Argument: The invasion of Iraq was legal
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision | Newer revision→ (diff)
- Greg Hunt. "Yes, this war is legal". The Age (Aus). March 19 2003 - "Military conflict in Iraq will have the full legitimacy of international law. I make this statement as someone who is a multilateralist by nature. I believe in international law and was a strong advocate for Australian participation in the International Criminal Court. I have worked for the United Nations in Geneva chronicling the abuses that occurred during the Bosnian conflict and I was Australia's chief electoral observer in Cambodia during the 1998 elections.
In each case I saw the tragic human consequences of a failure to uphold international law and the decisions of the UN. Now, in Iraq, we are witness to the same violation of international law and Security Council decisions.
There are three requirements if Security Council members the United States, Britain and Spain are to lead an international coalition to enforce the council's resolutions on Iraq.
First, there must be a clear and unequivocal duty on Iraq to comply with council resolutions. Second, there must be a clear and unequivocal breach of that duty. Third, there must be a legitimate and continuing authority for enforcing those actions. All are present." [see justifications for all three in article]
- "Attorney General: War Is Legal," The Guardian, March 17, 2003