International Law First Casualty of US Action

Home>>Opinion

Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Wednesday, March 26, 2003

International Law First Casualty of US Action

Mark the day: March 20, 2003. History will record it when bombs, instead of international laws, started to count in regional or world conflicts.

DISCUSSION

CHINESE

SEND TO FRIEND

Mark the day: March 20, 2003. History will record it when bombs, instead of international laws, started to count in regional or world conflicts.

It was a day when the US bombing of Iraq began. It set a precedent that a country could, at will, go to war, flying in the face of the international community which, for the most part, wanted to continue to pursue a peaceful solution.

War seemed inevitable two days ago when the United States scuttled the remnants of diplomacy by issuing an ultimatum to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Thursday's opening salvo shattered confidence in justice and international law.

While questioning the legitimacy of this military action, we ask: Is this to be a precedent for settlement of international conflicts in the future? Why is it that all the efforts by the international community to seek a political solution should be so easily discarded?

For the United States and its allies, the weapons of mass destruction are not the issue they would like the world to believe.

This is a war of choice by the United States and its allies.

In US President George W. Bush's words, the bombing of selected targets in Iraq yesterday was to undermine this Middle Eastern nation's capability to wage war.

Without United Nations authorization, this excuse cannot in itself be justification.

The US threat to use force before, and now the significant scale of force being brought to bear, have all along gone against the will of the majority within the international community. The military action taking place now is a clear breach of the UN Charter and hence a violation of international law.

Playing the guardian or saviour of world peace and security, Bush claimed his country and 35 other nations share a duty to attack Iraq and overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Who has given them the authority and duty to invade a sovereign country?

The UN Charter is clear. No such war is permitted unless it is in self-defence or authorized by the Security Council.

Neither the US nor Britain, nor any of their allies, is under attack or any threat of immediate attack by Iraq.

Nor has the UN authorized military actions.

By bombing Iraq, the attackers have tested the fundamental dogma of international law, perhaps to the point of its destruction.

The US invasion of Iraq will be of immense world significance, because it has alerted the world to the risks the UN itself faces.

The UN Charter is a treaty, to which 192 out of a total of 196 sovereign states around the world are parties. It takes precedence over all other treaties.

The disdain for the world body, shown by the US, has challenged the efforts of the past half-century to create an effective international structure to replace perpetual war with perpetual peace.

If attempts to create such international structure are abandoned, nations will have to depend for their security on military might.

This would inevitably lead to more being spent on swords and less on ploughshares.

This war is not only about Iraq, and it should be stopped immediately.

Questions?Comments? Click here

US AIRCRAFT START ATTACK ON IRAQ

Chinese FM Issues Statement on Iraq Question

>> Full Coverage

The US Must Not Put Pressure On the UN ( 3 Messages)

Saddam Vows to Globalize War if Attacked ( 5 Messages)

China's Z11 Helicopters Get Green Light for Civilian Use ( 5 Messages)

New Premier Comes from Grass Roots ( 2 Messages)

China Hopes War can be Avoided: FM ( 3 Messages)