Hidden Facts
The United States-led occupation of Iraq is a
dead end, politically, militarily, morally and
economically
The national popular resistance in Iraq is
the sole legal and legitimate representative
of the Iraqi people and the Republic of Iraq
Only the national popular resistance can and has
authority to determine a path towards peace
and stability in Iraq
In 2005, the Jury of Conscience of the World
Tribunal on Iraq stated clearly the illegality and
immorality of the US-led invasion, occupation and
destruction of Iraq as a state and as a nation.
Legality is with Iraq
While the litany of US-authored illegalities in Iraq runs
almost beyond measure, international law affirms:
The US-led occupation of Iraq is explicitly
prohibited under international law from instituting
changes aimed at permanently altering the foundational
structures of the Iraqi state, including its judiciary,
economy, political institutions and social fabric.[i]
Further, and given that the 2003 invasion of Iraq
was unequivocally illegal under international law,
not only are the US-designed Iraqi permanent
constitution and National Assembly illegal, every
law, treaty, agreement and contract signed in Iraq
since the illegal invasion and subsequent occupation
began is illegal. All states are obliged under
international law not to recognize as legal the
consequences of illegal acts by other states.[ii]
· The US-led occupation is prohibited under
international law from establishing any long-term
economic contract that has not been agreed
upon by a sovereign Iraqi government representing
the sovereign Iraqi people.[iii] Since no such
government can, by definition, exist under occupation,
all attempts to bind the future of Iraqi oil to foreign
multinationals — particularly through unfavorable
“Product Sharing Agreements” (PSAs) —
are illegal and null and void.
· The US-led occupation is unequivocally
prohibited under international law from seeking or
permitting the division of Iraq into three or more
federal units. Any such outcome would be a grave
breach of the laws of war that govern belligerent
occupation. It is equally illegal that the US-led occupation
engenders and foments ethnic and sectarian strife
in order to realize policies opposed to the
interests of the Iraqi people.[iv]
· The policies of the US-led occupation having failed,
occupation authorities have no right to attempt to
subjugate Iraqis by force. Conducting punitive
operations that indiscriminately affect civilians
across entire cities — e.g., present plans in
motion to pacify Baghdad for the fourth time —
is illegal and imputable under international law.[v]
The US-led occupation and the feudal proxies it
established are committing collective punishment,
crimes against humanity, using prohibited weapons
and violating the laws of war by not recognizing the
combatants of the resistance as combatants.[vi]
· The ongoing campaign of murder, torture, rape
and terror against the Sunni constituency in Iraq,
including the operation of death squads financed
by the US, constitutes genocide under the 1951
Genocide Convention.[vii] The failure of US-led
occupation forces to protect, as they are obliged
under international law, the right to life and to
ensure the security of all Iraqi citizens —
indiscriminate of confessional affiliation or any
other distinction — is a war crime and a crime
against humanity.[viii]
· Only the national popular resistance is legal in Iraq.
It’s legality and legitimacy is enshrined in numerous
instruments of international law, including
foundational and peremptory documents such as
the UN Charter.[ix] It should be recognized as a
combatant army and as the continuity of the Iraqi state.
Only resistance is legal
Only the national popular resistance in Iraq —
armed, political and civil — is empowered,
both as an objective fact and under international law,
to determine a path towards peace and stability in Iraq.
No other player, certainly not US-installed stooge politicians
in a 10-kilometre square “Green Zone”, can speak on behalf
of the Iraqi people or embodies the Republic of Iraq.
Full responsibility for the disasters that have befallen the
Iraqi people lies with the US, its failed “political process”
and failed security measures. No escalation can provide
a solution. The occupation must end and end now.
~~~~~
[i] Articles 43 and 55 of The Hague IV Regulations on
Laws and Customs of War on Land, 1907; Articles
54 and 64 of The Fourth Geneva Convention Relative
to the Protection of Civilian Persons in the Time of War, 1949.
