The drums of war are beating again. The Obama administration will reportedly launch a military strike to punish Syria’s Assad government for its alleged use of chemical weapons. A military attack would invariably kill civilians for the ostensible purpose of showing the Syrian government that killing civilians is wrong. “What we are talking about here is a potential response . . . to this specific violation of international norms,” declared White House press secretary Jay Carney. But a military intervention by the United States in Syria to punish the government would violate international law.
No ka ʻAmelika Hui Pū ʻIa i ka hoʻoweliweli a/a i ʻole e hoʻomaka i ka hoʻouka kaua ʻana ma ke ʻano he hoʻopaʻi ʻana, he hōʻino loa ia i ka United Nations Charter. Pono ka Charter i nā ʻāina e hoʻoponopono i kā lākou mau hoʻopaʻapaʻa honua me ka maluhia. Paukū 2(4) ʻaʻole ʻae i kekahi ʻāina ke hoʻohana ikaika a hoʻoweliweli paha e hoʻohana ikaika i kekahi ʻāina. Pākuʻi 2(7) pāpā i ka hoʻopaʻapaʻa kūloko a kūloko paha ma kekahi ʻāina ʻē. ʻO ka manawa wale nō e ʻae ʻia ai ka pūʻali koa ma lalo o ka Charter ke ʻae ʻia e ka Council Security, a i ʻole ma lalo o ka Paukū 51, e hiki ai i kahi ʻāina ke pale aku iā ia iho inā hoʻouka ʻia. "ʻO ka hoʻohana ʻana i nā mea kaua kemika i loko o Suria ʻaʻole ia he hoʻouka kaua ʻana ma ʻAmelika Hui Pū ʻIa," e like me ke kaukaʻi kānāwai Notre Dame Mary Ellen O'Connell.
The United States and the international community have failed to take constructive steps to promote peace-making efforts, which could have brought the crisis in Syria to an end. The big powers instead have waged a proxy war to give their “side” a stronger hand in future negotiations, evaluating the situation only in terms of geopolitical concerns. The result has been to once again demonstrate that military solutions to political and economic problems are no solution at all. In the meantime, the fans of enmity between religious factions have been inflamed to such a degree that the demonization of each by the other has created fertile ground for slaughter and excuses for not negotiating with anyone with “blood on their hands.”
ʻOiai ʻo ka ʻōlelo a US no ka "kānalua liʻiliʻi ua hoʻohana ʻo Assad i kēia mau mea kaua," aia ka kānalua nui ma waena o ke kaiāulu honua e pili ana i ka ʻaoʻao i hoʻohana i nā mea kaua. He nui ka poʻe i manaʻo i ka poʻe i kapa ʻia he kipi e hoʻāʻo nei e hana i kahi kūlana e hoʻonāukiuki i ke komo ʻana o ʻAmelika iā Assad. ʻOiaʻiʻo, ma Mei, ua hoʻoholo ʻo Carla del Ponte, ka luna hoʻopiʻi honua a me ke komisina UN i kēia manawa ma Suria, ua hoʻohana nā pūʻali kūʻē i ke kinoea sarin e kūʻē i nā kānaka kīwila.
The use of any type of chemical weapon by any party would constitute a war crime. Chemical weapons that kill and maim people are illegal and their use violates the laws of war. The illegality of chemical and poisoned weapons was first established by the Hague regulations of 1899 and Hague Convention of 1907. It was reiterated in the Geneva Convention of 1925 and the Chemical Weapons Convention. The Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court specifically states that employing “poison or poisoned weapons” and “asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices” are war crimes, under Article 8. The prohibition on the use of these weapons is an international norm regardless of whether any convention has been ratified. No ka mea ʻaʻole ʻokoʻa kēia mau mea kaua ma waena o nā pūʻali koa a me nā makaʻāinana, ua uhaki lākou i ke kumu o hoʻokaʻawale a me ka pāpā ʻana i nā mea kaua e hoʻopilikia ʻole ʻia a make i loko o ka Convention Hague. Ma lalo o ka Nuremberg Principles, ʻo ka uhaki ʻana i nā kānāwai o ke kaua he mau hewa kaua.
The self-righteousness of the United States about the alleged use of chemical weapons by Assad is hypocritical. The United States used napalm and employed massive amounts of chemical weapons in the form of Agent Orange in Vietnam, which continues to affect countless people over many generations. Recently declassified CIA documents reveal U.S. complicity in Saddam Hussein’s use of chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war, according to Nā kulekele'ē aʻe: “In contrast to today's wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Hussein's widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people. The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted.”
