March 10, 2003
PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE:
Annan Says U.S. Will Violate Charter if It Acts Without Approval (PATRICK E. TYLER and FELICITY BARRINGER, March 11, 2003, NY Times)Secretary General Kofi Annan warned today that if the United States fails to win approval from the Security Council for an attack on Iraq, Washington's decision to act alone or outside the Council would violate the United Nations charter."The members of the Security Council now face a great choice," Mr. Annan said in The Hague, where he was trying to broker a United Nations deal on Cyprus. "If they fail to agree on a common position and action is taken without the authority of the Security Council, the legitimacy and support for any such action will be seriously impaired."
Mr. Annan's remarks drew a sharp response from Washington, where the Bush administration, like its allies overseas, was engaged in a strong lobbying effort to win the necessary nine votes to pass a resolution this week authorizing war.
The White House spokesman Ari Fleischer in a strongly worded retort said that "from a moral point of view," if the United Nations fails to support the Bush administration's war aims, it will have "failed to act once again," as it did in Kosovo in the face of persecution of the ethnic Albanians by Serbia and earlier in Rwanda in the face of genocidal massacres by Hutus against Tutsis. [...]
Responding to a question on the United Nations Charter, Mr. Annan said the charter is "very clear on circumstances under which force can be used. If the U.S. and others were to go outside the Council and take military action, it would not be in conformity with the charter."
Unfortunately for Mr. Annan, the behavior of the UN during this crisis demonstrates that there's only one way to enforce the Charter: have the U.S. do it for you. Mr. Bush will have to administer himself a good stiff talking to. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 10, 2003 10:32 PM
Well, the Security Council had better pass a resolution warning us of serious consequences if we remain in violation of the charter. Oh, that's right, they can't.
Posted by: David Cohen at March 10, 2003 11:10 PMWill the blue helmets be along to rap our president on the knuckles, or will they continue to contain him like they have with Saddam?
We need to not only violate the charter, we need to withdraw from the UN. End it, don't mend it.
Mr. Judd;
I can no longer automatically write "Mr. Judd", I have to actually look at the poster.
I find it curious that all of the other wars since the founding of the UN, including wars by members of the UNSC, haven't violated the charter the way the invasion of Iraq will. On the other hand, Annan is in fact threatening the US with serious consequences - the UN charter would be violated!
. I think it's fair to assume that Annan views that as a pretty darn serious consequence.
I think that what Annan means is that if the US declares war on the UN, then the US is a fair target for the UN, especially its more progressive members.
Officially.
I think what Annan means is that if the US goes to war with Iraq, he'll lose his cut of the oil-for-food money, to which he has a right under the U.N. Charter, or ought to have.
Posted by: pj at March 11, 2003 8:05 AMLook on my monument, ye mighty, and despair!
Posted by: Harry Eagar at March 11, 2003 2:10 PM