Monday, October 15, 2007

The Rule of Law, Mr. Kofi Annan And The United Nations

The Rule of Law, Mr. Kofi Annan And The United Nations

Wednesday, 22 September 2004
The Rule of Law, Mr. Kofi Annan And The United Nations

United Nations’ Secretary General Kofi Annan finally spoke his mind honestly this week, first, during his interview with the BBC at which he appropriately described the invasion and occupation of Iraq as an illegal act and again, when he addressed the General Assembly opening ceremonies, where he in sum, admonished the invaders and occupiers, he informed them, as pretentious advocates of the rule of law, to take their own medicine, by first, following the rule of law themselves!

But has Mr. Annan not come to these realizations and conclusions too late? Does his statement not amount to, too little, too late for dead Iraqis and the other sundry victims of American/British wrong-headed invasion and occupation of Iraq? These sorts of statements by the UN leader would have been more helpful, before the invasion, or while Americans were beating the drums of war.

Mr. Annan, now faces the risks of appearing completely irrelevant, as Mr. Bush threateningly told the world he would make the UN, and the invasion and occupation has taken place and the dare consequences and aftermath are continuing, with all sorts of global ramifications. Kofi Annan now offers good medicines after countless deaths?

The UN leader now appears like a bad doctor who dithered, while his patient was in a terminal state, but the doctor preserved his best treatment and medicines, which he now seeks to administer to dead patient! Why treat the corpse? Particularly when you had all the time in the world to have played a role in preventing the death in the first place?

At what point did Mr. Annan become a convert of the rule of law mantra? And I wonder if he has heard the legal axiom, to the effect that, justice delayed is justice denied?
Dead Iraqis, whose lives were snuffed out indiscriminately, cannot benefit from Mr. Annan’s sudden conversion to the rules of international law, it is too late for those killed in the crusaders’ war to conquer the Middle East for its oil resources, even as the imperial powers take complete control of the strategic real estate of the Persian Gulf.

Some legal scholars have in the past argued that international law is no law, because it does not have enforcement threat and bite, as follow-ups, to usual ostentatious pronouncements, such as have been made by Mr. Annan. Whereas, his statements could have had more use or value, were they uttered during the pre-war debate heat at the UN, the United States and worldwide.

The UN leader leaves me wondering, whether his declarations of the invasion/occupation of Iraq as illegal, would by chance, change anything on the ground in Iraq? Especially as Iraq has become a the most chaotic enclave in the world with increasing prospect for civil war and complete disintegration; Or is the UN chief’s pronouncements intended to warn Mr. Bush, who might become more audaciously adventurous and invade Iran, North Korea etc, if he is re-elected to a second term, as has become very likely. A re-elected Mr. Bush might become emboldened by a renewed mandate, hence, Mr. Bush may want to engage in a logical conclusion of his empire building ambitions; The first term may have just been a peek and a snippet of more of his adventurism and militarism ahead.

The pre-war timidity and silence by the UN leadership was one of two things, blissful naiveté or willful complicity with the invaders/occupiers, being complicit or naïve are bad policies; Before the invasion and occupation of Iraq, I wrote an opinion piece in which I articulated a preference for the respect and observance of international law, and the preservation of Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity http://www.gamji.com/NEWS2249.htm; Now, I worry that American policies in Iraq are harbingers of more ominous empire building extremisms by neoconservatives, neocolonialists, camouflaged as the phantom war on terror and driven by the so-called pre-emptive wars.

No comments: