Ukraine - International Brigade

[Ben B]

I'm sure Farage, Fox, and the others who were saying how ready they were to man the barricades and fight to defend freedom, are busy putting their affairs in order so they can take this opportunity to do just that.

[Bird on a Fire]

Give them a minute, they're probably too busy moving their money around before the sanctions kick in.

[Herainestold]

Is it legal for Britons to go and join a non UK army?

They didn't use the foreign enlistment act against the scum that went to join ISIS, so it's pretty safe to assume it won't be used against people fighting against fascists invading a country we are arming.

Also, you have unanswered questions about China's mass detention and abuse of Uyghurs, coward.

I thought the ISIS wannabees were being prosecuted if they tried to return to the UK.

[jdc]

Is it legal for Britons to go and join a non UK army?

It doesn't seem to be illegal... French Foreign Legion. Our armed forces also accept some non-UK nationals.

Joining the foreign legion was illegal under the 1870 act, we just couldn't find any evidence (ditto fighting Franco). According to the wiki, the last successful prosecution occurred in 1896. This https://academic.oup.com/tcbh/article-a ... ogin=false says "the act proved embarrassingly unenforceable" and "a complete failure as a legal tool" in 1937, and the 1976 Diplock Report described the act as "antiquated"; I'm starting to think 1896 might keep its position as the last successful prosecution.

Is it legal for Britons to go and join a non UK army?

Wasn't Truss actively supporting the idea? - although she probably doesn't know what the laws actually are.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60544838

Apparently her department's own website was warning people could be prosecuted: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ght-russia

Is it legal for Britons to go and join a non UK army?

They didn't use the foreign enlistment act against the scum that went to join ISIS, so it's pretty safe to assume it won't be used against people fighting against fascists invading a country we are arming.

Also, you have unanswered questions about China's mass detention and abuse of Uyghurs, coward.

I think it wouldn't have applied as ISIS weren't the army of a state - so that would be terror legislation that would be relevant?

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/33-34/90
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_E ... t_Act_1870

[Herainestold]

If (or when) Ukraine forms an International Brigade of volunteers, who here is signing up?

If not, why not?

I know a bloke called Eric Blair, policeman and freelance writer, he's heading out there to fight.

Hope he comes back in one piece, perhaps he'll write up his own accounts akin to "Homage to Catalonia".

I would sign up but I've already joined the Womens Auxiliary Balloon Corps.

Does Tony Blair's cousin have a twitter feed, or Insta or TikTok or anything like that?

[shpalman]

If (or when) Ukraine forms an International Brigade of volunteers, who here is signing up?

If not, why not?

I know a bloke called Eric Blair, policeman and freelance writer, he's heading out there to fight.

Hope he comes back in one piece, perhaps he'll write up his own accounts akin to "Homage to Catalonia".

I would sign up but I've already joined the Womens Auxiliary Balloon Corps.

Does Tony Blair's cousin have a twitter feed, or Insta or TikTok or anything like that?

Not since he died of covid or whatever it was.

[Ben B]

Here you go: https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/34 ... rithm.html

[EACLucifer]

Reading about a lot of people going, and from a lot of places. Saw a report saying two hundred from the Netherlands - not all of them Dutch - and another saying fifty from Japan. Saw an interview with an IDF Givati Brigade veteran, and the description strongly suggested more than just one was present, but I don't have Hebrew, so couldn't confirm.

Also a lot of Americans look like they are going, veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. The numbers are high enough that some are apparently forming into platoons and going in groups.

ETA: There's also Free Syrians talking about trying to get there, including a tank-hunting ace nicknamed "Abu TOW"

2ETA: Also some Iraqi Kurds already fighting, along with Tatars. Not sure if they were living in Ukraine before the invasion or not.

[Herainestold]

Under the Geneva convention do free lance mercenaries have any protection or can the Russians summarily execute them if captured?

[Woodchopper]

Under the Geneva convention do free lance mercenaries have any protection or can the Russians summarily execute them if captured?

