En oppfølger av et annet punkt.
At 14:30 10.01.2002 +0100, Gabriel Kielland wrote to Knut Rognes:
>Genevekonvensjonene gjelder erklært krig mellom land, så de passer ikke i
>Afghanistan der bombingen skjer i samråd med det regimet som allerede var
>støttet av USA (og av FN).
Men merk at USA bombet lenge før de fikk samtykke av den nye regjeringen i
Afganistan. Samtykket er av hensyn til oss (dvs GS og AS), USA bomber når
de vil, det har vi alle lært nå. USA ønsket ikke en gang samtykke av
Sikkerhetsrådet for bombingen i Afganistan:
Noam Chomsky skriver om dette:
*************
... There has been debate over whether U.S. military actions in
Afghanistan were authorized under ambiguous Security Council
resolutions, but it avoids the central issue: Washington plainly
did not want Security Council authorization,[33] which it surely
could have obtained, clearly and unambiguously. Since it lost
its virtual monopoly over UN decisions, the U.S. has been far in
the lead in vetoes, Britain second, France a distant third, but
none of these powers would have opposed a U.S.-sponsored
resolution. Nor would Russia or China, eager to gain U.S.
authorization for their own atrocities and repression (in
Chechnya and western China, particularly). But Washington
insisted on not obtaining Security Council authorization, which
would entail that there is some higher authority to which it
should defer. Systems of power resist that principle if they are
strong enough to do so....
(fotnote) [33]The fact was noted. See, e.g., Elaine Sciolino and Steven
Lee Myers, "Bush Says `Time Is Running Out'; U.S. Plans To Act
Largely Alone," _NYT_, Oct. 7, 2001: "A sign of Washington's
insistence that its hands not be tied was its rejection of United
Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan's entreaties that any
American military action be subject to Security Council approval,
administration officials said." For judicious commentary on the
legal issues, see _ASIL Insights_ (American Society of
International Law), 10/2/2001.
Mer på Znet:
http://www.zmag.org/lakdawalalec.htm
******************
Mht Genevekonvensjonen og GS's argument at den bare gjelder for stater -
hva da med anklagen mot Milosevic, som er basert nettopp på samme
konvensjon, for forbrytelser begått under borgerkrigen i det tidligere
Jugoslavia, dvs ikke i krig mellom stater?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_354000/354561.stm
"The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia, pursuant to her authority under Article 18 of the Statute of
the Tribunal, charges
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC with CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OR
CUSTOMS OF WAR and GRAVE BREACH OF THE GENEVA CONVENTION OF 1949 as set
forth below."
Knut Rognes
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 11-07-02 MET DST