Books

Can Kids Be War Criminals?

Consider the cases of Omar Khadr and Ishmael Beah.

By Chris Tenove, 11 Jun 2007, TheTyee.ca

Beah (4)

Beah: "Not difficult to turn child into killer."

  • A Long Way Gone: Memoir of a Boy Soldier
  • Ishmael Beah
  • Douglas & McIntyre (2007)

Meeting Ishmael Beah is a disorienting experience. Here is someone who once competed with other child soldiers to see who could slash the throats of captured prisoners most quickly. Beah won. It's one of many chilling scenes in his book, A Long Way Gone: Memoir of a Boy Soldier.

And yet here was Beah when I met him, courteously holding the door of an elevator for me to enter. That was in March, during the Vancouver leg of his book tour. In our conversation, Beah proved to be charming, eloquent and humorous. He was also a publicist's dream: dressed in a hip maroon shirt and blue jeans, with Gap ad good looks and a smile that would make a room full of dental hygienists swoon.

It has been a remarkable year for Beah. His book rides high on bestseller lists. He has graced American talk shows and starred in Bling'd, a VH1 documentary that takes American rappers to the diamond mines of Sierra Leone. Even Jon Stewart has paid tribute.

'Second life'

All these successes belong to what Beah, now 26, calls his "second life." But they would not have happened were it not for the cruelty of his first life in Sierra Leone. "I was in college when I started to write a book about my past," said Beah. "I thought the writing would help me understand certain things and come to terms with certain things. For lack of better word, that it would be 'therapeutic.'"

But before I tell you more about Beah, I want give you two reasons why you should read his book right now: the Omar Khadr and Charles Taylor trials.

On Monday last week, two United States military judges decided to drop war crimes charges against Khadr, who has been held in the Guantanamo Bay prison for five years. Khadr was accused of killing an American medic during a battle with U.S. forces in Afghanistan in 2002. The judges dismissed the case because Khadr had been classified as an "enemy combatant," and military commissions like the one at Guantanamo Bay can only try "unlawful enemy combatants." (This is not a trivial technicality: the military commissions were created to circumvent the United States' obligations under the Geneva Convention, which would normally apply to enemy combatants. See here, for example.) Prosecutors will likely appeal the ruling, but no tribunal yet exists to hear that appeal. Khadr will remain at Guantanamo Bay indefinitely.

Child adults

But whether Khadr was a lawful or unlawful combatant, one thing is certain: he was 15 years old when American soldiers captured him. Should a child soldier be tried for war crimes?

U.S. Army Sergeant First Class Layne Morris argues that Khadr should be treated as an adult. For proof, Morris described Khadr's behaviour in the battle in which Khadr allegedly killed an American soldier. (Morris was injured in the same clash.) Trapped in a compound besieged by American troops, Khadr chose not to escape with a group of women. The Americans then bombed the compound, killing most of Khadr's companions. When American ground forces entered, the injured Khadr threw a grenade at them. "Anyone who thinks those are the actions of a child, I can't even take them seriously," Morris told CBC's The Current on Tuesday.

Had he read Ishmael Beah's book, Morris would know that this is exactly how a child soldier would act. They are fierce fighters and suicidally loyal to superiors -- that is why child soldiers are used. Moreover, international legal convention, psychological research, and common sense all tell us that most youths are easily manipulated and therefore not entirely responsible for their actions. Indeed, David Crane, the former chief prosecutor at the Special Court for Sierra Leone, said that he would not prosecute child soldiers because they were "as much victims as the people they raped, maimed and mutilated."

Ishmael Beah committed much more heinous acts than those attributed to Omar Khadr. Now Beah is on talk shows and Khadr remains in indefinite incarceration. Were their situations really different? Or is it just that Beah killed Sierra Leonean civilians, while Khadr allegedly killed a single American soldier?

Fascinatingly repugnant

Now here is the second reason why this book is timely: Charles Taylor is on trial in The Hague. The former president of Liberia is accused of fomenting a civil war in Sierra Leone that caused over 50,000 deaths. The conflict, fuelled in part by proceeds from "blood diamonds," became notorious for roving militias that torched villages, kidnapped and raped women and amputated limbs. Many of the perpetrators were children, and one of the charges against Taylor is that he conscripted child soldiers.

The trial will get plenty of attention. Not only is Taylor a former African leader, he is also a fascinatingly repugnant individual. Born in Liberia, he studied in the United States, escaped from a prison in Massachusetts, trained in Libyan revolutionary camps under Muammar Gaddafi, and led a vicious rebel army in Liberia. Liberian civilians became so terrified of Taylor's forces that they elected him president in 1997 in the hope that this would end the civil war. Charles Taylor's winning election slogan was: "He killed my ma, he killed my pa, I vote for him."

Ishmael Beah, when we spoke in March, said that he was looking forward to Taylor's trial. "It shows people that no one is above law, not even a former president."

But Beah added that the trial should have taken place in Sierra Leone, instead of being moved to The Netherlands out of fear of attack by Taylor sympathizers. "Sierra Leoneans should be able to see justice done in their own country," said Beah. "Removing him to The Hague shows that in Sierra Leone, all you have to do is threaten violence and the judicial system will cower."

Lost boys

With the trials of Omar Khadr and Charles Taylor now in the news, A Long Way Gone is a timely book. But it is also a compelling work of literature, one that will be read long after the headlines change.

The story begins with Beah, then 12, on his way to a nearby village to perform in a rap and dance group with his older brother. When rebels attack, the boys are separated. Beah begins a picaresque journey across the war torn countryside, looking for family members. He often wanders with other lost boys, all of them hungry, ill, desperate, chased by wild boar and by villagers who think they are rebel spies.

Beah's descriptions of these travels, seen through the eyes of a traumatized child, are tinged with magic realism. Here is Beah fleeing with a group of boys from a rebel attack:

I was behind Alhaji, who parted the bushes like a diver heading to the surface for air. Some of the buses slapped me, but I didn't stop. The gunshots grew louder behind us. We ran for hours, deeper into the forest. The path ended, but we kept running until the sky swallowed the sun and gave birth to the moon. The bullets continued to fly behind us, but now their redness could be seen as they pierced through the bushes. The moon disappeared and took the stars with it, making the sky weep. Its tears saved us from the red bullets.

We spent the night breathing heavily under bushes soaked with rain.

At last, Beah and the other children find themselves in a village protected by a government-aligned militia. The commander gives the boys a choice: join his forces and help fight the rebels, or continue to wander the countryside in fear of the next attack. Soon the boys are carrying AK-47s and sneaking through the jungle toward their first battle.

'Rambo' revived

In the months that follow, the new recruits are kept high on drugs, whether engaged in combat or watching war movies at base camp. Killing soon becomes a routine, and often a game. As the boys advance on one village, Beah's friend decides to use a tactic he learned from the Rambo movies. He smears himself in dirt and crawls toward the huts. Beah watches as his friend sneaks behind a man, covers his mouth and slices his throat open. (I felt like photocopying this page in the book and mailing it to Sylvester Stallone with the words: "Sly, you must be proud that so many kids look up to you.")

Then, one day, some men from UNICEF arrive and take the youngest child soldiers away to be decommissioned and rehabilitated. Beah is one of them. He was 15 at the time -- the same age as Omar Khadr was when captured. But while Khadr was put in a military prison, Beah was taken to a rehabilitation centre called Benin Home.

The staff at Benin Home are the real heroes of Beah's memoir. In the first weeks the former child soldiers suffer excruciating withdrawal symptoms, and they self-medicate with violence, attacking each other and the centre's staff.

When Beah returned to Sierra Leone last year, he visited Benin Home and thanked the counsellors. "Those people were amazingly strong," Beah told me. "We would do all kinds of things to them and they would come back and help us. Their only goal was to show us that we were trusted and that we could get hold of ourselves. They rekindled our humanity."

