Prisoners are an unfortunate part of every war.  Each country involved in a war takes prisoners with the hope of acquiring critical information about the war efforts of the prisoner’s country.  Contemporary rules concerning the treatment of prisoners of war have been in effect since the Hague convention in the early part of the twentieth century, and were more clearly specified in Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.  The Geneva Convention was held in 1949 and clearly addressed the humane treatment of prisoners.  One reason this was necessary was that the Japanese and other countries treated World War II prisoners brutally, as most were tortured and some were murdered.  It was hoped that a contemporary review of the situation would help guide countries to a better understanding of the specific behavior of countries holding captives.  The Geneva Convention Laws of War, 1949 is an extensive and complicated document for school-age children, but Article 3, which deals with the treatment of prisoners is rather clear-cut and is enclosed in the back of this section of the unit.

For purposes of concentrating on this section dealing with prisoners,  Article 3 essentially says that all prisoners of war must be treated humanely and without discrimination of any kind.  Article 3 specifically forbids murder, mutilation, cruel treatment, torture, outrages on personal dignity, humiliating treatment, and the passing of sentences.  Article 3 also clearly states that the wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

It may seem odd to say that there are rules for the conduct of war when two sides are trying to kill one another, but there are sound reasons for having rules and this is an excellent opportunity for teachers to lead discussions concerning the necessity of having rules in war and in school.  What would happen if we had no rules?  What about innocent children and other civilians, should there be attempts to protect them?  Through active discussion and listening, children will come to an understanding of the necessity of having rules in war.  Classroom discussions can, in one sense, duplicate the conversations held in Geneva.

Some people say that “all is fair in love and war.”  But all is not fair in war.  There are innocent civilians who need to be protected by every means possible.  Prisoners, who were performing their duty prior to being captured and unarmed need to be respected.  Is all fair in sports?  Should we take an “anything goes” approach?  Consider the analogy of boxing.  Prior to two men or women attempting to beat the heck out of one another, a referee mentions rules such as, no hitting below the belt, no head butting, no biting, etc.  If  they are going to beat the heck out of one another, why have rules?

In schools, even when a student starts a fight on the playground and is being belligerent, there are certain rules that guide the manner in which that student may be handled.  Should a teacher or principal be allowed to strike a student who was sent to the office?  No matter how bad the behavior may have been, the answer is a resounding no.  Like a prisoner, that student must be treated humanely and with dignity.  We have rules in war, sports, and other parts of life for the same reason we have certain rules in schools - to protect the innocent and enforce a reasonable code of conduct.

During the Vietnam War there were 702 American prisoners of war, most of whom were downed pilots who had been bombing military targets in North Vietnam.  In most cases, anti-aircraft fire would hit a plane, the pilot would eject just prior to explosion, and he would be captured by North Vietnamese forces.  Immediately, Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was to have been applied.  However, the North Vietnamese said, in essence, that the rules of the Geneva Convention did not apply because war had not been declared.  They felt their American prisoners were war criminals and should be treated as such.  The North Vietnamese believed they could not only extract information from the prisoners by any means necessary, but that they could use the prisoners for political gain, especially as anti-war sentiment in the United States continued to grow.   However, it can be argued that war did not have to be declared for the Geneva Convention to be in effect due to Article 2, which says, “In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of 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 one of them.”  Irrespective, no document could protect an American soldier captured in Vietnam.  Their only hope was that their captors would have some sense of moral and ethical feelings about them.  Sadly, those feelings did not exist.

Conditions in the prisons were abominable.  Insects and rats were in the cells and men were often bound by their feet to their beds.  Cells varied in size, but they were generally 7 feet by sixteen feet.  American prisoners of war were routinely beaten and tortured in ways so painful that no words could possibly do justice to their suffering.  Every code of conduct for the ethical treatment of prisoners was broken in ways too difficult to imagine.  With the kind approval of representatives of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, an illustration by former prisoner war, John M. McGrath, showing one of the particularly brutal methods of torture is copied herein with an explanation by Mr. McGrath.

“Here, I tried to depict the ‘Vietnamese rope trick.’  The arms are repeatedly cinched up until the arms are forced together.  Sometimes at this point the ‘hell cuffs’ are applied.  The ‘hells cuffs’ are handcuffs which are put on the upper arms and pinched as tightly as possible onto the arms, cutting off the circulation.  The resulting pain is extreme.  If the prisoner has not broken down by this time, his arms are rotated until the shoulders dislocate.  Words could never adequately describe the pain, or the thoughts that go through a man’s mind at a time like this.”

