Victims Compensation

Solution

   The United Nations should incorporate a victims compensation policy as standard procedure whenever a conflict occurs between nations. In particular, when civilians are harmed by either military force.

   For example, in the recent America-Iran conflict when the first oil tanker was damaged by Iran, the matter should have been automatically reviewed by the United Nations Victims Compensation division as standard procedure. The international community would then determine if the offending nation (Iran) should be required to pay the cost of another oil tanker, value of its cargo, and any personnel that were injured/killed by their hostile act. The same if other civilian targets were harmed by their military (e.g., hotel, airport, residential homes, natural resource facilities, etc.).

   In any circumstance, a nation may file a claim for victims compensation. The amount awarded should be substantial enough to nullify the act of aggression and to discourage further hostility (e.g., $10 million USD per person injured/killed plus any structural damages including the cost of the victim defending against such action). If monetary compensation is not feasible then property/land forfeiture may suffice (e.g., Palestinians in Gaza to reimburse Israel for their rocket attacks into civilian areas).

   It is important for the international community to impose corrective measures early in the process to prevent further hostility between the nations. If the offending nation refuses to pay then additional measures may be necessary such as accrue interest on the amount owed, impose sanctions/trade embargoes, freeze assets, and in extreme cases, even quarantine the nation (no trade, no travel, not even food/medicine).

   Another example that may qualify for victims compensation may be Afghanistan's situation where they were repeatedly invaded by the Taliban from the Pakistan region. If the international community had gotten involved early in the process and imposed fines against the offender, which is Pakistan since they gave the Taliban safe harbor and were responsible for their behavior (similar to how a dog owner is responsible for damages that their dog inflicts), Pakistan may have been encouraged to move their military along the border to prevent such attacks. By doing so, they could have saved many lives and prevented further attacks from their region.

   Another situation that may qualify for victims compensation is if the offending nation had acted in an indirect or secretive manner, such as Iran's use of improvised explosives against American forces in Iraq. Once America showed the evidence of Iran's involvement behind the scenes, the international community should have held Iran responsible and awarded monetary damages to discourage further hostility. The earlier that the international community would have acted in the matter, the more lives that could have been saved by the measure.

   Victims compensation may apply for non-military situations as well, as with China's theft of intellectual property. If the international community had awarded damages, China may have been discouraged from continuing in such a manner thereafter.

   The United Nations Victims Compensation effort should not only be considered for future events, but also to rectify past occurrences as well (as those mentioned above among others). Otherwise, offending nations may not learn that their errant behavior will not be tolerated by the international community.