A-Infos (en) Humanitarian Law Prpoject:Press Release on Iraq, Feb 19

[MichaelP <papadop@PEAK.ORG>]

________________________________________________
     A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
           http://www.ainfos.ca/
________________________________________________

                                                PRESS RELEASE
                                                CONTACT: Karen Parker
                                                1-415-668-2752 or
                                                Lydia Brazon: 310-836-6316


WHAT PRESIDENT CLINTON DIDN'T TELL YOU:  U.S. AIR STRIKES AGAINST IRAQ
VIOLATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

Los Angeles -- February 18, 1998 --  "The planned U.S. military action in
Iraq violates rather than upholds international law" says Humanitarian Law
Project's Chief Delegate to the United Nations, Karen Parker, "There are
serious consequences in humanitarian law (the law applying to armed
conflict) for any U.S. military action." There are at least six instances
of possible violations:

THERE'S NO VIABLE MILITARY OBJECTIVE 

1.  For a military action to be legal, there must be a viable military
objective. There is no viable military objective to a U.S.  military
strike against Iraq and the U.S.  may accordingly be viewed as the
aggressor. U.S. military forces may not target Saddam Hussein because to
do so will far exceed the U.N. Security Council mandate for the use of
force which is limited to forcing Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait. Iraq
withdrew from Kuwait in 1991 and at present offers no military threat to
Kuwait. 

U.N. RESOLUTIONS DO NOT AUTHORIZE U.S. AIR STRIKES

2.      The U.N. has not authorized the use of military action to  force
compliance with U.N. weapons inspectors and has instead authorized
sanctions against Iraq.Three of the five permanent members of the Security
Council (Russia, China and France) are opposed to military action. A
majority of the non-permanent members oppose. The U.S. will not be able to
classify the proposed military action as under the U.N. umbrella--putting
our military personnel at greater risk of legal actions against them for
violations of the rules of war (the Geneva Conventions, The Hague
Conventions, etc.)

THE LIKELIHOOD OF EXCESSIVE CIVILIAN CASUALTIES MAKES AIR STRIKES ILLEGAL

3.  Any military actions will have far more serious consequences for Iraqi
civilians than for the remains of Iraq's armed forces or the Hussein
government. It is illegal to target civilians nor may military actions be
carried out when there is a likelihood of excessive civilian casualties in
proportion to military casualties or damage. In fact, it is almost certain
that civilians will suffer tremendously when they are already suffering
extreme health problems from the sanctions. 

TARGETING CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS IS AS DEVASTATING AS USING THEM

4.  Facilities alleged to be for storage of chemical or other dangerous
weaponry may not be targeted. Under humanitarian law, such weapons may not
be used nor unleashed. Even if the U.S. does not use chemical or other
prohibited weapons against Iraq, if U.S. forces unleash chemicals that
Iraq may have, the military action would be an illegal one and any damage
to civilians, property and the environment is chargeable to the U.S. 

WAR MAY NOT BE CARRIED OUT TO "TEST" NEW WEAPONS 

5.  War may not be carried out to "test" new weapons. There is credible
discussion that the U.S. wants to test its new "smart" weapons. The U.S. 
has tried very hard to get Americans to "hate" Iraq enough to justify
military actions. This in itself is a violation of the U.N. charter that
forbids propaganda for war. U.S. action for weapon testing purposes would
clearly be military action with no legal military purpose. 

THE U.S. USED NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN 1991 ATTACK AGAINST IRAQ

6.      The U.S. used weapons containing depleted uranium (DU) in the Gulf
War which had a devastating effect on the health of Iraqi civilians and
Iraqi, U.S. and UK veterans of the war.  Evidence of depleted uranium
contamination may be obliterated through  additional military actions. It
may be more difficult to distinguish DU damage from present damage. The
U.S. is obligated under humanitarian international laws to assist victims
of DU weaponry (including Gulf War Syndrome) and may not carry out any
military or other action that would further harm its victims or cover up
the use of said weaponry.

The Humanitarian Law Project urges President Clinton to respect the rules
of Humanitarian and International laws which have so often been invoked as
justification for U.S. military action against Iraq.


     ****** A-Infos News Service *****
  News about and of interest to anarchists

Subscribe -> email MAJORDOMO@TAO.CA
             with the message SUBSCRIBE A-INFOS
Info      -> http://www.ainfos.ca/
Reproduce -> please include this section