War crime and punishment
There was never much doubt about the technical and moral guilt of little Lt Calley and his squad. They obeyed superior orders when they should not have done so, and they murdered some Vietnamese, as dis- tinct from killing some Vietcong. They were at fault in not drawing, or being able or willing at the time to draw, the distinction. They also disobeyed another and an obscurer but—if the necessary misconstruction be allowed—more superior set of orders, or code of conduct, which says that where ap- propriate superior orders must be disobeyed.
Lt Calley's war guilt exists, is proved, is not disputed. But where upwards does the guilt stop, and be replaced by responsible statesmanlike conduct? There was a con- troversy in these columns some months back, and Henry Fairlie defended the traditional view in the light of which generals and states- men are effectively exonerated and unpun- ished and often rewarded. It is not to excul- 'Pate Calley to say that men far more power- ful and intelligent and thoughtful than he bear a greater responsibility and should Share some of the guilt and the punishment.
Previous page
