Reply to post: Re: OK, so they asked nicely

Cyber-stability wonks add election-ware to ‘civilised nations won’t hack this’ standard

Voland's right hand Silver badge

Re: OK, so they asked nicely

How many non-states have signed the Geneva Conventions?

There are states that have not like North Korea.

Similarly there are states which have signed it, but have decided NOT to ratify it so in effect their signature is null and void. The last annex on the annual OCPW report lists these. The list (states which have refused to ratify after a signature) is not widely advertised which is not surprising as it has ONE entry in it. Israel.

Make you own conclusions on that any way you like it (IMHO this has the distinct smell of Dimona all over again).

As far as non-states, the current conflict in Syria demonstrates that states signing it is rather irrelevant in this day and age. Specifically, the OPCW has had 100+ reports of incidents and 6 invitations to examine evidence of chemical attacks by non-state actors in 2017 (in their report). It did not attend EVEN ONE. At the same time it found resources to attend to 3 incidents by the regime. The numbers are out of the annual report of the Fact Finding mission on Syria available on their web site as a PDF. So if we continue the analogy with chemical weapons to elections, non-state actors like Fox, SCL, CA, etc can "influence" elections with impunity. They will not be even investigated.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon