PressInfo #175 – The US and Kuwait undermine the UN by entering the demilitarised zone on the Kuwait-Iraq border

Perhaps it is not the most well-known peace mission of the UN, but you will be sure to hear more about it soon as it is situated on the border between Iraq and Kuwait. Its name is UNIKOM (UN Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission), http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unikom/index.html. It was established by Security Council Resolution 687 in 1991. During TFF’s fact-finding mission to Iraq in January this year, we visited the UN mission there.

Reports from the last few days tell that armed US Marines and vehicles have entered this demilitarised zone, DMZ, between Iraq and Kuwait. On the Kuwaiti side, they have cut down fences and set up 7 gates, presumably in preparation of an invasion and occupation of Iraq.

We, the authors, are not experts in international law and shall not judge whether this is a breach of the Security Council Resolution and/or other parts of international law, or whether there is some fine print somewhere that makes this legitimate under certain circumstances. However, we doubt it. It is hard to understand that a UN demilitarised zone can be entered by armed personnel in preparation for an attack on a UN member state and that it would be legal.

But, more importantly, this is undoubtedly a serious political and normative blow to the authority and integrity of the United Nations as such. It undermines both the Security Council and the vitally important, highly competent UNIKOM mission on the ground. It further destabilises the region and signals to the government of Iraq that it will be attacked no matter what it does to avoid war.

It is striking that this unilateral action has not caused a stir and that there has been virtually no international debate about it.

Questions that should be raised

We believe these developments raise a series of important questions pertaining to international peace.

1. Did the United States seek permission from the United Nations before entering into the zone? If so, on what grounds was the US given permission to enter the zone with weapons?

2. When the UN has informed the Security Council about this breach, what will it be able to do when one of its own permanent members ignores a decision made by that very same Council?

3. Can it be morally acceptable and in accordance with the letter and spirit of international law as well as the UN Charter that one member of the UN unilaterally militarises a UN demilitarised zone? If done in preparation for an attack on another member state, can this be legitimate under any circumstances?

4. Is Iraq – a UN member that has, naturally, never signed an SC decision – legally or politically obliged to comply with SC decisions if a Permanent SC Member that has signed SC decisions does not respect them?

5. It would seem that a member state, by entering a UN demilitarised zone with weapons and with the purpose of invading another member constitutes a threat to international peace and security. If so, the Secretary-General can choose to “bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.” (Article 99 of the UN Charter). What is the Secretary-General’s opinion in this case when a member state makes a force-based incursion into a zone set up by the organisation he leads?

6. What obligations does UN member Kuwait have as party to the UNIKOM mission? By letting US troops enter its side of the demilitarised zone, does it constitute a breach of the SC decision and the UNIKOM mandate? If so, should Kuwait continue to receive 25% of all Iraq’s oil revenue in war reparations if it, as it seems, contributed to preparing an international aggression on Iraq?

7. What if Baghdad perceives the incursion into the zone as a further increase of the threat against it and, with reference to the inherent right to self-defence (UN Charter Article 51), finds it necessary to enter the UN demilitarised zone from its side?

Why has nobody raised these questions? Has the arrogance of the Bush regime and its systematic defiance of international consultations, norms and laws and its might-make-right policies been so pervasive that they no longer provoke debate?

The U.S. repeatedly points out that Iraq has repeatedly violated Security Council decisions. It argues that the credibility of the Council is at stake when its decisions are not backed up with determination, with force if necessary. In this case it looks as if the United States doesn’t care a damn about its own signature under an SC decision, doesn’t it?

Background

The following are excerpts from UNIKOM’s website:

The Council gave UNIKOM a mandate to monitor the DMZ and the Khawr ‘Abd Allah waterway between Iraq and Kuwait, to deter violations of the boundary, and to observe any hostile action mounted from the territory of one state against the other.

The military observers of UNIKOM are unarmed. Responsibility for the maintenance of law and order in the DMZ rests with the Governments of Iraq and Kuwait, which maintain police posts in their respective parts of the zone. Police are only allowed side arms.

In 1993, the Security Council, by its resolution 806 (1993), expanded the tasks of UNIKOM to include the capacity to take physical action to prevent or redress: (a) small-scale violations of the DMZ; (b) violations of the boundary between Iraq and Kuwait, for example by civilians or police; and (c) problems that might arise from the presence of Iraqi installations and Iraqi citizens and their assets in the DMZ on the Kuwaiti side of the newly demarcated boundary. The Council increased the authorised strength of the mission to 3,645 (three mechanised infantry battalions including support elements) and requested the Secretary-General to execute a phased deployment of the additional elements.

By acting under Chapter VII, the Council demonstrated that the international community would act decisively should Iraq attempt to attack Kuwait again. To further strengthen this, all five permanent members of the Security Council, for the first time in a peacekeeping operation, agreed to provide military observers.

As of 31 December 2002, there were 1,105 total uniformed personnel, comprised of 193 military observers and 912 troops, supported by 63 international civilian personnel and 164 local civilian staff. They came from 32 countries, among them the United States, the United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden.

Breach by U.S. Troops Reported
Kuwait-Iraq Zone Crossed, U.N. Says

UNITED NATIONS, March 6 — The United Nations has informed the Security Council that armed U.S. Marines have repeatedly breached a U.N.-monitored demilitarized zone along the Kuwait-Iraq border, potentially violating a 1991 resolution ending the Persian Gulf War.

U.N. peacekeepers monitoring the border “reported numerous violations of the demilitarized zone” since Tuesday by individuals in civilian dress and driving four-by-four vehicles, said chief U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard. He said some of the individuals “were armed and identified themselves as U.S. Marines.”

The U.N. force also reported seeing three spots that had been cut along an electric fence erected near the Iraqi border by Kuwait. The United Nations raised the matter with the Kuwaiti government and asked to be informed of similar activities.

A Kuwaiti official said the United Nations has no right to report any activities to the council beyond the fact of an armed incursion of the demilitarized zone. “Whether or not we cut or move a fence is nobody’s business,” the official said.

It remained unclear whether the alleged activities were part of preparations for a U.S. incursion into Iraq. But the council notification raised questions about whether a U.S.-led invasion through the demilitarized zone would violate a Security Council resolution.

An official at the U.S. mission to the United Nations declined to comment.

— Colum Lynch

Here is a short report from The Miami Herald that gives a good impression of the military situation on the Iraqi side: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/5116262.htm.

Related Posts

The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...