Information | ||
Derechos | Equipo Nizkor
|
06Sep13
US aggression on Syria would violate international law
As the world sits glued to their radios and TV screens and their other sources of information waiting for news of an attack on Syria other events are taking place that the nefarious planners in Mclean Virginia and Washington have successfully distracted the world's attention from. At the cost of a couple of hundred Syrian lives, which in reality mean nothing for the Americans and their Al-Qaeda elements in Syria, the US has perhaps yet failed to launch another act of aggression and commit another crime against peace, but it has succeeded in accomplishing several other objectives.
Of the four "core international crimes" (crimes of aggression, crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes) as determined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the treaty which founded the International Criminal Court (ICC), the United States of America is guilty of all of them.
Crime against peace
In international law a crime against peace is defined as the "planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing". The word participation means that any country that goes along with such a crime is also guilty of the same crime as the aggressor, this includes any third countries that allow for their airspace or territory to be used to launch an attack on a third state.
It is clear given the preponderance of evidence that the US attacks on Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq and now the planned attack on Syria are all crimes against peace and would be prosecuted if there was a body with the will to do so.
Crimes against humanity
Under international law another type of crime that the United States may be guilty of committing on multiple occasions and which many accuse the US of carrying out in its execution of its "War on Terror", are crimes against humanity. These crimes are defined as "particularly odious offenses in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of human beings." The systematic persecution of one racial group by another, as is the case with American blacks, would be eligible for this classification.
It is arguable whether for example, the targeting of Muslims as a group, the extra judicial executions of suspected terrorists by drone, rendition, illegal detention and torture would, by themselves, meet the litmus test for being classified as crimes against humanity, but there can be little doubt that all of these crimes put together as part of a continual concerted effort in which the participants know they are committing violations of human rights, international law, the Geneva Conventions, the laws of war and other international laws and conventions, could and should be classified as crimes against humanity.
It might be argued that those behind, or in collusion with, the perpetrators of 9-11, or even those who failed to prosecute the perpetrators are also guilty of crimes against humanity, especially the consequences that those events have had on the world since that date.
War crimes
An area where there is little area for debate as to the collusion and guilt of the United States is in the area of war crimes. War crimes are generally defined as including: "murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps (Guantanamo, rendition sites, Abu-Ghraib, etc), the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war, the killing of prisoners (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria), the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya), and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity (all of the previous and in particular Syria).
The US Government's institutionalized collusion in war crimes, including torture, the use of chemical weapons and indefinite detention under conditions amounting to torture have been very well documented and proven time and time again. The persecution and prosecution of Bradley Manning serving as the best example, as well as the evidence that he revealed.
Genocide
No one has called the, what could be millions, of Sunni Muslims and others killed in the illegal US wars genocide but if the numbers are in fact in the millions this would be valid.
The fact that the United States was founded on the genocide of the American Indians, something no one has ever been prosecuted for. The continuing practice of keeping the few Indians that are left living on "reservations" essentially prison zones, would be classified as a crime against humanity but no one is willing to or calling for anything to be done.
Other crimes
The number of other crimes committed by the United States since 9-11 would fill volumes and include everything from droning, to extra-judicial executions, bringing about and causing revolutions and political instability, economic manipulation, repression of dissent and protestors, attacks on media and whistleblowers and others. However the largest and most egregious offense with a truly global reach involves the revelations by Edward Snowden. It is chiefly these revelations and the backlash that the United States has avoided by threatening the world with an even greater crime. You would not tell a murderer that you have caught as he is hacking his victim to death that his car is illegally parked now can you?
Who will prosecute?
The International Criminal Court or ICC is the body that has the authority to prosecute these crimes and is supposed to do so if states can not or will not act, however they do not have arrest powers and along with the United Nations they are largely under the complete control of the United States.
So there are certainly bodies with the authority to prosecute and rein in the criminality but until they possess the independence and are pushed into taking action nothing will be done.
This has led to movements in the United States for example to prosecute George Bush for murder, for example, something easier to prove than war crimes and prosecutable in a US court, but no one has been able to pursue these attempts to a successful conclusion and apparently there is not a single body willing to arrest these criminals.
