• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Did Sisko commit a war crime?

A Maquis state would need to hold its own and jealously guard its borders and people.

Which it wouldn't be able to do. Even a half crippled Defiant easily wiped the floor with them. The major actors in the area can throw hundreds of starships at problems. Those dinky little raiders aren't going to stop much.

Their only hope would be to get their defence guaranteed by either the Klingons or the Federation. Once they go independent the treaty probably wouldn't protect them from actual proper Cardassian military action. Federation might, probably only if they surrendered their bio-weapons and probably some of their leadership as well. Klingon might be their best bet, but they are in a expanding empire kind of mood and if they allowed them in (to defend their borders, set up bases) they better get used to gagh because they're now part of the Klingon Empire whether they want to be or not.
 
The Federation treated the Klingons with care because, again, a full-out war with them (as shown) was a losing proposition for both sides, especially with The Dominion waiting to mop up anyone who survived. It's easy to say the Feds shouldn't have made peace with the Klingons; what would you have preferred, exactly?

Once the Cardassians joined The Dominion they attacked The Maquis so swiftly that there was nothing left to defend. It's likely the Feds took in Maquis refugees, because why not? Wouldn't mean they shouldn't face charges for any potential crimes they committed during their "holy war", though. If the Maquis actions weren't religious (and in the case of the Native American types...) they were certainly based on ideology more than practical reasons.

Please cite some supporting evidence for claims that the Feds were heartless regarding the situation.
I was not suggesting that the Federation should have declared an all out war against the Klingons.

I was making a comparison between how harshly the Feds treated their former compatriots, the human settlers (whom the Federation sold out in the first place), and how forgivingly the Feds dealt with the Klingons, who committed naked aggression against DS9 and the Federation.

I suppose it was also somewhat ironic that it was the aggressive action of the Federation's good buddies, the Klingons, that led the Cardassians to eventual war with the Federation, but not the actions of the Maquis.

Sisko was so fearful that the actions of the Maquis would lead to a war with the Cardassian when it was primarily Klingon aggression against Cardassia that made the Cardassians feel vulnerable which led to their alliance with the Dominion and thus all out war.

The Klingons deserve contempt not the Maquis.

During the Klingon invasion of Cardassia, they seized a number of Cardassian planets and outposts. Oddly enough the Klingons held onto them even as they remade peace with the Federation. I assume the Klingons defended those Cardassian territory that they seized through aggression, while those in the Federation, like Sisko and his ilk, probably couldn't have care less as the Cardassian/Dominion slaughtered their former human compatriots.

As contemptible as the Klingons were, I can at least respect them for defending what they think is theirs, while I can not respect the Federation for what I assume was a second betrayal of those human settlers by the Feds when the Feds apparently did not come to their aid as the Cardassian/Dominion slaughtered them.
 
Funny thing is it shows the Federation was more willing to forgive its ally than its own people.

A Maquis state could only have existed in the aftermath of a broken cardassia. But the Federation wouldn't leave the Maquis alone and let them carve out their state.
 
So...because the Cardassians may not have been making a sincere effort to honor the treaty, the Federation should sink to their level as well?
 
Sisko says:I thereby will make the planet uninhabitable to all human life for the next fifty years.

Assuming he speaks the truth (and why wouldn't he?) it doesn't necessarily follow Cardassians (or any humanoid life for that matter) could live there the next 50 years.

As to whether it's a war crime, I'm trying to think of a somewhat analogous situation. Suppose it's near the end of WW2, the US has developed its atomic bomb, and they wish to give the Japanese a demonstration. So they warn a specific small island with few inhabitants (and the Japanese government) they will detonate a new type of bomb over it with an unprecedented power and particularly nasty lingering after effects after a time frame that gives all of them a sufficient, but by no means generous amount of time to do an emergency evacuation (but nothing more than that). Warning gets ignored, bomb is detonated. Would that have been a war crime?
 
