The Iraq War and International Law


Book Description

The decision by the US and UK governments to use military force against Iraq in 2003 and the subsequent occupation and administration of that State, has brought into sharp focus fundamental fault lines in international law. The decision to invade, the conduct of the war and occupation and the mechanisms used to administer the country all challenge the international legal community placing it at a crossroads. When can the use of force be justified? What are the limits of military operations? What strength does international criminal law possess in the face of such interventions? How effective is the international regime of human rights in these circumstances? What role does domestic law have to play? How the law now responds and develops in the light of these matters will be of fundamental global importance for the 21st century and an issue of considerable political and legal concern. This book explores this legal territory by examining a number of issues fundamental to the future direction of international law in the War's aftermath. Consideration is also given to the impact on UK law. Both practical and academic perspectives are taken in order to scrutinise key questions and consider the possible trajectories that international law might now follow.




War Law


Book Description

“Professor Byers’s book goes to the heart of some of the most bitterly contested recent controversies about the International Rule of Law.” —Chris Patten, Chancellor of Oxford University International law governing the use of military force has been the subject of intense public debate. Under what conditions is it appropriate, or necessary, for a country to use force when diplomacy has failed? Michael Byers, a widely known world expert on international law, weighs these issues in War Law. Byers examines the history of armed conflict and international law through a series of case studies of past conflicts, ranging from the 1837 Caroline Incident to the abuse of detainees by US forces at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Byers explores the legal controversies that surrounded the 1999 and 2001 interventions in Kosovo and Afghanistan and the 2003 war in Iraq; the development of international humanitarian law from the 1859 Battle of Solferino to the present; and the role of war crimes tribunals and the International Criminal Court. He also considers the unique influence of the United States in the evolution of this extremely controversial area of international law. War Law is neither a textbook nor a treatise, but a fascinating account of a highly controversial topic that is necessary reading for fans of military history and general readers alike. “Should be read, and pondered, by those who are seriously concerned with the legacy we will leave to future generations.” —Noam Chomsky




War, Aggression and Self-Defence


Book Description

Yoram Dinstein's influential textbook is an indispensable guide to the legal issues of war and peace, armed attack, self-defence and enforcement measures taken under the aegis of the Security Council. This fifth edition incorporates recent treaties such as the Kampala amendments of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, new case law from the International Court of Justice and other tribunals, and contemporary doctrinal debates. Several new supplementary sections are also included, which take into account recent conflicts around the world, and consideration is given to new resolutions of the Security Council. With many segments having been rewritten to reflect recent State practice, this book remains a wide-ranging and highly readable introduction to the legal issues surrounding war and self-defence.




Striking First


Book Description

Does the United States have the right to defend itself by striking first, or must it wait until an attack is in progress? Is the Bush Doctrine of aggressive preventive action a justified and legal recourse against threats posed by terrorists and rogue states? Tackling one of the most controversial policy issues of the post-September 11 world, Michael Doyle argues that neither the Bush Doctrine nor customary international law is capable of adequately responding to the pressing security threats of our times. In Striking First, Doyle shows how the Bush Doctrine has consistently disregarded a vital distinction in international law between acts of preemption in the face of imminent threats and those of prevention in the face of the growing offensive capability of an enemy. Taking a close look at the Iraq war, the 1998 attack against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, among other conflicts, he contends that international law must rely more completely on United Nations Charter procedures and develop clearer standards for dealing with lethal but not immediate threats. After explaining how the UN can again play an important role in enforcing international law and strengthening international guidelines for responding to threats, he describes the rare circumstances when unilateral action is indeed necessary. Based on the 2006 Tanner Lectures at Princeton University, Striking First includes responses by distinguished political theorists Richard Tuck and Jeffrey McMahan and international law scholar Harold Koh, yielding a lively debate that will redefine how--and for what reasons--tomorrow's wars are fought.




A Matter of Principle


Book Description

Offering alternative viewpoints to the prevailing pro & anti-war debate, this volume considers the argument that intervention in Iraq was justified on the grounds that protection of human rights & freedom from tyranny are global concerns.




For the Love of Humanity


Book Description

On February 15, 2003, millions of people around the world demonstrated against the war that the United States, the United Kingdom, and their allies were planning to wage in Iraq. Despite this being the largest protest in the history of humankind, the war on Iraq began the next month. That year, the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI) emerged from the global antiwar movement that had mobilized against the invasion and subsequent occupation. Like the earlier tribunal on Vietnam convened by Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre, the WTI sought to document—and provide grounds for adjudicating—war crimes committed by the United States, the United Kingdom, and their allied forces during the Iraq war. For the Love of Humanity builds on two years of transnational fieldwork within the decentralized network of antiwar activists who constituted the WTI in some twenty cities around the world. Ayça Çubukçu illuminates the tribunal up close, both as an ethnographer and a sympathetic participant. In the process, she situates debates among WTI activists—a group encompassing scholars, lawyers, students, translators, writers, teachers, and more—alongside key jurists, theorists, and critics of global democracy. WTI activists confronted many dilemmas as they conducted their political arguments and actions, often facing interpretations of human rights and international law that, unlike their own, were not grounded in anti-imperialism. Çubukçu approaches this conflict by broadening her lens, incorporating insights into how Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Iraqi High Tribunal grappled with the realities of Iraq's occupation. Through critical analysis of the global debate surrounding one of the early twenty-first century's most significant world events, For the Love of Humanity addresses the challenges of forging global solidarity against imperialism and makes a case for reevaluating the relationships between law and violence, empire and human rights, and cosmopolitan authority and political autonomy.




