Prompted by a discussion on the BBQ Pit:
Is the United States (and other countries) breaking a law by attacking Iraq?
Obviously, I don’t know international law. Another poster referred to this attack as “illegal,” and it made me stop and think. If the attack is illegal, what are the ramifications for the U.S. and the other coalition countries?
Anybody know?
No, we’re not.
There is no such thing as International Law.
The US is flouting with impunity several Iraqi laws respecting the crossing of borders, use of airspace, homicide of civilians, arson, and so on. Given the military nature of these violations, however, it’s unlikely that the current Iraqi government, should it survive the assault, would prosecute in civilian courts any American-coalition prisoners they may manage to capture.
There is no such thing as international law in the same sense as federal and state law in the US because there is no overarching governing body that has specific enforcement power, courts, and punishment. However, there is most definitely a set of conventions and agreements generally referred to as international law. They are somewhat tenuous, though, in that agreements can be broken, and sometimes power trumps reason. Which is what this situation is all about. Some are claiming that US actions are illegal because it’s agression without a clear interest of self-defense. However, I’m not betting that there will be a trial in Brussels charging Bush with war crimes.
There was another thread on this just this week and one poster put a link to a site with an excellent reference for generally accepted international law, though a little heavy reading.
Art. 6 of the U.S. Const
I’ll let others figure out if any treaties were violated.
What will happen to the UN now? If noone will listen to it then why is it there? Some changes will have to be made to it.
This topic has been debated extensively in GD:
Is the US violating any treaties with the UN by going into Iraq without UN approval?
Thanks, brianmelendez!
If I am reading the article right, Michael Byers, who teaches international law at Duke University in North Carolina, says we are breaking int’l law. The article is here.
I haven’t read the links provided by brianmelendez and I’m no lawyer. Byers’s article is interesting, whatever conclusion the evidence points you to.
Can’t answer in-depth without getting in a Debate, although I would probably be interested if someone were to start that in the proper forum. To answer your question as GQ-ish as possible, however, either the UN will carry on as it has, undergo some significant internal power shifting to make it a more viable governmental body, or it might possibly go the way of the League of Nations.