There were several prison camps in North Vietnam, most in or near Hanoi.  The prisoners gave the camps various names, such as Dogpatch, Camp Faith, Camp Hope, Alcatraz, the Plantation, and perhaps the most famous, The Hanoi Hilton.  It might be interesting to ask your students why they think prisoners would name these various prisons the way they did.

“Misery loves company” is a rather famous saying, and perhaps it was never more accurately applied than in the prisons in Vietnam.  Imagine, if it is possible, not only the physical pain but the horrible sense of loneliness felt by the American men being held and tortured.  One of their most inspirational feelings was their sense of camaraderie and the realization that they weren’t alone.  Their ability to rely on each other and communicate with each other was critical to their survival.  Unfortunately, their walled cells did not lend themselves to normal communication.  Additionally, communication among the prisoners was forbidden by the North Vietnamese.  The American POW’s were men of great strength and determination and they developed a method of communication called the tap code.  The tap code used 25 letters of the alphabet, all but K, arranged in a 5-column grid .  The first tap, cough, or sneeze indicated the horizontal row, the second the vertical, so that 1-1 was A, 2-2 was G, and so forth, with 2-6 standing for K.  See the enclosed lesson for your students to attempt and experience this special form of communication.
 

A very sad chapter during the time these courageous men were being held captive was the misguided belief by American actress, Jane Fonda, and others that the Americans being held were war criminals.  Ms. Fonda used her celebrity status to support the Communist regime of North Vietnam that killed over 58,000 Americans by making public statements that clearly deflated the morale of the men being held and tortured.  The Communist abusers played Ms. Fonda’s Radio Hanoi statements over the loud speakers in camp and then while torturing the men told them that their resistance  was meaningless because American public opinion was in accord with the beliefs of Ms. Fonda.  Imagine being tortured and trying to withhold information from the enemy and then hearing a popular American celebrity call you a war criminal.  Ms. Fonda clearly made the situation of the prisoners of war significantly worse.  Ms. Fonda went on to call the Communist heroes and she even had her picture taken on an anti-aircraft gun used by North Vietnamese soldiers who were out to kill young American men and women.  Is it any wonder that many veterans still refer to Ms. Fonda as “Hanoi Jane”?  This topic is a bit controversial and teachers may wish to avoid it, but others may find it an opportunity to discuss why a celebrity would make such statements at a time of national crisis.  Do celebrities have a special responsibility to watch what they say in public?  Should all people, especially celebrities be careful about what they say at critical moments?  If so, what about their right to free speech?  (You can also discuss more recent events, such as the heinous comments made by actor Alec Baldwin calling for the torture and murder of a current U.S. Congressman and his family.)

As the war wound down and peace talks continued in Paris, one of the key components of any truce discussion was the release of prisoners.  A schedule for release was developed and the first prisoners were repatriated on February 12, 1973.  A total of 588 prisoners were repatriated while 114 died in captivity.

American prisoners of war in Vietnam were held captive longer than in any other war.  Everett Alvarez, Jr., for instance, was a prisoner from 1964 until 1973.  Adjustment to life in the United States for the released prisoners turned out to be very difficult.  Although they received very warm welcomes and some kissed the ground at U.S airports upon arrival, they had lost so much time out of their lives and so much had changed in the United States that they couldn’t understand or adapt to the many changes.  In the case of some men, their young children had grown to be independent young men and women, and their wives had developed a whole new level of independence that was foreign to these men who had no way to stay abreast of societal changes.  The strain of these many shocks was too much for some relationships and some of the men ended up divorced and alone again.

However, other men more successfully dealt with their repatriation and went on to lead very successful lives.  For example, John McCain, a former prisoner at the Hanoi Hilton went on to become a Republican Senator representing the people of Arizona, and he recently ran a strong campaign for President of the United States.  Jeremiah Denton also became a Senator representing Alabama, and others such as Air Force Col. Ted Guy led successful lives both in an out of the military.

While most feature films about the war in Vietnam are lacking, a movie about the prisoners of war entitled, The Hanoi Hilton isn’t bad.  (Not great, but not bad either.)  It would be worth your time to watch it.

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces
    who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness,
    wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated
    humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith,
    sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel
      treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous
      judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial
      guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavor to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict

Article 4
Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.

What does this coded message say?

3-5____  4-2____  2-4____  4-3____  3-4____  3-3____  1-5____  4-2____  4-3____

5-2____  1-5____  4-2____  1-5____

4-4____  3-4____  4-2____  4-4____  4-5____  4-2____  1-5____  1-4____