[ii] Article 41(2) of the United Nations International Law
Commission’s Draft Articles on State Responsibility,
representing the rule of customary international law
(and adopted in UN General Assembly Resolution 56/83
of 28 January 2002, “Responsibility of States for
Internationally Wrongful Acts”), prevents states from
benefiting from their own illegal acts: “No State
shall recognize as lawful a situation created by a
serious breach [of an obligation arising under a
peremptory norm of general international law]”
(emphasis added); Section III(e), UN General
Assembly Resolution 36/103 of 14 December
1962, “Declaration on the Inadmissibility of
Intervention and Interference in the Internal
Affairs of States”.
[iii] UN General Assembly Resolution 1803 (XVII)
of 14 December 1962, "Permanent Sovereignty
over Natural Resources".
[iv] UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV)
of 14 December 1960, “Declaration on the Granting of
Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”.
[v] Article 50 of The Hague IV Regulations, 1907;
Article 33, The Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949: “
Collective penalties and likewise all measures of
intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited”; Article
51, the 1st Additional Protocol to the Geneva
Conventions, 1977.
[vi] Article 3, The Hague IV Regulations, 1907: “
The armed forces of the belligerent parties may
consist of combatants and non-combatants. In the
case of capture by the enemy, both have a right
to be treated as prisoners of war.”
[vii] Articles 2 and 3 of Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide, 1951.
[viii] Principle VI, Principles of International Law
Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg
Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal,
adopted by the United Nations International
Law Commission, 1951.
[ix] The right to self-determination, national
independence, territorial integrity, national
unity, and sovereignty without external interference
has been affirmed numerous times by a number
of UN bodies, including the UN Security Council,
UN General Assembly, UN Commission on Human
Rights, the International Law Commission and the
International Court of Justice. The principle of
self-determination provides that where forcible
action has been taken to suppress the right, force
may be used in order to counter this and achieve
self-determination.
The Commission on Human Rights has routinely
reaffirmed the legitimacy of struggling against
occupation by all available means, including armed
struggle (CHR Resolution No. 3 XXXV, 21 February
1979 and CHR Resolution No. 1989/19, 6 March
1989). Explicitly, UN General Assembly Resolution
37/43, adopted 3 December 1982: “Reaffirms the
legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence,
territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from
colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation
by all available means, including armed struggle.” (
See also UN General Assembly Resolutions
1514, 3070, 3103, 3246, 3328, 3382, 3421, 3481,
31/91, 32/42 and 32/154).
Article 1(4) of the 1st Additional Protocol to the
Geneva Conventions, 1977, considers self-determination
struggles as international armed conflict situations.
The Geneva Declaration on Terrorism states:
“As repeatedly recognized by the United Nations
General Assembly, peoples who are fighting against
colonial domination and alien occupation and against
racist regimes in the exercise of their right of
self-determination have the right to use force to
accomplish their objectives within the framework
of international humanitarian law. Such lawful uses
of force must not be confused with acts of international
terrorism.”
In the exercise of their right to self-determination,
peoples under colonial and alien domination have
the right “to struggle ... and to seek and receive
support, in accordance with the principles of the
Charter” and in conformity with the Declaration on
Principles of International Law concerning Friendly
Relations and Co-operation among States. It is in
these terms that Article 7 of the Definition of
Aggression (General Assembly Resolution 3314
(XXIX) of 14 December 1974) recognizes the
legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under
colonial or alien domination.
The Declaration on Principles of International Law
concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation
among States (General Assembly resolution 2625
(XXV)) cites the principle that, “States 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.”
Recognition by the UN of the legitimacy of the
struggle of peoples under colonial and alien
domination or occupation is in line with the general
prohibition of the use of force enshrined in the UN
Charter foremost because a state which forcibly
subjugates a people to colonial or alien domination
is committing an unlawful act as defined by
international law, and the subject people, in the
exercise of its inherent right of self-defence, may
fight to defend and attain its right to
self-determination.
From Al Basrah.net
Source Palestine Free Voice
0 Have Your Say!:
Post a Comment