SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
My Audacious Hope: President Obama Will Respect the UN Charter
Aug 28, 2008
Speaking of the audacity of hope, here is my hope for the Obama
Administration. I'd like to see if we could get through four years of
the Obama Administration without invading, bombing, or threatening to
invade or bomb any other countries in violation of the UN Charter. Is
that too audacious a hope?
My audacious hope is that during the Obama Administration, we'll never
have to chant or sing "No Blood for Oil," as CodePink did Monday in
the "protest cage" at the DNC in Denver:
Democrats often fault the Bush Administration for rupturing our
relations with allies with its invasion of Iraq. The criticism is
correct, but it finesses a key point. Why did the U.S. invasion of
Iraq rupture relations with allies? Because the Bush Administration
thumbed its nose at international law and the UN Charter.
We need a very vigorous and sustained public education campaign in the
United States for the UN Charter, and particularly for its prohibition
on the use of military force against other UN member states. The
principal justification for the creation of the United Nations at the
end of the Second World War was precisely to create such a binding
prohibition on the signatory countries.
There are only two exceptions to the prohibition: immediate
self-defense against actual armed attack, and military actions
authorized by the UN Security Council. Since the US invasion of Iraq
was not in immediate self-defense against armed attack, and was not
authorized by the UN Security Council, it was illegal, as former UN
Secretary General Annan affirmed.
If we had a culture of intolerance in the United States for violations
of the UN Charter by our leaders - like the attitude we have towards
driving while intoxicated - the US invasion of Iraq could never have
taken place, and all those lives would have been spared. The U.S.
invasion of Iraq was only possible because we have a cavalier attitude
towards international law, at least as it might apply to the United
States. That's not for us, that's for the little people.
We need more Members of Congress like Dennis Kucinich, who, in his
powerful speech to the DNC, included violations of international law
in his litany of charges against the Bush Administration:
My guess is that Dennis' will be the only speech at the DNC that takes
note of the fact that international law also applies to the United
States. Let's get busy turning that around.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Robert Naiman
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy. Naiman has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. He has masters degrees in economics and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked in the Middle East.
Speaking of the audacity of hope, here is my hope for the Obama
Administration. I'd like to see if we could get through four years of
the Obama Administration without invading, bombing, or threatening to
invade or bomb any other countries in violation of the UN Charter. Is
that too audacious a hope?
My audacious hope is that during the Obama Administration, we'll never
have to chant or sing "No Blood for Oil," as CodePink did Monday in
the "protest cage" at the DNC in Denver:
Democrats often fault the Bush Administration for rupturing our
relations with allies with its invasion of Iraq. The criticism is
correct, but it finesses a key point. Why did the U.S. invasion of
Iraq rupture relations with allies? Because the Bush Administration
thumbed its nose at international law and the UN Charter.
We need a very vigorous and sustained public education campaign in the
United States for the UN Charter, and particularly for its prohibition
on the use of military force against other UN member states. The
principal justification for the creation of the United Nations at the
end of the Second World War was precisely to create such a binding
prohibition on the signatory countries.
There are only two exceptions to the prohibition: immediate
self-defense against actual armed attack, and military actions
authorized by the UN Security Council. Since the US invasion of Iraq
was not in immediate self-defense against armed attack, and was not
authorized by the UN Security Council, it was illegal, as former UN
Secretary General Annan affirmed.
If we had a culture of intolerance in the United States for violations
of the UN Charter by our leaders - like the attitude we have towards
driving while intoxicated - the US invasion of Iraq could never have
taken place, and all those lives would have been spared. The U.S.
invasion of Iraq was only possible because we have a cavalier attitude
towards international law, at least as it might apply to the United
States. That's not for us, that's for the little people.
We need more Members of Congress like Dennis Kucinich, who, in his
powerful speech to the DNC, included violations of international law
in his litany of charges against the Bush Administration:
My guess is that Dennis' will be the only speech at the DNC that takes
note of the fact that international law also applies to the United
States. Let's get busy turning that around.
Robert Naiman
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy. Naiman has worked as a policy analyst and researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. He has masters degrees in economics and mathematics from the University of Illinois and has studied and worked in the Middle East.
Speaking of the audacity of hope, here is my hope for the Obama
Administration. I'd like to see if we could get through four years of
the Obama Administration without invading, bombing, or threatening to
invade or bomb any other countries in violation of the UN Charter. Is
that too audacious a hope?
My audacious hope is that during the Obama Administration, we'll never
have to chant or sing "No Blood for Oil," as CodePink did Monday in
the "protest cage" at the DNC in Denver:
Democrats often fault the Bush Administration for rupturing our
relations with allies with its invasion of Iraq. The criticism is
correct, but it finesses a key point. Why did the U.S. invasion of
Iraq rupture relations with allies? Because the Bush Administration
thumbed its nose at international law and the UN Charter.
We need a very vigorous and sustained public education campaign in the
United States for the UN Charter, and particularly for its prohibition
on the use of military force against other UN member states. The
principal justification for the creation of the United Nations at the
end of the Second World War was precisely to create such a binding
prohibition on the signatory countries.
There are only two exceptions to the prohibition: immediate
self-defense against actual armed attack, and military actions
authorized by the UN Security Council. Since the US invasion of Iraq
was not in immediate self-defense against armed attack, and was not
authorized by the UN Security Council, it was illegal, as former UN
Secretary General Annan affirmed.
If we had a culture of intolerance in the United States for violations
of the UN Charter by our leaders - like the attitude we have towards
driving while intoxicated - the US invasion of Iraq could never have
taken place, and all those lives would have been spared. The U.S.
invasion of Iraq was only possible because we have a cavalier attitude
towards international law, at least as it might apply to the United
States. That's not for us, that's for the little people.
We need more Members of Congress like Dennis Kucinich, who, in his
powerful speech to the DNC, included violations of international law
in his litany of charges against the Bush Administration:
My guess is that Dennis' will be the only speech at the DNC that takes
note of the fact that international law also applies to the United
States. Let's get busy turning that around.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.