Ultimately, Beah's story gives us reason to be fearful and optimistic about children who are dragged into war.

"You know, it really is not difficult to turn a child into a killer," said Beah. "It requires serious coercion and extreme violence, which in the context of war can happen easily.

"But to heal a child requires genuine care and compassion and a real, long-term commitment. It is extremely difficult. But it can be done."

 [Tyee]

15  Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • G West

    4 years ago

    Thanks Chris

    Beah's story is remarkable.

    It's interesting how he has become the toast of the American media while Omar Khadr has been sitting in a cage at Gitmo. One child rehabilitated - the other forgotten.

    The contradictions in American political culture are stark.

    I wonder if the image Beah presents - attractive and wholesome as it undoubtedly is - has very much to do with the different way the two boys have been received in the media?

  • Fiat lux

    4 years ago

    I always have to laugh when

    I always have to laugh when I see, or hear about some 17 year old punks, who have committed major crimes, but can not be named, photographed or identified, because they're "children ".

    My compulsory military training started at 12, I won my first major target shooting championship at 15, by 16 I was a platoon commander in the cadets. At 17 a regimental champion in the army, out in the frontline, one of 6 battalion staff master marksmen, detailed to a heavy machinegun squad to protect the crew and the 2 guns from infiltrators.

    Child soldiers are either draftees, or brainwashed to serve some ideological, or religious cause. They may not fully understand what they're doing, but how many grownups do ?

    I always ask people about their beliefs and knowledge and their ignorance sometimes scares me. This goes right across the spectrum. In my Vancouver days I was in daily contact with highly placed professionals and the captains of industry for 22 years and their ignorance of the simplest, elementary issues, astonished me. Yet, they were so called VIPs, who controlled the lives, sometimes of thousands under their command.

    After all, who in their right minds would have voted for people like Campbell, Manning and Harper ? How much do these voters really know about the issues and what various politicians ideologies stand for and the consequences of their actions ?

    Ed Deak.

  • frank2

    4 years ago

    You are right when you

    You are right when you say
    "Were their situations really different? Or is it just that Beah killed Sierra Leonean civilians, while Khadr allegedly killed a single American soldier?"

  • skeptikool

    4 years ago

    Are humans not born inherently good?

    Unless one is pathologically devoid of feeling I cannot imagine one involving oneself in the butchery of others. Even so, things like "shock and awe" happen and, clearly, are invariably viewed differently - if given thought to at all.

    Since the belief is that most are born inherently good, surely even children must question the taking of life of another.

    There is no place on earth for those who must have carried out the indoctrination that twisted these young minds. These bottom-feeding perpetrators, who profit from war and conflict, should be tried for the war criminals that they are.

  • Percy

    4 years ago

    No difference?

    Maybe there is a difference between a child in a third world country, hungry and separated from family, impressed into warfare through death threats...

    ...and a child who, from the privilege of a western country, travels to the third world, under no apparent threat or coercion, and kills people.

  • mopled

    4 years ago

    What's the difference

    between Khadr and the soldier he killed in terms of understanding what they were doing? Both were patsies.

    Khadr might actually have the edge on the American he killed as far as a right to be in Afghanistan in the first place and last time I looked, self defence was still a valid justification for killing someone.

    The attack on Afghanistan was justified by a false flag operation, 9/11 and was totally bogus on all levels. How does bombing and invading a whole country to get at one person get such unthinking approval?

    Anybody who still thinks the US and its stooges (Canada especially) have a right to be in Afghanistan should attend the Vancouver 9/11 Truth Conference next week.
    http://www.v911truth.org/conference2007.html

  • freebear

    4 years ago

    Who lets loose the dogs of war?

    Kids can be manipulated obviously, whether it is to pester their parents to buy the latest whatever, to being good consumers, to being soldiers and murderers.

    Why do you think regular armies want young recruits, rather than 35 and older ones? Because the young ones can be manipulated, and brow beaten and ordered to follow orders!

    The ones that should be really held responsible are the ones who say and think that it would be a good idea to use kids as cannon fodder in their wars.

