View attachment 929694
Notice, the AVG P-40 is using ROC Roundel, not USAAF Roundel, or a completely blank paint scheme
In this case, if we compare Wagner and AVG. If we use your definition and interpretation of Article 47,
Which is The Party to the Conflict does not count we only count the country. Then let's ask the same question to both organisation on both war
Was Wagner Group an organisation to the party of the Conflict? Russia is a party to the conflict. So yes
Was AVG an organisation to the party of the Conflict? China is a party to the conflict, so the answer is also yes.
On the other hand,
Was Russian Wagner operator is a national or resident of a party to a conflict? Yes, they are Russian and a resident in Russia
Was American in AVG a nation or resident of a party to a conflict? Yes, they reside in ROC during their service, hence a resident in China, which is a party to the conflict.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fact, if article 4 was interpreted the way you said, if we do not distinguish between the country and the "Party" to the conflict.
Then there would be no Mercenary by this definition, because everyone would have to reside in the combat zone to fight in that combat zone, which give literally everyone the status of state actor.....Because remember D is
A person is NEITHER a national of the Party to the conflict NOR a resident of territories controlled by a party to the conflict.
I mean, if you fight in Iraq, you have to be a resident of Iraq regardless of your citizenship status, as in you have to be physically living in Iraq in order to fight in Iraq, how do you be a resident of somewhere else and fight in Iraq?