Last edited:
Assuming he speaks the truth (and why wouldn't he?) it doesn't necessarily follow Cardassians (or any humanoid life for that matter) could live there the next 50 years.

I seem to recall it being stated that the Human colonist and the Cardassian colonist basically swapped planets after Eddington was captured. As Eddington's biological weapon was suppose to effect Cardassians only, while Sisko's effected Humans only. (or mainly in both cases, one gathers there should be species that are close enough to both that couldn't go there anymore). Tailored biological weapons seem to be able to do that. Or known weapons that effect some species but not others.
 
It is explicitly stated at the end of the episode that the Humans and Cardassians will swap planets, which is why I get particularly annoyed when people hyperbolically state that Sisko poisoned the planet while overlooking the end result.

I think this issue is muddied by the fact that we don't have a clear definition of what a "war crime" is, not to mention that it would likely vary based on who was calling the shots.

I don't think Sisko's actions with regards to the Maquis can be called a war crime if for no other reason than that there wasn't a state of war at the time.
 
I don't believe all the Maquis evacuated. It just isn't possible to evacuate all those men, women and children in the time frame Sisko demanded.
 
I think people are using war crime in a broad sense, as in- someone engaged in combat action that throws away the rules of of warfare, or someone who specifically targets civilians in an attempt to gain victory over a combatant, like the British and Americans did in WW2.

So in that sense, there may not have to be an active official state of war. And the Maquis were fighting a war. The Cardassians were fighting a war against them, and the neutral Federation were fighting an on and off war against the Klingons, who were allied with the Maquis, and also fighting against the Kardashians.

Plenty of war to go around at this time.
 
I don't believe all the Maquis evacuated. It just isn't possible to evacuate all those men, women and children in the time frame Sisko demanded.

Any realistic resistance force will be able to evacuate in hours for its own survival and have that idea drilled into them to flee rather than stand and fight. Also these colonies seem to house hundreds of people as these seemed likely to be mining colonies since they don't appear to be a typical M-class planet.
 
It would take some time for the poison to spread through the atmosphere, it would depend on the winds mostly. Eddington's weapon was suppose to do the same and allow for their enemy to escape alive rather than decimate the planet. By the end Sisko was playing to Eddington's hero complex in order to defeat him and stop his campaign.

It should be pointed out that while Captain Picard would likely never take this route, Captain Kirk certainly would.
 
If Archer did this, he would spend a full season self loathing and brooding about it. If Janeway did this, everyone would say she is psycho, and bi-polar....


...oh wait...
 
Regardless of whether it's a war crime or not, Sisko definitely went too far here in my opinion. He never should have let his obsession with Eddington take the reigns on him, and starfleet command shoudl have stopped him cold in this situation.
 
What are some alternate courses Starfleet or Sisko could or should have done?
 
Eddington's weapon was suppose to do the same and allow for their enemy to escape alive rather than decimate the planet.

I doubt it. Eddington was not likely to give his victims any kind of time to evacuate. He wanted to kill Cardassians.

Hell, Eddington would have ultimately settled for nothing less than the genocide of the entire Cardassian species.
 
What are some alternate courses Starfleet or Sisko could or should have done?
IMO - there's really nothing else he could have done if he wanted to get the Romulans to side with the Federation in the war. That doesn't absolve him of guilt for the acts, but it also shows that sometimes there ISN'T always a 'right' or morally correct solution to a problem.
 
I don't believe all the Maquis evacuated. It just isn't possible to evacuate all those men, women and children in the time frame Sisko demanded.

I think we have to assume that statements made by reliable narrators are true, and then figure out how they could be true. Otherwise, you're not criticizing Star Trek, you're criticizing your own caricature of Star Trek.

I figure the Maquis settlements were very small, about the size of the one we saw in "For the Uniform". They make settlements around where their ships are, and keep the ships ready to take off at a moment's notice.
 
Couldn't they have contacted more pro-federation members or anti-dominion members of the Romulan senate?

Their had to be diplomats working overtime to convince the Romulans of joining the Fed-Klingon alliance.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top