    Would they call partisan fighters (as in WW II) terrorists nowadays, or heros? Would it matter if it was a 40 year old partisan or a 14 year old child partisan?

  • Fiat lux

    4 years ago

    This always brings back the

    This always brings back the question somebody once asked Lester Pearson:

    What is the difference between an offensive and defensive weapon?

    He replied: It depends on which end of the weapon you're standing.

    The partisans of WW2 were never captured, but shot on the spot, regardless of age. Many were children.

    70% of the Germans captured in Stalingrad perished in the POW camps. I've met some after they were released in the summer of '45. Their condition was unbelievable, filthy, sick, covered with sores and dressed in rags.

    The Russians figured out immediately what bad propaganda they caused in Austria and from then on they fattened up the released POWs, dressed them in clean clothes and the trains were carrying banners with "We thank comrade Stalin for our homecoming".

    Ed Deak.

  • doggone

    4 years ago

    Small Boys Unit

    Called here: Child soldier. I worked with them (Liberia, '92/93) but as an "aid worker"

    I have one quarrel with the notion that Liberians joined in to vote for Taylor: "Killed my Ma" etc. For what it is worth (I was extremely naieve) my observation at the time was that most citzens respected C.I.C. (Charles In Charge)

    It is hard to make sense of these memories.
    I need to read the "Long Way Gone"

  • Colin

    4 years ago

    certainly not forgotten

    Khadr is certainly not forgotten and in fact the centre of much attention. The question of his status is a good one and will affect his future, if declared a POW, then the US will have to prove his actions constituted a war crime (was the medic well marked as such, I haven’t looked for awhile but they used to have a semi-protected status) Even if he is found innocent of a war crime, as a POW he is not entitled to be released until cessation of hostilities.
    Now I am sure the Taliban are treating the soldier they claim they have captured by Geneva Convention and the Red cross/Crescent will shortly be given access to them. More likely they will be having a 12 year boy slit the prisoners throat and videotape it.

  • dorothy

    4 years ago

    no other choice

    "After all, who in their right minds would have voted for people like Campbell, Manning and Harper ? How much do these voters really know about the issues and what various politicians ideologies stand for and the consequences of their actions ?"

    This question is asked by Ed Deak. My answer is, nobody, of course, but since people with a grip on reality and a care for life on this Earth and their fellow men do not run for political office, what other choice is there?

    You have here the true meaning of the wild hunt. This is a party you do not want to meet, because they mess with you. If you can stay below their radar, you are better off. They do not inhabit the same realm you do. The environment they create is just a new kind of jungle with its own set of predators and types of vermin and so on. One day, by luck, for that's what it will take, things may come to a head in such a way that a little living space will still exist, and the survivors will haul themelves up on that distant shore and one will lift his head, a glimpse in his eye, and say, "we could maximise our harvest if we...", and he would make it clear that anyone not espousing his 'maximising' was a party pooper, and most people would follow him, because most people are followers, and so it would go on, another cycle of insanity, headed for another Ragnarok, into all eternity, amen.

  • Colin

    4 years ago

    Not forgotten

    Interesting I know I commented here and now it’s gone. G West How can you say Khadr is forgotten, he is being tried and has lawyers and has had a judge review his case. His status is unclear, either he is deemed a war criminal and tried on that basis, declared a POW and held until the hostilities cease or as a Canadian citizen be tried on attacking a NATO ally. None of likely great choices. Also considering his family views I doubt he will willingly change his mind and will take arms at the first chance.

  • G West

    4 years ago

    I'm surprised

    The point, Colin, was that one child soldier - after killing Africans - is given a chance for rehabilitation and, in the course of time writes a book about it. The other young person (still a legal child at the time of his alleged crime) precisely because his victim is an American, is not rehabilitated or even given a chance for it and grows up bitter and angry in an American concentration camp.

    Even if he ends up being acquitted - for one reason or another – his chance to make of himself something more worthwhile and productive, not to say moral, is lost simply because he killed an American rather than a black man or two. It's not hard to see that the situations, while essentially similar in kind, are very different in quality.