The Politics of Justifying Force


Book Description

What are the politics involved in a government justifying its use of military force abroad? What is the role of international law in that discourse? How and why is international law crucial to this process? And what role does the media have in mediating the interaction of international law and politics? This book provides a fresh and engaging answer to these questions. It introduces different actors to the study of international law in this context, in particular highlighting the importance of institutional actors and the role of the media. It takes a theoretical approach, informed by detailed empirical analysis of key case studies, which challenges the traditional distinction between the spheres of 'the international' and 'the domestic' in global affairs, and the role of international law in the making of public policy. The book specifically critiques the idea of the 'politics of justification', which argues that deploying international legal norms to justify governmental decisions resulting in the use of force necessarily constrains government actions, and leads to fewer instances of military intervention. The politics of justification, on this account, can be seen as a progressive practice, through which international law can become embedded in domestic societies. The book investigates the actors engaged in this justification, and the institutional contexts within which legal justification is articulated, interpreted, and contested. It provides a rich, detailed account of domestic British discourse in the crucial case studies of the Suez Crisis of 1956 and the Iraq War of 2003, making extensive use of archival material, newspaper and television reporting, Parliamentary debates, polling data, personal memoirs, and the declassified material provided to several Public Inquiries, including the Chilcot Inquiry. In light of these sources, it considers the concept of international law as a language and form of communication rather than a set of abstract norms. It argues that a detailed understanding of how that language is deployed, both in private and in public, is essential to gaining a deeper understanding of the role of international law in domestic politics. This book will be illuminating reading for scholars and students the use of force in international law, historians, and media theorists.




What We Owe Iraq


Book Description

What do we owe Iraq? America is up to its neck in nation building--but the public debate, focused on getting the troops home, devotes little attention to why we are building a new Iraqi nation, what success would look like, or what principles should guide us. What We Owe Iraq sets out to shift the terms of the debate, acknowledging that we are nation building to protect ourselves while demanding that we put the interests of the people being governed--whether in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, or elsewhere--ahead of our own when we exercise power over them. Noah Feldman argues that to prevent nation building from turning into a paternalistic, colonialist charade, we urgently need a new, humbler approach. Nation builders should focus on providing security, without arrogantly claiming any special expertise in how successful nation-states should be made. Drawing on his personal experiences in Iraq as a constitutional adviser, Feldman offers enduring insights into the power dynamics between the American occupiers and the Iraqis, and tackles issues such as Iraqi elections, the prospect of successful democratization, and the way home. Elections do not end the occupier's responsibility. Unless asked to leave, we must resist the temptation of a military pullout before a legitimately elected government can maintain order and govern effectively. But elections that create a legitimate democracy are also the only way a nation builder can put itself out of business and--eventually--send its troops home. Feldman's new afterword brings the Iraq story up-to-date since the book's original publication in 2004, and asks whether the United States has acted ethically in pushing the political process in Iraq while failing to control the security situation; it also revisits the question of when, and how, to withdraw.




The Law of War


Book Description

D Types of war.




From '9-11' to the 'Iraq War 2003'


Book Description

This book is a tale of two towers,two wars and two visions. The two towers are those of the World Trade Center in New York, destroyed by a terrorist attack on 11 September 2001. The two wars are the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq. The two visions are of the international legal and political order for the twenty-first century. The issues involved in the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq are of fundamental importance because they may define the shape of international order for the twenty-first century. The book has a number of themes. First, it considers the principal international law and international order issues involved in the War Against Terrorism and in the War on Iraq in 2003. Specific attention is given to the application of international humanitarian and international human rights law in the wars. Secondly it asks how the international debate on the Iraq War was conducted and why? Finally it questions whether the post-1945 system of international laws and organizations is capable of surviving, and in what form? Chapter one outlines how the relationship between war and the international legal order has evolved and introduces the idea of 'complexity theory' as a framework for understanding the events and issues considered in this book. Chapter two considers the pattern of events from the attacks on the US on 9-11 to the Iraq War 2003. Chapter three addresses the issues of law and morality involved in the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq. Chapter four focuses on the moral and legal debate around the War on Iraq and chapter five considers the systemic consequences for international law doctrine and practice, giving particular weight to US policy and approaches and how other states have responded to them. Chapter six appraises the post-war situation in Iraq in terms of political and economic organisation and human rights. It also assesses the consequences of the status of post-war Iraq for the wider region. Chapter seven concludes the book by examining the possible implications of the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq for world order in the twenty-first century.