Secondary Source: “The Nuremberg Principles” from Vietnam War and International Law

My first article discussed the precepts of international law based on the rulings at the Nuremberg Trials. It supported my research because despite being a relatively general secondary source, it was difficult to read and I felt like it was a good primer for the sources I will eventually get into as I get deeper into my project. It also helped me plan out a roadmap of how I will attack this project. Because my research questions are ordered chronologically and consequentially, by focussing on answering and conducting research for one question at a time, in order, I will have a much better perspective when answering my more complex second and third questions. This does not go to say that the actual content I found in this article was not relevant.

O’Brien wrote this from his personal interpretation of the law and world events. This book was published in 1968 as well which allows an interpretation of the Nuremberg Principles relative to the ongoing Vietnam War. It also pays much attention to the relativity of the Nuremberg Principles to WWI, WWII, and the Korean War, and discusses the efficacy of the standards of international war law to those wars in comparison to the more “fanatical” geurilla warfare used in Vietnam.

As someone with very little background information before reading this article, it was so useful as it explained the different kinds of international courts that will be pertinent to my project. For example, O’Brien addressed the role of the international military tribunal (IMT) as a court made up of representatives from each country involved, meant to try crimes of “whose offenses have no geographical region.” Though the Vietnam War most definitely occurred in Vietnam, it involved both American military, South Vietnamese, North Vietnamese and the Vietcong, which justifies the use for an IMT for war crimes rather than the US court martial which was used.

O’Brien also describes the specific judicial role attached to the IMT, which falls into three categories: crimes against peace such as planning war; war crimes, such as injuring civilians or hostages or property not deemed for legitimate military necessity; and crimes against humanity, defined as the murder of civilians, whether or not in violation of domestic law of the country where perpetrated.

Though the concept of war crimes was already established before the Nuremberg Trials, the explicitness or rubric of them had been created. O’Brien asserts the precepts created by the Nuremberg Trials are as follows: 1. there are violations of jus in bello(law of war) that individuals are subject to a military tribunal or national martial court in which they are captured, 2. neither an act of state nor plea of superior orders is a complete defense for such violations, and 3. that the individuals ability to make a moral choice is more significant. Additionally The Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials oversaw 89 cases, and the large majority of these were for high ranking officials, setting long standing precedents for prosecution of war crime which, because of their status, hold more relevance and power in proceeding cases.

Arguably the most definite and explicit precept created by Nuremberg, which also directly correlates to the My Lai Massacre, is the proscription against wanton destruction of cities, towns, and villages. This is quite interesting as the perpetrators of My Lai virtually decimated the Son My village, killing livestock and destroying crops, and to my knowledge, this aspect of the My Lai Massacre was not even addressed in the court-martial for the crimes.

Perhaps the most important conclusion of O’Brien’s assessment of the role of the IMT is that, at the time of publication, no standing IMT exists. They are created and convened following large scale international wars, most notably, the Nuremberg Convention following WWII. My first research question will address how the disconnect from the precepts created during the Nuremberg trials and the prosecution of the My Lai massacre led to changes in international law. I am still finishing researching the precepts created by Nuremberg and will find out if any IMTs have convened since the Vietnam War as time permits.

O’Brien, William V. “The Nuremberg Principles.” 1968. In The Vietnam War and International Law, 193-239. Vol. 3. Princeton, NJ: American Society of International Law, 1968. A Conflict of Loyalties.