They have the same protections as any other people serving in a national army. Summary execution isn't allowed under any circumstances.

[secret squirrel]

Under the Geneva convention do free lance mercenaries have any protection or can the Russians summarily execute them if captured?

They have the same protections as any other people serving in a national army. Summary execution isn't allowed under any circumstances.

Not that Russia seems to care that much about the Geneva convention at the moment.

[Herainestold]

Under the Geneva convention do free lance mercenaries have any protection or can the Russians summarily execute them if captured?

They have the same protections as any other people serving in a national army. Summary execution isn't allowed under any circumstances.

Thanks. I am a bit surprised by that, but so be it.

[monkey]

Under the Geneva convention do free lance mercenaries have any protection or can the Russians summarily execute them if captured?

They have the same protections as any other people serving in a national army. Summary execution isn't allowed under any circumstances.

Thanks. I am a bit surprised by that, but so be it.

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

[Herainestold]

They have the same protections as any other people serving in a national army. Summary execution isn't allowed under any circumstances.

Thanks. I am a bit surprised by that, but so be it.

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

Yes. I can remember reading about summary execution for commandos etc in previous conflicts. I think they have to have some kind of insignia to indicate they are combatants.

[monkey]

Thanks. I am a bit surprised by that, but so be it.

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

Yes. I can remember reading about summary execution for commandos etc in previous conflicts. I think they have to have some kind of insignia to indicate they are combatants.

POWs have been mistreated and killed in the past. Do you think that the GC does not protect them?

[Herainestold]

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

Yes. I can remember reading about summary execution for commandos etc in previous conflicts. I think they have to have some kind of insignia to indicate they are combatants.

POWs have been mistreated and killed in the past. Do you think that the GC does not protect them?

So much depends on the country holding them. I wasn't sure if the Geneva convention protected mercenaries but apparently it does. Not sure I would trust Putin's men though.

[Bird on a Fire]

They have the same protections as any other people serving in a national army. Summary execution isn't allowed under any circumstances.

Thanks. I am a bit surprised by that, but so be it.

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

I'll cop to not being entirely sure either, fwiw. I know the use of mercenaries and "contractors", including e.g. by the west in Afghanistan and Iraq, was partly to circumvent certain international agreements, but without being sure of the details I wasn't sure if both rights and responsibilities differ, or just the rights. Presumably mercenaries are categorised as combatants rather than civilians, but could be POWs?

[monkey]

Thanks. I am a bit surprised by that, but so be it.

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

I'll cop to not being entirely sure either, fwiw. I know the use of mercenaries and "contractors", including e.g. by the west in Afghanistan and Iraq, was partly to circumvent certain international agreements, but without being sure of the details I wasn't sure if both rights and responsibilities differ, or just the rights. Presumably mercenaries are categorised as combatants rather than civilians, but could be POWs?

You don't have to know what the legal status of mercenaries is to know that the Convention has fundamental protections for everyone in a conflict.

[monkey]

Here's a summary about international law on mercenaries by doctors without borders - clicky

That might clear things up (or not, it seems confusing to me and country dependentent), but you will note it includes this bit - "They are entitled to the fundamental guarantees established for all individuals."

[Bird on a Fire]

You are surprised that the Geneva convention gives mercenaries the same fundamental rights it gives all, stuff like a fair trial and humane treatment!?

I'll cop to not being entirely sure either, fwiw. I know the use of mercenaries and "contractors", including e.g. by the west in Afghanistan and Iraq, was partly to circumvent certain international agreements, but without being sure of the details I wasn't sure if both rights and responsibilities differ, or just the rights. Presumably mercenaries are categorised as combatants rather than civilians, but could be POWs?

You don't have to know what the legal status of mercenaries is to know that the Convention has fundamental protections for everyone in a conflict.

Ah - I was unsure about the "same protections as any other people serving in a national army" bit. Obviously nobody is allowed to execute captives, no.

