The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Dear All, Having followed the discussions about the coming new slaughter of Iraq, I could not but notice one common factor even among those who care for the Iraqis and the injustice that has been done to them: all call for dismantling Iraq's weapons programs. I know some have their own views of the Iraqi president and the Ba'th Party, but that is hardly the criteria upon which views regarding the fate and sovereignty of a country are based. If the issue is that Saddam Hussein killed his own people, then that applies first of all to the history of the US against its own citizens, as well as almost every country in the world. So why should we all accept that it is alright to disarm Iraq, and Iraq alone? Why should some states be "more equal than others"? And what gives those same states that develop and own WMDs the right to decide who can have such weapons and who can not? No one has given us any explanation as to why inspections must be carried out in Iraq… I understand that all of us are against sanctions, but our wish to help the people of Iraq should not be in the form of accepting anything less than justice for Iraq and equality with other states. If one state in the world (be it a super power like the US or a has-been like Britain) can own such weapons, there is no legal nor moral grounds to prevent others from having the same right, regardless of what some may think of SH or his regime. Those who refer to the UN SC resolutions forget major issues. First of all, the SC is not a court of law, nor can it issue resolutions that violate the Charter of the UN or International Law. There is no ground for preventing any member state of the UN from having WMDs, similar to those owned by others. The claim that Iraq's acquisition of such weapons is a threat to international peace which should be stopped is absurd, and could apply more to states that really have such weapons in the area, especially Israel. Second, the SC resolutions against Iraq have almost all been adopted in violation of the Charter of the UN itself. The lack of the "concurring vote" of any permanent member of the SC (as demanded by the Charter) makes adopting such resolution illegal. The first such resolution was 678 of November 29, 1990. China abstained, which means that the draft resolution failed to receive the necessary "concurring vote of all permanent members". How it was adopted exposes the hypocrisy and ignorance within the UN machine, and shatters the credibility of the UN. You can not punish someone for violating international law by violating international law yourself. And therefore, as the legal principle goes, every resolution that was based on resolution 678 is illegal and not binding, including especially resolution 687 of April 1991, which is the base for inspections. Third, sanctions were imposed on Iraq for invading Kuwait in violation of international law and the Charter of the UN. The only condition set for the sanctions was Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait. When that was achieved by March 1, 1991 sanctions had no legal ground for them, and should have been lifted. The sanctions regime imposed again in April 1991 (though the resolution is illegal), with new conditions, had nothing to do with the previous regime, nor with its reasons, nor with the UN Charter or international law. It is NOT illegal under the UN Charter to own WMDs. Nor has the SC determined that Iraq was a threat to International Security when adopting resolution 687 to justify adopting a resolution under Chapter 7 of the Charter, allowing its implementation by force. I think that it is important for us to stress these legal facts in addition to the inhumanity of sanctions and the catastrophe it has created. If we are to call for inspections in Iraq, then we should call for inspection in every state which is known to be or suspected of developing WMDs, and call for FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF ALL SC RESOLUTIONS BY ALL STATES. Otherwise, we would be accepting that inequality is right. Finally, I found the following sentence, from a letter to the editor of Time Magazine's latest issue, quite interesting: "The Administration's mentality seems to be that democracy and legitimate justice are for Americans. Others get the crumbs from the table". Hassan _________________________________________________________ Better safe than sorry, right? You will always be safe with the Maktoob Anti-Virus feature. http://www.maktoob.com _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk