 "Pakistan Army's shelling at civilians along LoC a war crime: Defence expert")
The past couple of weeks have been extremely tense for India-Pakistan relations. It reached a fever pitch with India executing precision strikes on terror infrastructure spread across nine strikes— Operation Sindoor.
Pakistan vowed to retaliate, in what is being called the worst clash between the nuclear-armed neighbours in over two decades.
Pakistan’s response to India’s strikes has been to deliberately commence artillery firing on civilians, a move that defence and strategic affairs analyst Colonel Danvir Singh (Retd) says amounts to “war crime”.
Here’s an in-depth look at what has transpired.
Pakistan Army attacks civilians along LoC
Following India’s precision strikes on Wednesday (May 7) which targeted nine terrorist sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, Pakistan initiated heavy artillery shelling across the Line of Control (LoC).
This shelling affected multiple sectors, including Krishna Ghati, Shahpur, and Mankote in Poonch district, as well as Laam, Manjakote, and Gambeer Brahmana in Rajouri district.
On Wednesday evening, sources from the Ministry of Defence told Firstpost that following heavy shelling on civilians along the Line of Control, Poonch, Tangdhar, and Uri had been adversely affected.
They confirmed that at least 15 people have died in Poonch and Tangdhar, with the latest fatalities report suggesting 15 fatalities in Poonch itself. The lives lost belonged to civilians— innocent non-combatants who were not involved in the hostilities.
Moreover, 44 people, including two Central Reserve Police Force personnel, had been injured in Poonch. In Uri, 15 people were injured, the sources said.
Do these actions constitute war crimes?
Before one asks whether Pakistan Army’s actions constituted war crimes, there is an even more fundamental question to be answered. If two countries have not declared war, can actions still come under the purview of war crimes?
Since modern international humanitarian law applies based on the existence of hostilities, not on whether a war has been formally declared, these actions can be seen through the lens of international conventions on war crime.
Impact Shorts
More ShortsCol. Singh (Retd) put it quite succintly. He told Firstpost that “Pakistani Army directly and deliberately targeting Indian civilians is not only a human rights violation but also a war crime.”
“Targeting civilians during war is considered a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, specifically under the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) and its Additional Protocol I (1977), because it violates the fundamental principle of distinction in international humanitarian law (IHL). This principle requires parties to a conflict to distinguish between combatants and civilians, ensuring that only military targets are attacked,” he explained, emphasising that Pakistan has targeted “innocent civilians in Poonch and Kupwara” in the ongoing military escalation.
Which conventions has Pakistan violated?
The following are international conventions and statutes that term attacks on non-combatants and civilians as war crimes:
Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) – Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
1. Article 27: “Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs.” (“Protected persons” refers to individuals who are not or no longer taking part in hostilities and are therefore entitled to special protections during times of war or armed conflict.)
2. Article 32: Prohibits “measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents.”
Additional Protocol I (1977) – Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts
1. Article 51(2): “The civilian population… shall not be the object of attack.”
2. Article 85(3)(a): Wilful attacks on the civilian population or individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities are defined as grave breaches and therefore war crimes.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998)
1. Article 8(2)(b)(i): “Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities” is a war crime.
2. Article 8(2)(e)(i): Further criminalises such acts in non-international armed conflicts.
Customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
1. Rule 1: The parties to the conflict must at all times distinguish between civilians and combatants.
2. Rule 6: Civilians are protected against attack unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
3. Rule 156: Lists attacks against civilians as war crimes under both treaty law and customary law.
Whether action is taken on these grounds remains to be seen.
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
