“Friends” breach international law barring intervention

Syria as in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen — “Humanitarian” criminals

Excerpting, editing by Carolyn Bennett

From Centre for the Study of Interventionism, a Project designed “to provide critical analysis of the burgeoning doctrine of interventionism”

“Friends like these”

The critical consequence of “Friends like these” is ever more bloodshed — and just as there was a flickering     “promise of return to normalcy in Syria and a promise of reform brought about by the recent (unnoticed by the West) constitutional referendum.… Countries like Syria, though, cannot be permitted to solve their own domestic problems, internally; and any solution attempted, internally, must be undermined by the United States/North Atlantic Treaty Organization and its allies.

“Sovereignty must be destroyed in the name of global democratic revolution,” Daniel McAdams writes at the Centre for the Study of Interventionism.

The super-powered “Friends of Syria” have turned the United Nations Charter on its head. As flawed as the concept might have seemed, the United Nations at the least recognized the inviolability of sovereignty that must lie at the core of an international body dedicated to peace, McAdams writes.  “Rip the rug from that concept and you have what we are now witnessing in places like Libya and now Syria:

Various outside interests — corporate, government, NGO, etc. — can plot against any sovereign leader under the cooked up mantle of ‘protecting human rights,’ dismantle the state, and remake it as they wish with their own compliant satraps (rulers, henchmen) in charge.”

BAIT AND SWITCH bloodthirsty “friends”

 

“Secretary of State [Hillary Rodham] Clinton, whose bloodthirstiness makes even the neo-cons cringe, demands that the Syrian government implement the UN-Arab League peace proposal ‘without delay.’ It was suspicious to see the plan that came out of Kofi Annan’s recent visit to Syria embraced by China and Russia as well as the United States, and now we can see why:

Flag of Syria

The ‘Friends of Syria’ simply did a bait and switch operation, substituting the slightly more nuanced demands of the Annan plan that all sides must disarm with the spirit of the original vetoed US/GCC United Nations Security Council resolution demanding that only one side — the government authority — disarm and the president resign, leaving the country open to a Libya-style takeover by the rebel groups.

Flag of Somalia

Revealed —

HR CLINTON (and Co.’s) humanitarian intervention: ‘Our (Clinton’s) message must be clear to those who give the orders and those who carry them out: Stop killing your fellow citizens or you will face serious consequences.’

But, McAdams writes, “Hillary and the ‘Friends’ are lying about the Annan plan. They demand that the government lay down its arms while all the while massively transferring military equipment to the rebels. … The United States provides covert military support through a morally-disintegrating Turkey and overt ‘communications’ equipment — likely targeting devices linked to CIA satellites — to anti-government Syrian rebels.… Saudi Foreign minister Saud al-Faisal, a representative of one of the most brutal dictatorships on the face of the earth, says —

Flag of Libya

‘The arming of the [Syrian] opposition is a duty … because it cannot defend itself except with weapons.’ What a humanitarian!”

Recap 1970 UN declaration on friendly relations

Flag of Afghanistan

DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS, 1883rd plenary meeting, October 24, 1970

“Having considered the principles of international law relating to friendly relations and co-operation among States — solemnly proclaim the following principles: excerpt

Flag of Iraq

“Every State has the duty to refrain in its 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

A war of aggression constitutes a crime against the peace, for which there is responsibility under international law.

In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression.

Flag of Pakistan

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. …

States have a duty to refrain from acts of reprisal involving the use of force.

Flag of Yemen

Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

Flag of Iran

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

The territory of a State shall not be the object of military occupation resulting from the use of force in contravention of the provisions of the Charter.

The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force.

No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.

Flag of Palestine

Yet, despite this 42-year old UN Declaration on Friendly Relations, the Centre for the Study of Interventionism continues, “Ever since the end of the Cold War, powerful states have given themselves the right to intervene in the internal affairs of weak ones both militarily and judicially. Various pretexts are invoked — the need to enforce UN Security Council resolutions, to prevent humanitarian catastrophes or human rights abuses, or to maintain peace. Interventionism has received legal basis with the creation of supranational criminal tribunals and with the 2005 General Assembly Resolution on the so-called ‘right to protect.’

“From Yugoslavia to Libya via Iraq and Afghanistan, these theories have now been put into effect. But how true are the claims made in favor of interventionism and how effective is it?

Flag of
Serbia and Montenegro
(formerly Yugoslavia)

Were civilian lives really saved in Libya?

Did the creation of an international criminal tribunal bring peace to Yugoslavia?

Were the United States and Britain justified in invoking UN Security Council resolutions in justification of their 2003 attack on Iraq?”

“Non-interventionism is the forgotten doctrine in international relations,” the Center writes at its website.  The ‘Declaration on Friendly Relations’ adopted by the UN General Assembly on October 24, 1970, stipulates “that ‘No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatsoever, in the internal or external affairs of another State.

“‘Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements are in violation of international law.’”

Sources and notes

 “With friends like these... April Fools Gather To Destroy Syria” (Daniel McAdams), April 1, 2012, http://www.interventionism.info/en/With-friends-like-these...

Centre for the Study of Interventionism

On this site is information about the legal structures that have been created for interventionist purposes, as well as critical analysis of actual military interventions. The purpose of this Project is to provide critical analysis of the burgeoning doctrine of interventionism. http://www.interventionism.info/; and http://www.interventionism.info/en/Non-interventionism

See also

“War on Libya, Syria and NGOs — ‘the humanitarian war’ (facts & interview), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U86vWB7Cpik

Documentary in which Julien Teil examines the documents and interrogates the NGOs behind the campaign to oust Gaddafi, and shows the lack of evidence for the alleged war crimes that supposedly justified UN intervention.

Images

Nonviolent peace force, http://www.jdslanka.org/2010_08_29_archive.html

Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations ...

untreaty.un.org

Flags from http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/flags/countrys/

______________________________

Bennett's books are available in New York State independent bookstores: Lift Bridge Bookshop: www.liftbridgebooks.com [Brockport, NY]; Sundance Books: http://www.sundancebooks.com/main.html [Geneseo, NY]; Mood Makers Books: www.moodmakersbooks.com [City of Rochester, NY]; Dog Ears Bookstore and Literary Arts Center: www.enlightenthedog.org/ [Buffalo, NY]; Burlingham Books – ‘Your Local Chapter’: http://burlinghambooks.com/ [Perry, NY 14530]; The Bookworm: http://www.eabookworm.com/ [East Aurora, NY] • See also: World Pulse: Global Issues through the eyes of Women: http://www.worldpulse.com/ http://www.worldpulse.com/pulsewire http://www.facebook.com/#!/bennetts2ndstudy
_____________________________