    Each boy was, in some way, forced or indoctrinated to behave in anti-social ways.

    The black boy from Africa gets a second chance because he is a child; the Muslim boy - every bit as much a child - is demonized and turned into a criminal.

    You figure it out. I meant 'forgotten' in the sense that the potential of the one child is recognized and redemptive; in the case of the other, his potential has been forgotten and squandered.

    Not so hard to understand.

    Moreover, no, Percy, I don't think the fact one boy came from Canada and the other from the 3rd world makes any difference.

    ps. Colin, I suspect your comment hasn't disappeared - you're just not familiar with the rating system.

    Select 'all comments' / Expand All. Everything will be as normal.

  • dorothy

    4 years ago

    It aint over till its over

    “Even if he ends up being acquitted - for one reason or another – his chance to make of himself something more worthwhile and productive, not to say moral, is lost simply because he killed an American rather than a black man or two. It's not hard to see that the situations, while essentially similar in kind, are very different in quality.”

    I don’t see how this kid’s chance is lost, unless he decides to lose it. Where there is life, there is hope, and every man is his own smith.

    I also am a little sick and tired of how nobody seems willing to place responsibility where it belongs. It is not the Americans, or the ‘system’, or the guards in Guantanamo who are the authors of this boy’s misery. It is none other than his own father, who committed the monumental stupidity of engaging an enemy he did not know, or care to know, and then had the gall to make that same choice for his underage children, to get dragged into his grand schemes. Just shows that it is still true that one must be very careful in choosing one’s parents.

    Even so, there is yet a fork in the road for young Khadr, if he should gain his freedom. It is ultimately up to him, to become or remain ‘bitter and hateful’ or to realize this is not the way. It is also still true, that he who lives by the sword will die by the sword – and it may actaully be no simple matter to die that way. Sometimes the spiritual death comes long before the mechanical one.

  • G West

    4 years ago

    Dorothy

    You misapprehend me. I don't disagree that Khadr's father is culpable. He's also Dead!

    Something else the two share.

    The point I was making had two targets: Percy, who claimed the treatment of child 'Khadr' was somehow OK because he came from a 'Western' country when compared with the kinder gentler treatment of African child 'Beah'; and Colin, who was making a different but still more or less apologetic and essentially semantic approach to the analysis simply because he didn't seem to appreciate my use of the term 'forgotten'.

    Both children, by my lights at least, got a very bad start in life - for whatever reason.

    I'm not sure that matters at this stage of the game.

    One of them lucked into a group of people who treated the child and the life as salvageable while the other group (the Americans) treated the child as a criminal and began to mete out revenge without ever having providing justice. I think that's been confirmed more than once by "American" courts.

    I don’t see how that can be ignored – this is supposed to be the ‘leader’ of the free world we’re talking about here.

    I don't believe that's a subtle difference at all. In fact, I'd suggest such an approach is a long way from enlightened self-interest. Virtually every academic analysis I've read in the last 2 years is adamant in describing how much worse the situation relative to America's long-term terrorism security prospect is now compared with what obtained prior to the invasion of Iraq.

    As to whether or not young Khadr has a good chance of rehabilitating himself subsequent to what he's undergone for years at Gitmo: Who knows?

    From my point of view, I’d wager all the prejudicial and critical things his father taught him about the infidels has been pretty much confirmed in his mind by Uncle Sam’s behavior, if not the company he's been keeping for the last 6 years.

    Even the latest charge-dropping must seem like just another American ruse.

    At this stage of the game, and not to be too cynical, I see that kind of redemption as a Victor Hugo-‘esque’ sort of cautionary tale with very little chance of becoming reality. Changing yourself is always a difficult job.

    There really aren’t very many exemplars of Jean Valjean walking the streets of urban America these days. My view.

    We, in both this country and America, are in the thrall of 'hard' men these days. Such people have little respect for childhood.

    But, I guess it's important to dream.

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.