Thanks aishaA for posting that article. I think Bush’s war against Iraq will ultimately make the functionality of the UN as meaningless. With a defunct UN there would be no settlements of disputes utilising International laws and conventions, instead parties could fight out their differences militarily which could endanger the entire world.
Iraq war will destroy global legal system, say experts](http://www.etaiwannews.com/Taiwan/2003/03/13/1047516339.htm) Taiwan News 13 Mar 03
“If the United States starts the war on Iraq without the support of the United Nations, it would be a big blow to the U.N., to the whole structure of this international organization devoted to the peace and security of the world,” said Jozef Goldblat, vice president of the Geneva International Peace Research Institute (GIPRI).
GIPRI, created in 1984, is a foundation under private Swiss Law, not tied to any political or religious organization, which is dedicated to promoting the study, teaching and interdisciplinary discussion of problems that inhibit peace. Its purpose is to carry out scientific research, both in the field of exact sciences and in humanist sciences, on all matters connected with questions of peace, security and related problems, in order to contribute to the establishment of a lasting peace.
In an interview with the Taiwan News, the president and vice president of the GIPRI expressed their viewpoints on the escalating tension in Iraq and noted that should a war break out, it would not only be a big blow to the U.N. but would also jeopardize democracy. While highlighting the fact that the Bush administration’s determination to attack Iraq is not well justified, both also agreed that the possible military action involves political maneuvering rather than an attempt to create a lasting peace.
**GIPRI President Jean-Pierre Stroot said that “the (impending) war (will be) a catastrophe. (An attack on Iraq) will kill the international legal system and breach international humanitarian law. We are very keen on this (law) because of the Geneva Conventions. It will bring very serious consequences for everybody in the world in the long term.” The legal sources of international humanitarian law are the four Geneva Conventions concluded in 1949 and this additional Protocol. **
International humanitarian law is an essential part of international law. It refers to times of armed conflict and contains provisions both to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in the hostilities as well as to restrict war methods and means. The purpose of international humanitarian law is to limit the suffering caused by war by protecting civilians and to provide as much support as possible for such persons.
Goldblat, also a permanent scholar at the U.N. Institute for Disarmament Research, noted that "the Charter of the United Nations states two possibilities to use armed force: one happens when it’s a collective action by the U.N. members against a country that has committed a crime, a violation against peace and security. “Another possibility to use the armed force is self-defense. But what is the actual situation now? The Security Council of the United Nations does not appear to support any military action against Iraq. This country is not attacking the United States either.” The vice president stressed that “war is never a solution to peace. If you want peace, prepare for peace.”
The motive behind the Bush administration’s tough position on Iraq lies in the fact that "Bush wants to change the regime of Iraq. They keep talking about disarmament, but the truth is: they want to throw out Saddam Hussein. But this is interference in the domestic affairs of another country, which is prohibited by international law," said Goldblat, who has been studying the problems of arms control since the 1950s and has been involved in disarmament negotiations in various capacities, including service at the United Nations.
Reacting to claims that the war on Iraq will be finished within a short period of time, therefore mitigating negative effects on the world economy and the Middle East, Stroot, once a research expert at the European Laboratory for Particle Physics, argued that “a speculation like this is extremely dangerous because it never goes the way you plan once a war is started. That’s always the case. We learned that from the history of humankind.”
Goldblat further noted that the situation in the Middle East is highly volatile, “you can’t properly calculate how long the war will last. It depends. If armed Kurdish groups based in northern Iraq attempt to take control of oil-rich Kirkuk during the war or in the aftermath of a regime change, the situation will be more complicated.” Stroot added that “it is highly likely that Iraq does not have nuclear weapons, as it is confirmed by the latest inspection report to the U.N. Would the whole region be brought in turmoil, there is one place where terrorists might get access to nuclear weapons, this is the politically fragile Pakistan. There is the real nuclear danger.”
Stroot and Goldblat were in Taiwan for a five-day visit. They visited Vice Foreign Minister Tou Chou-seng (§ùµ®¥Í) and Vice Chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council Chen Ming-tong (³¯©ú³q). They also paid a visit to the Academia Sinica (¤¤¥¡¬ã¨s°|), Kuomintang think tank National Policy Foundation and the Democratic Progressive Party think tank.