The DWB link you give says "If arrested, mercenaries are not entitled to the status of prisoners of war" and also

Mercenaries are not entitled to the status of combatant, prisoner of war (API Article 47), or any of the categories of protected persons provided for by the Geneva Conventions, unless they are wounded or sick, although they must always benefit from humane treatment.

which is a difference from national armies. (It also says that military contractors don't count as mercenaries, so I was wrong to conflate them).

So they're not specifically protected by the Geneva Convention as combatants would be, but you still can't shoot them after you capture them and must be humane in general. I assume you can kill them instead of capturing them, though?

[Bird on a Fire]

More to the point, perhaps, is that the legal definition of mercenary is quite tight, and probably wouldn't cover International Brigades (my bold):

As defined by Article 47 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, a mercenary is any person who:

is specially recruited locally or abroad,
does, in fact, participate directly in the hostilities,
is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that party
is neither a national of a party to the conflict nor a resident of a territory controlled by a party to the conflict;
is not a member of the armed forces of a party to the conflict; and
has not been sent by a State that is not a party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

I've not seen any mention of the salary involved nor how it compares to the regular Ukrainian forces, but AFAICT people are joining because they're motivated to help defend Ukraine from Russian incursion, rather than for the money.

Seems more likely anyone joining a "Ukrainian foreign legion" or similar would be a regular combatant with full Geneva protection (including that you can't shoot them after capture).

[Woodchopper]

There is a distinction between a mercenary and a foreign citizen who joins a state's armed forces. As far as I know and as Bird points out we've been discussing the former in terms of foreigners who have signed up to fight for Ukraine. Similarly, the Ghurkas or other commonwealth citizens serving in the UK armed forces aren't mercenaries in a legal sense, nor are members of the French Foreign Legion.

Also, when citing the Geneva Conventions etc be aware that people are also covered by International Human Rights Law. So, to take the earlier example, summarily executing a prisoner would be a grave violation of human rights regardless of their nationality or status as a mercenary.

[Herainestold]

The media would have me think that there are some retired British servicemen that have been recruited by somebody to go into Ukraine right now.
So, in general, they would be protected, but as mercenaries would not get the full protection accorded to Ukranian armed forces POWs. Still Putin's men can't shoot them.

An unnamed private military firm based in Europe are to fund the SAS operation in Ukraine which is a clever plan as it is does not involve the British military directly.

More than a dozen SAS veterans are now on the ground in Ukraine and more are to travel to the country later this week.

I don't give this source a lot of credibility.

https://londonlovesbusiness.com/former- ... desperate/

[Stranger Mouse]

The media would have me think that there are some retired British servicemen that have been recruited by somebody to go into Ukraine right now.
So, in general, they would be protected, but as mercenaries would not get the full protection accorded to Ukranian armed forces POWs. Still Putin's men can't shoot them.

An unnamed private military firm based in Europe are to fund the SAS operation in Ukraine which is a clever plan as it is does not involve the British military directly.

More than a dozen SAS veterans are now on the ground in Ukraine and more are to travel to the country later this week.

I don't give this source a lot of credibility.

https://londonlovesbusiness.com/former- ... desperate/

If they are SAS veterans it is not an SAS operation anyway

[Herainestold]

The media would have me think that there are some retired British servicemen that have been recruited by somebody to go into Ukraine right now.
So, in general, they would be protected, but as mercenaries would not get the full protection accorded to Ukranian armed forces POWs. Still Putin's men can't shoot them.

An unnamed private military firm based in Europe are to fund the SAS operation in Ukraine which is a clever plan as it is does not involve the British military directly.

More than a dozen SAS veterans are now on the ground in Ukraine and more are to travel to the country later this week.

I don't give this source a lot of credibility.

https://londonlovesbusiness.com/former- ... desperate/

If they are SAS veterans it is not an SAS operation anyway

Yes. The story presents it as such, but they would just be common or garden variety mercenaries