BarnacleBob
03-22-2003, 01:06 PM
"If the UN Security Council describes the US actions as an aggression, the appropriate measures will be taken. But if you or I describe them as aggression it won't achieve anything," the foreign minister said Friday.
"The action has no legal basis and the attempts to justify it by resolution 1441 are not serious," he said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030321/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_war_russia_un_1
UN Charter:
Article 53
The Security Council shall, where appropriate, utilize such regional arrangements or agencies for enforcement action under its authority. But no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council, with the exception of measures against any enemy state, as defined in paragraph 2 of this Article, provided for pursuant to Article 107 or in regional arrangements directed against renewal of aggressive policy on the part of any such state, until such time as the Organization may, on request of the Governments concerned, be charged with the responsibility for preventing further aggression by such a state.
The term enemy state as used in paragraph 1 of this Article applies to any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory of the present Charter.
Translated into english it means that only the Security Council can authorize enforcement actions.
SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS - 2002
http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/2002/sc2002.htm
The debate: Does Resolution 1441 authorize war?
The US administration argues that resolution 1441, which passed unanimously in November and threatened Iraq with "serious consequences" if it failed to show it had disarmed its weapons of mass destruction, provides sufficient authority for the war.
Line 13, Resolution 1441 is the one in question.
"Recalls that, in that context, that the council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of itīs continued violations of itīs obligations."
This is an affirmation that in the past the council has warned Iraq. The security council alone can authorize enforcement of UN resolutions, and 1441 does NOT authorize it. If they meant WAR it would have said BY ALL NECESSARY MEANS instead of īserious consequences"
"Serious consequences" simply means the UN would reconsider where to go next.......
Get America out of the UN NOW!
"The action has no legal basis and the attempts to justify it by resolution 1441 are not serious," he said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030321/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_war_russia_un_1
UN Charter:
Article 53
The Security Council shall, where appropriate, utilize such regional arrangements or agencies for enforcement action under its authority. But no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council, with the exception of measures against any enemy state, as defined in paragraph 2 of this Article, provided for pursuant to Article 107 or in regional arrangements directed against renewal of aggressive policy on the part of any such state, until such time as the Organization may, on request of the Governments concerned, be charged with the responsibility for preventing further aggression by such a state.
The term enemy state as used in paragraph 1 of this Article applies to any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory of the present Charter.
Translated into english it means that only the Security Council can authorize enforcement actions.
SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS - 2002
http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/2002/sc2002.htm
The debate: Does Resolution 1441 authorize war?
The US administration argues that resolution 1441, which passed unanimously in November and threatened Iraq with "serious consequences" if it failed to show it had disarmed its weapons of mass destruction, provides sufficient authority for the war.
Line 13, Resolution 1441 is the one in question.
"Recalls that, in that context, that the council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of itīs continued violations of itīs obligations."
This is an affirmation that in the past the council has warned Iraq. The security council alone can authorize enforcement of UN resolutions, and 1441 does NOT authorize it. If they meant WAR it would have said BY ALL NECESSARY MEANS instead of īserious consequences"
"Serious consequences" simply means the UN would reconsider where to go next.......
Get America out of the UN NOW!