The Geneva Convention, signed by the majority of the nations of the world, requires that prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated and protected against acts of violence, intimidation, insults, and public curiosity.
I had a young Navy lieutenant in my office not long ago to one of the very few prisoners who have returned to describe life in the enemy compounds—and this kind of testimony is, of course, the most valid information we have. He told me how he was beaten and his wounds left untreated. He was held in solitary confinement until he began talking to the rats. At one time, he was forced to sit on a narrow stool without moving for four days until his legs bloated and he lost consciousness and fell off. In the 22 months he was a prisoner, he lost over 50 pounds on the two meals of pumpkin soup, pig fat, bread and water he received each day.
He told me about other prisoners in North Vietnam who had been hanged from the ceilings of their cells; who had been dragged along the ground with broken legs; who had not been allowed to sleep or eat for long periods of time.
The Geneva Convention prohibits the public exploitation of prisoners of war, but widely published propaganda photographs show U. S. pilots being paraded before jeering mobs in Hanoi and displayed at press conferences.
The Convention provides that the detaining power quickly provide the names, serial numbers and addresses of all prisoners so that the next of kin can be promptly advised.
The North Vietnamese have never officially released the names of any prisoners to the U. S. government. Instead, they have provided their incomplete lists to various private individuals and unofficial groups. Recognizing the agony and anxiety of the families of these men, the North Vietnamese have attempted to exploit them for political gain.
The Geneva Convention requires that adequate medical care be provided to prisoners of war, but propaganda pictures taken months after capture show that many of our men still suffer from wounds received when they were shot down. Other pictures show badly set bones, and arms and legs shrunken from inadequate medical care. Years of this kind of treatment will make corrective surgery almost impossible.
The Convention imposes an absolute obligation of release of prisoners of war who are seriously sick or wounded as soon as they are fit to travel. Propaganda pictures and the firsthand reports of the few prisoners who have returned tell us that many of these men are critically ill and many others have serious wounds from which they have never recovered. We know of one man with both arms and a leg broken, others with withered arms and legs. But, despite the fact that South Vietnam has repatriated many sick and wounded prisoners— including the last group of 60 in junks provided by the government this past summer—and stands ready to repatriate many more whenever Hanoi will agree to the necessary arrangements, North Vietnam has never released any such prisoners. Instead, we know of at least 17 American prisoners who have died in captivity in South Vietnam, and have unofficial information indicates that another 22 may also have died in North Vietnam.
The Convention requires that not more than a week after capture every prisoner shall be allowed to write directly to his family telling them about his situation, his health and giving them his address, and that thereafter they shall be allowed to send and receive not less than two letters and four cards each month.
The lieutenant I talked with, received two of the 120 letters sent to him in 22 months by his family and was allowed to write none.
Probably as a result of the increased pressure of world opinion, many more letters were received during 1970 than in all previous years combined. However, there has been little mail received from our POWs in 1971. When mail is permitted, it is capricious, irregular, heavily censored, and usually handled through extreme anti-war groups who forward it to the anxious families with propaganda tracts denouncing U. S. government policies.
The Geneva Convention provides for impartial inspection of prison camps and interviews with the prisoners. North Vietnam has never allowed such inspections or interviews. Prisoners have been interviewed by selected news correspondents under strictly controlled conditions when it serves the enemy's propaganda purposes. On the other hand, the International Committee of the Red Cross continually inspects South Vietnamese prison camps.
It is important to remember that many of these men have been prisoners for more than five years, longer than any American has been a prisoner of war in our nation's history.
One man, Lieutenant Everett Alvarez, Jr., U. S. Navy, was shot down and captured in August 1964. He has now been a prisoner for almost seven years.
In all the modern history of man's inhumanity to man, there is no example of crueler or more inhuman treatment than that being dealt to our prisoners of war and their families by the North Vietnamese.
How does Hanoi excuse its utter disregard of an international agreement to which it is a party? How do they defend their treatment of prisoners, which President Nixon has described as "one of the most unconscionable in the history of warfare?"
They say that the Convention does not apply because there has been no declaration of war, and that our men are therefore not prisoners at all, but "war criminals" or “air pirates." But even this tenuous, legalistic excuse does not hold up. Article Two of the Geneva Convention specifically provides that it "shall apply to all cases of declared war or any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by them."
The fact remains, as Ambassador Philip C. Habib recently told the North Vietnamese at Paris: "The question of prisoners of war is not only a burning humanitarian question, but also a question of…solemn legal obligation."
What do you do when brave men are held indefinitely and cruelly mistreated; when their families are made to suffer unnecessarily; when the men and their families are used as political pawns by a nation which does not respect the international agreements to which it is a party?
You search the entire spectrum of possible actions you can take; you try any and all that promise any chance of success, and you eventually come up with a rescue attempt like that of 20 November 1970. And, hopefully, you keep the enemy worrying night and day about the same thing happening again.
We are considering the whole range of things we can do and are following up on every one that shows promise. We are beginning to obtain some effect by the arousal of world opinion. For example, a new high of about a thousand letters were received during October, and the enemy policy on receipt of packages by prisoners has been relaxed to permit one every other month and a special one, of up to 11 pounds at Christmas. Unfortunately, the letters are still received through groups whose views are deeply offensive to the prisoners and their families, and there is no assurance that the packages will actually be delivered—but still, it is some progress.
How can members of the U. S. Naval Institute help? They can, for example:
- Request news media to take editorial positions on the prisoners of war.
- Write letters to the editors.
- Civilian members can ask their employers to print prisoners of war information in company newsletters.
We sent these men on the missions which resulted in their capture; that they are where they are and have suffered and are suffering as they are is a result of bravely carrying out the national policy of the United States.
These men are our fellow citizens, our comrades, our shipmates.
They must know, the world must know—and the enemy must know—that we will never forget nor abandon them, that we will hold their captors fully responsible, and that this war which we all abhor will not be over until our men have been returned to us.
