Term Paper on "International Law and the Invasion of Iraq"

Term Paper 15 pages (5121 words) Sources: 0

[EXCERPT] . . . .

International Law and the Invasion of Iraq

The invasion of Iraq by the United States prompted a debate about the type of force that was used without having explicit approval from the United Nations. Whether this show of force was truly legal and legitimate became a question that was considered by many individuals. The argument was made by some that there was implied authorization because a resolution that was created during the Gulf War still continued to authorize any type of force necessary to ensure that Iraq complied with the cease-fire that was created during that Gulf War. The United States government also argued that there was an imminent threat posed to many countries by Iraq and also to the security and peace of the international community. Because of this the United States decided to defend itself in a preemptive strike.

It is important to look at these claims in some depth on a legal basis and explore the background of the war in Iraq. Looking at whether there was implied authorization for the war is also vital to an understanding of the issue. Others argue against the United States having any right to start this type of war and they base this on the assessment and other statements of members of the Security Council and the suggestion that the resolutions that were created during the Gulf War were not intended to have any kind of subsequent use when it came to force or war with Iraq. Another resolution, passed in November of 2002, is also said to have not provided any type of implied authorization to allowing the United States to use force against Iraq. There is also some question about the self-defense argument that the United States made because there has been a great deal of testimony from the chairman of the United Nations and as has been noted in many different news programs there have not been any weapons of mass destruction located within Iraq.

These individuals that are against the war being acceptable under international law feel that the justifications that must be made to say that the war in Iraq would be valid and acceptable stretch legal principles so much that the principles themselves are quite likely undermined. Operation Iraqi freedom was begun on the 20th of March, 2003 when the United States along with Australia and the United Kingdom began missile attacks on Baghdad. This was aimed at removing the Iraqi leadership that was in place. After approximately three weeks of this type of activity American troops took control of Baghdad in a period of two days. On the second of May, 2003 President Bush announced that the coalition had achieved a victory in Iraq.

According to Bush, however, the battle that was being fought in Iraq was only a small victory in the war that had been waged on terrorism. This war allegedly began on the 11th of September, 2001 with the terrorist attacks on the United States. The coalition believed that it was necessary to eliminate any type of threat that Iraq was posing to the United States and other allies and those leaders of the coalition who spoke up about the war also stated that the lives of many people in Iraq would be improved. The argument was also made that humanitarian assistance could be delivered to Iraq much easier and Iraqis could create a peaceful and democratic state in which they could determine their own fates and lives without the need for an authoritarian leader such as Saddam Hussein.

It has been suggested by authoritative sources that between 7000-9000 thousand Iraqi civilians have been killed by coalition troops in Iraq. Even though this number is considered to be significant it is also deemed quite likely that the number of civilians actually killed is considerably much higher. Greenpeace and other organizations that work to promote peace and tranquility throughout the world state that the framework that comes from international law is being threatened by the United States because the United States will not accept the current international law and instead wishes to change it so that what it wishes to do appears to be acceptable.

Legal challenges are therefore present in the United States invasion of Iraq and their arguments both for and against the war. Some believe that these legal rules are there to stop the states or nations from acting in ways that are not easily justifiable. The invasion suggests to many that the United States is looking at international law as a purely instrumental device in order to validate the actions that they take. According to these individuals, there are ways to use international law and explain it so that it can validate and uphold almost any course of action that a nation wishes to take.

Investigating these claims is vital because there is still a strong debate about whether the war in Iraq was actually legal under international law. It appears at this point that most of the claims that were put forth by Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States do not have any type of strong legal footing. However, rather than showing that those who believe international law can be used to uphold nearly anything are correct the paper seeks to show that international laws are very powerful frameworks that can allow for discussion between various nations regarding whether particular actions were legitimate or not. The United States and other members of the coalition apparently manipulated international law to some degree to benefit themselves strategically but they also made arguments that were generally not accepted by most of the individuals in the international community.

This is very significant because the principles that govern international law are stretched so strongly by the United States and its reasons for going to war that they almost appear as though they do not have any meaning any longer. The war was allegedly authorized by the Security Council of the United Nations but this appears to be stretching the interpretation of many of the resolutions that the Security Council has made in the past and therefore the intent of the Council is lost. Saying that the war was started in self-defense also stretches that particular term quite far and makes aggression and self-defense appear to be one and the same. There are no punitive powers with international law as there are with domestic law but it seems as though not being able to legally justify the war itself should damage to some degree how legitimate the actual war campaign is and some of those that instigated the war should have to pay those high costs.

Determining whether the invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allies was actually legal is extremely vital for evaluating not only the legitimacy of the war itself but the impact that this type of tissue may have in the future on the international community. International law is generally framed by the charter of the United Nations but it is not limited to what the U.N. Charter has to say. One article in the United Nations charter that deals with the use of force states that nations should refrain from using force or threat against any type of political independence or territorial integrity of other nations. This was intended to be interpreted very broadly and applicable in a general sense.

There are two exceptions to this rule within the United Nations charter. First it is indicated that measures created by the Security Council are binding on all nations and that the Security Council is allowed to authorize military force if it is necessary to restore or protect international security and peace. Second, an exception also indicates that all nations are allowed the right to utilize force if they are doing so in self-defense. The law that deals with governing any type of recourse to force within the international community is a very complex one but the general opinion of nations appears to be that the basic rules that are contained in the United Nations charter is customary for international law.

In general, most nations agree on the applicable law and what type of contents it carries. Applying this law to various facts or activities is where nations and individuals tend to start their disagreements. The basic rules mentioned above, however, are very important because they are largely what is at the heart of the debate about whether it is legal to use the type of force that the United States used in Iraq. The reason behind this is that the United States focused most strongly on the two exceptions that were created to this article. Even though some critics suggest that principals were disregarded, those who believe that the invasion of Iraq was justified will argue that the United States did not in fact disregard any type of international legal principles or attempt to rewrite any legal rules.

Instead of this, what the United States did was interpret the application of the law… READ MORE

How to Reference "International Law and the Invasion of Iraq" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

International Law Assess the Legality Seminar Paper

International Law

Assess the legality of the 2003 American invasion of Iraq in the context of the United Nations Charter provisions governing the use of force. Does the legal position… read more

Seminar Paper 7 pages (2295 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

International Law in the Modern World Term Paper

International Law in the Modern World

The role of international law has become more imperative and important in our world than ever before. Possibly one of the most prominent issues… read more

Term Paper 4 pages (1388 words) Sources: 3 Style: MLA Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

Is International Law Really Law? Term Paper

Enforcement of International Law

The argument against international law

International law that is defined as the body of law that is used to effectively govern the legal relationship among or… read more

Term Paper 7 pages (1902 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

International Law and Human Trafficking Thesis

International Law and Human Trafficking

Human Trafficking in the World

Human trafficking is the forcible transport of persons to other countries to render sexual or other services (Herro 2006). About… read more

Thesis 10 pages (3756 words) Sources: 10 Style: MLA Topic: Crime / Police / Criminal Justice

---

Implications of the Invasion of Iraq for International Law Essay

Invasion of Iraq for International Law

Over the last 150 years, international law was often seen as a way for different nation states to be able to collectively deal with… read more

Essay 3 pages (1044 words) Sources: 3 Style: MLA Topic: Israel / Palestine / Arab World

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>