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States used cluster bombs, depleted uranium, and white phosphorous gas. Cluster bomb cannisters contain tiny bomblets, which can spread over a vast area. Unexploded cluster bombs are frequently picked up by children and explode, resulting in serious injury or death. Depleted uranium (DU) weapons spread high levels of radiation over vast areas of land. In Iraq, there has been a sharp increase in Leukemia and birth defects, probably due to DU. White phosphorous gas melts the skin and burns to the bone. The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in time of War (Geneva IV) classifies "willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health" as a grave breach, which constitutes a war crime.
The use of chemical weapons, regardless of the purpose, is atrocious, no matter the feigned justification. A government’s use of such weapons against its own people is particularly reprehensible. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the purported attack by Assad’s forces “defies any code of morality” and should “shock the conscience of the world.” He went on to say that “there must be accountability for those who would use the world’s most heinous weapons against the world’s most vulnerable people."
Yet the U.S. militarily occupied over 75% of the Puerto Rican island of Vieques for 60 years, during which time the Navy routinely practiced with, and used, Agent Orange, depleted uranium, napalm and other toxic chemicals and metals such as TNT and mercury. This occurred within a couple of miles of a civilian population that included thousands of U.S. citizens. The people of Vieques have lived under the colonial rule of the United States now for 115 years and suffer from terminal health conditions such as elevated rates of cancer, hypertension, respiratory and skin illnesses and kidney failure. While Secretary Kerry calls for accountability by the Assad government, the U.S. Navy has yet to admit, much less seek atonement, for decades of bombing and biochemical warfare on Vieques.
ʻO ka huhū o ke aupuni US i ka hoʻohana ʻana i kēia mau mea kaua e hāʻule palahalaha no ka hōʻole ʻana i ke kuleana no kāna mau hewa ponoʻī.
President Barack Obama admitted, “If the U.S. goes in and attacks another country without a UN mandate and without clear evidence that can be presented, then there are questions in terms of whether international law supports it . . .” The Obama administration is studying the 1999 “NATO air war in Kosovo as a possible blueprint for acting without a mandate from the United Nations,” the New York Times reported. But NATO’s Kosovo bombing also violated the UN Charter as the Security Council never approved it, and it was not carried out in self-defense. The UN Charter does not permit the use of military force for “humanitarian interventions.” Humanitarian concerns do not constitute self-defense. In fact, humanitarian concerns should spur the international community to seek peace and end the suffering, not increase military attacks, which could endanger peace in the entire region.
Eia kekahi, e like me Phyllis Bennis o ka Institute for Policy Studies a me David Wildman o Human Rights & Racial Justice for the Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church i kākau ai, "Ke manaʻoʻiʻo maoli nei kekahi i ka hoʻouka kaua ʻana i kahi hale hana mea kaua e kōkua i ka Suria. kanaka, e hoʻopakele i nā ola, e kōkua i ka hoʻopau ʻana i kēia kaua kīwila weliweli?
Military strikes will likely result in the escalation of Syria’s civil war. “Let’s be clear,” Bennis and Wildman note. “Any U.S. military attack, cruise missiles or anything else, will not be to protect civilians – it will mean taking sides once again in a bloody, complicated civil war.” Anthony Cordesman, military analyst from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, asks, “Can you do damage with cruise missiles? Yes. Can you stop them from having chemical weapons capability? I would think the answer would be no.”
Pono ʻo ʻAmelika Hui Pū ʻIa a me kāna mau hoa pili e hōʻole i ka hana kaua ma Suria a hana i nā hana kūpono e hāpai i kahi hoʻomaha mau a me kahi hopena politika e kūlike me ke kānāwai o ka honua. Inā makemake maoli ke aupuni US i ka hoʻoulu ʻana i ka maluhia a me ka hoʻolaha ʻana i ke kuleana, pono ia e kala mai a uku i ka poʻe i hoʻohana ʻia i nā mea kaua a puni ka honua.
He polopeka ʻo Marjorie Cohn ma Thomas Jefferson School of Law, pelekikena mua o ka National Lawyers Guild (NLG), a he hope kākau ʻōlelo nui o ka International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL). ʻO ka loio ʻo New York ʻo Jeanne Mirer ka pelekikena o ka IADL a me ka luna hoʻomalu o ke Kōmike Nui o ka NLG. Aia ʻo Cohn lāua ʻo Mirer ma ka papa o ka Vietnam Agent Orange Relief and Responsibility Campaign.
Hāʻawi kālā ʻia ʻo ZNetwork ma o ka lokomaikaʻi o kāna poʻe heluhelu.
E Makana mai