Distraction and avoidance of response
The initial response that the United States was spying on the United Nations and on allies was quickly dwarfed by the media sensation around Edward Snowden, the forced landing of the presidential aircraft of Evo Morales and now the "impending invasion" of Syria.
The initial reaction from European countries was to freeze all economic and business cooperation, when it was revealed that the United States was spying on and collecting economic, banking and financial information from even its allies in order to manipulate their markets, something that should have been a key topic for debate at the G-20, but it has successfully been for the most part ignored. This goes for other matters that the G-20 countries may have reached a consensus on as well.
Demonizing
All of these events, as well as the threat of terrorist attacks at the upcoming Sochi Olympics by the Saudi Prince Bandar have been carefully orchestrated to demonize and vilify Russia and to detract from the success and leadership on the world stage that Russia is taking and will take if the G-20 Summit, the Sochi Olympics and the internal conflict in Syria are allowed to take place and be resolved successfully.
Experts and international observers agree that by attacking Syria the US is going after one of Russia's allies in order to decrease Russia's possible influence in the region, and that Obama is so unstable and was so upset by Russia's legal protection of Edward Snowden that he decided, by bombing Syria he would punish Russia. Regardless of the reasoning. With imminent threat, or a UN Resolution, any attack on Syria is a crime against peace.
The US has successfully caused a serious rift with Russia and is something they continue to do. Statements that Russia supplied Syria with chemical weapons is beyond the pale but proves that the United States will do anything to attempt to paint Russia as some supporter of terror. This is ridiculous beyond words, when Russia has, since day one, promoted a political solution to the conflict and the United States has been importing terrorists and its Al-Qaeda elements into Syria to bring about their repeated goal of a forceful regime change in Damascus.
In light of the recent threat by Prince Bandar against the Russian people and the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin with terrorist attacks at the Sochi Olympics, while failing to bribe the head of state, and the admission by the rogue prince that the Saudis control the Chechen terrorist groups, it should be time for the world community to seriously question the legitimacy of these states.
Some analysts have stated that Russia has every right to level Saudi Arabia as it has threatened Russia with terrorist acts, and some say that this is a threat for which war could be declared, but Russia has so far maintained the high moral ground and refrained from bellicose rhetoric against the supporters of cannibalterrorists.
Even though Russia has every right to react in an extreme manner to such an outrageous unprecedented threat President Putin chooses to act in the most diplomatic and responsible way possible, and as the record shows, seek a diplomatic and peaceful resolution to even that affront.
The psychological aspects
The state of the world, waiting whether the US will launch another illegal war and attack yet another defenseless country that poses it no threat, is one on edge. This form of psychological terrorism, placing the world in fear of possible World War III, is beneficial for the United States as it distracts from other pressing issues that the world (outside the western media bubble) was beginning to wake up about.
The fear of war is powerful tool to control not only its own population but to control and spread fear into the hearts of the world's peace-loving nations. However it is these nations that must unite and that is where the United States may have finally over stepped the bounds and wandered into unknown territory. Fear can cause unexpected reactions and terrorizing the world with the constant threat of a "humanitarian" attack may bring about events that the US does not expect and is not prepared for.
United front
It is a given, I believe, that if the US does in fact unilaterally decide to attack Syria it will galvanize the world community against them, especially those countries who know they are next in line for Washington's nefarious regime change invasion plans.
Even the fact that Obama is even considering to move ahead without the UN or even wait for the results of the UN inspection on the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria, is having the effect of uniting countries against the United States.
Unilateral war and bombing poor defenseless countries and dictating to the world how to run its affairs may play well for the violence loving political base back in America but quite frankly the world has grown weary of American bombs and American aggression.
Iraq never threatened America, nor did Afghanistan, nor did Libya, nor did Yugoslavia and finally nor has Syria.
[Source: By John Robles, Voice of Russia, Moscow, 06Sep13]
This document has been published on 09Sep13 by the Equipo Nizkor and Derechos Human Rights. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. |