Fw: Legal Scholar: US, UK Acting As 'Totalitarian States' InAttacking Iraq]

["Nello Margiotta" <animarg at tin.it>]

>
>
> Subject: Legal Scholar: US, UK Acting As 'Totalitarian States' In
Attacking Iraq
> Date: 26 Mar 2003 08:55:39 -0800
>
>
http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id=160&msg_id=3135376&startrow=1&date=2
003-03-26&do_alert=0
>
> Russian Information Agency (Novosti)
> March 26, 2003
>
> WAR IN IRAQ IS AGGRESSION
>
> -In the 20th century, following the two world wars,
> the international community banned wars as a means to
> pursue foreign policy and settle international
> disputes and conflicts.
> -[T]he UN General Assembly defines an aggressor as a
> state that was the first to use force against another
> state "regardless of a declaration of war".
> Particularly so, if a country attacks a sovereign
> country without UN authorisation.
> -By acting in circumvention of the United Nations
> Washington and London violate international law, their
> own international commitments, including the
> Millennium Declaration adopted by the United Nations
> at the General Assembly session in 2000.
> -According to the scholar, the United States and Great
> Britain are acting as totalitarian rather than
> democratic states, for democracy primarily requires
> compliance with both national and international law.
>
>
>
>
> MOSCOW, March 26, 2003. /from RIA Novosti
> correspondent Valery Asriyan/--The war on Iraq,
> unleashed by the United States and Great Britain, is
> "undoubtedly an act of aggression in terms of
> international law," Professor Oleg Khlestov, Deputy
> President of the Russian Association on International
> Law, Chairman of the Department of International and
> Constitutional Law of the Moscow State Linguistic
> University said in an interview with RIA Novosti. In
> the 20th century, following the two world wars, the
> international community banned wars as a means to
> pursue foreign policy and settle international
> disputes and conflicts. Prior to that, war was
> considered a legal means "to settle arguments," which
> accounts for so many wars in the world's history,
> Khlestov said.
>
> Khlestov stressed that in line with international law
> and the UN Charter, the use of force can only be
> authorised by a UNSC resolution or, while using the
> right of self-defence which is stipulated by Article
> 51 of the UN Charter, if a state is subject to an
> armed attack by another state or to a terrorist
> attack. The reference to terrorism was added to the
> previous version by a UNSC resolution in the wake of
> the New York terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
>
> An intense debate is going on now whether the
> Anglo-American campaign against Iraq may be qualified
> as aggression.
>
> The word "aggression," Khlestov reminds, was defined
> 70 years ago by the 1933 London Convention, and later
> confirmed and specified within the framework of the
> 1974 UN General Assembly.
>
> By the way, the definition was initiated by the Soviet
> Union whereas the United States was against it, the
> scholar added.
>
> According to Khlestov, the UN General Assembly defines
> an aggressor as a state that was the first to use
> force against another state "regardless of a
> declaration of war". Particularly so, if a country
> attacks a sovereign country without UN authorisation.
>
> However, to claim that aggression is a fact is the
> prerogative of the United Nations Security Council
> which then has the role of an international court
> arbiter of last resort and passes a final verdict on
> the act of aggression, Khlestov noted. That is why the
> Russian leadership is absolutely right referring to
> the UNSC prerogative in the present-day complicated
> situation, the scholar stressed.
>
> Now it is clear that the military action of the United
> States and Great Britain against Iraq is qualified as
> aggression. Thus, the United States and Britain
> violate the basic principle of international law which
> bans the use of force except in self-defence, Khlestov
> added.
>
> As for Iraq, in the given circumstances, the country,
> which is subject to military attack, has the right to
> defend itself, as stipulated by Article 51 of the UN
> Charter, Khlestov believes.
>
> By acting in circumvention of the United Nations
> Washington and London violate international law, their
> own international commitments, including the
> Millennium Declaration adopted by the United Nations
> at the General Assembly session in 2000. The Millenium
> Declaration proclaims the rule of international law
> world-wide. Both the United States and Great Britain
> voted for the declaration only to deal a severe blow
> to international law in Iraq three years later. "In
> fact, this is an attempt to return to the past, to
> cross out humankind's progress on an end to war,"
> Khlestov said.
>
> According to the scholar, the United States and Great
> Britain are acting as totalitarian rather than
> democratic states, for democracy primarily requires
> compliance with both national and international law.
>
> "The attempts of aggressors (which, undoubtedly,
> Washington and London are) to interpret UNSC
> Resolution 1441, seeking to determine unilaterally
> whether or not Iraq follows it, reveal the ambition to
> tackle issues of international stability, war and
> peace out of self-interest," the Russian scholar
> believes. The goal the aggressors proclaim openly - to
> change the Iraqi regime - is another infringement on
> international law, which outlaws an imposed regime
> change in sovereign states, Khlestov added.
>
> Fortunately, the UN Security Council is to reconsider
> the situation in Iraq at an open session. Thus,
> pressure will be brought to bear on the US and Great
> Britain to put an end to the illegal military action
> and stop aggression in Iraq, the lawyer believes.
>
> Moscow, March 26, 2003.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *** FULL-SPECTRUM FIGHTBACK! *********************************
> * U.N. General Assembly Censure of U.S. Regime's Aggressions *
> * World-Wide General & Rotating National Strikes             *
> * Rotating Student & Worker Walkouts                         *
> * Your Ideas Here!                                           *
>
>
>