Doug
----
At 10:50 AM -0500 11/22/01, Ian Williams wrote:
>The US did not seek the Sept 12 resolution. The French introduced it. That
>resolution invoked the article of the Charter determining that the US would
>be acting in self defence. Under the UN charter military action is illegal
>unless authorized by the Security Council under Chapter VII, - or in self
>defence. So the resolution made specific authorization of military action
>un-necessary. It was a dangerous blank cheque, since at the time no one was
>sure whether the Wolfowitz's would win in Washington.
>
>But it was a legal blank cheque. At the same time NATO Council decided that
>it was an attack on one of its members which therefore permitted collective
>action.
>
>Later the US did go back for resolution 1373, which repeated all the above,
>listed specific measures to be taken and invoked under Chapter VII making
>it legally binding. At no time for either resolution was there any
>opposition whatsoever from any member of the Security Council, including
>Russia and China. At no time has anyone on the Council raised any objections
>whatsoever to US action.
>
>And Afghanistan was already under sanctions by the SC for refusal to hand
>over Bin Laden over Nairobi etc.
>
>
>As I think I said in ITT, it reminds me of all the people who opposed the
>definitely UN authorized Gulf War and then tut-tutted because NATO did not
>go to the SC over Kosovo.
>
>The war is definitely legal. You can oppose the tactics, and maybe even the
>targets may be illegal - certainly if the bombing of AlJazeera was
>deliberate is was a war crime, but the international community regards the
>war itself as legal under international law. Perhaps the encouraging thing
>is that the US did actually go out of its normally unilateralist way to
>secure legal cover.
>
>
>Is it a just war, or a fair war, Is it politically or ethically sound? They
>are different questions. Of course there is a hypocrisy factor. As Francis
>Boyle himself would point out, all of the countries concerned let Bosnia
>stew in its blood for years despite UN resolutions that called upon them to
>act. In an area swarming with NATO troops, Mladic and Karadjic are free
>despite Srebrenica, which killed twice as many people as at the WTC.