Those who wage this war will be taken before the International Criminal Court at The Hague to be tried for war crimes if there are civilian casualties and possibly, crimes against humanity, if the conditions are met. The author of this article will be the proud author of the indictment. More than this, it is hereby proved that the nation in breach of Resolution 1441 is the United States of America, not Iraq.
A war against the sovereign state of Iraq without the express authorization of the UNO is illegal under international law, running against the UN Charter and against the Resolution 1441.
Under international law, Article 2, Paragraph 4 of the UN Charter is clear:
“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”.
Article 51 spells out the right of nations to wage war: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security”.
Since Iraq has neither waged an act of war against the USA or UK and since international peace and security is put at risk not by Iraq but by the USA and United Kingdom, the provisions for self-defence are not met.
Much is said by the warmongers about Resolutions 678 and 687 (1991), claiming that they allow a military attack to be launched against Iraq under the principle that their provisions were not met. However, the UNO does not enact ghost or voodoo resolutions, which are passed, acted upon, forgotten and resurrected twelve years later when the time is deemed right. If the context of the question is different, the Security Council has to deliberate a further resolution.
This was the case with 1441, which under paragraph 3, instructs Iraq to “provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA and the Council…a currently accurate, full and complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and other delivery systems”. Iraq subsequently provided a 12.000 page report.
Evidently, questions were asked about details and naturally, time is needed to reply. 12.000 pages and numerous weapons programmes involve a universe of materials and Iraq has complied consistently with the inspections teams.
Under paragraph 4, “material breach will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and 12 below”. Material breach has not been reported to the Council, rather, the inspections teams have both stated that Iraq is cooperating and that they need more time to carry out their duties determined under Resolution 1441.
The “immediate, unimpeded, unconditional and unrestricted access” guaranteed under Paragraph 5 of 1441 has been fulfilled by Iraq. Paragraph 10 “Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any information related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their mandates”.
The United States of America has not been forthcoming with this material, despite its many insinuations. There was even a ridiculous report presented to the UN Security Council by Colin Powell, who referred to foreign intelligence reports which turned out to be no more than a 1991 thesis copied from the internet by the British Intelligence Services and vague references, picked up by the biased western media, about links between Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath regime and Al-Qaeda, never proved because they are untrue.
Under Paragraph 10 of Resolution 1441, the United States of America is hereby challenged to produce the documentation behind these allegations. Should this documentation not be produced, the USA is guilty of lying to the UNSC or is in breach of its provisions.
Under Paragraph 12, should the provisions of Paragraph 4 (failure to comply and cooperate fully with this resolution will constitute material breach, which is not the case) or Paragraph 11 (interference with the inspection process or failure to comply with the disarmament process, also not the case), not be fulfilled, the UNSC “decides to convene immediately…to consider the situation and the need for full compliance of all of the relevant council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security”.
Fundamentally, Paragraph 13 continues, that “In that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations”.
Not guilty. This has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt and under the fundamental elements of international law, fundamental equality in human rights is a basic, guaranteed principle. What is evident here is that the jury has been tampered with (veiled threats about suspension of aid programmes and economic consequences if members of the UNSC voted against the USA), that the UN Charter and International Law have not been followed and that if there is military action in which any civilian dies, the US and British governments will be liable under international law for prosecution for war crimes.
I personally shall make every effort to this end here on Pravda.Ru to see that international law is adhered to and that the world is ruled on principles of multi-lateralism, equality of rights among nations, diplomacy, discussion and dialogue.
Timothy BANCROFT-HINCHEY PRAVDA.Ru
The behavior of the Russian inspector satellite, which was launched in the autumn of 2017, puzzles military officials in the United States
When the bill was submitted to Congress on August 2, the reason for imposing the new sanctions on Russia was based on Russia's alleged interference in the US presidential election in 2016, but then something clicked