International law

    Farhang Jahanpour Against the advice of practically the whole world, including many American scientists, politicians and diplomats, and contrary to the Security Council Resolution 2231 that has given the Iran Nuclear Deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) the backing of international law, last night President Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement. Not only did he withdraw America from the deal, but he also threatened to impose sanctions on all countries and companies that trade with Iran. He also issued a warning that he would do to Iran what that country has never experienced before. That statement by itself is in clear violation of International law. His short statement that was meant to justify his action was full of clear errors and inaccuracies and the reversals of known facts. He implied that Iran had violated the terms of the agreement. This is not true....

  , he draws the character of Madame Defarge. She along with other members of the Tricoteuse, the knitting women, perch every day next to the guillotine, knitting into hats and socks the names of those to be executed, while watching the upper aristocracy and upper bourgeoisie being dispatched to their death one by one. They were regarded as respected sisters of the revolution. I can’t help being reminded of her when I read the CV of the woman nominated by President Donald Trump to be the new head of the CIA, Gina Haspel, who is due to be cross examined at a Senate hearing on May 9th. She is a career officer who ran a CIA “black site” in Thailand. She implemented the torture policies of President George W. Bush. She also, according to The Economist, transmitted her boss’s orders to destroy video evidence of brutal interrogations. She ignored...

By David Swanson* Imagine some foreign nation sent 100 missiles into Washington D.C. You can imagine this because Hollywood has trained you to imagine it.   Originally published at David Swanson here. April 20, 2018 Imagine that for weeks or months prior to this attack, the foreign nation’s government and public debated whether to do it. You can imagine this because you live in the one nation on earth where such debates happen, or because you have heard about the sorts of things that go on in the United States. Now imagine that the primary excuse for the attack settled on in the debate in the distant foreign capital was this: it would be punishment for the U.S. government’s use of and possession of banned weapons: depleted uranium, white phosphorous, napalm, cluster bombs, etc. You may be able to imagine that, depending on what you know about events in the...

  , speaks with Russia Today and points out why this type of behaviour is totally unacceptable: It violates international law, undermines the UN and brings Syria, the region and the world further and further from peace. The people behind it and their media and other supporters must be perceived as either conflict- and peace illiterate or advocates of criminal activity. Both of which are tragic and making already dark times darker. We must say stop and argue: Peace first – The Secure the peace. In addition, contrary to the Western/NATO belief this is self-destructive and self-isolating. The international so-called community is, for the large majority, not behind this type of policy.

  By Tibor Várady April 19, 2018 Some introductory remarks concerning the use of the term “populism” The term “populism” is becoming increasingly popular in public discourse. It is difficult to deny – and I have no intention to try to deny – that the designation tackles (or tries to tackle) a serious problem. But wide use has made it more and more difficult to discern what ground is actually covered by this term. The question also arises, whether more coherent (even if contested) notions framed in social sciences may succeed in reining in careless use of the term “populism” in public discourse. A couple of years ago I was noting various contexts in which the term “populism” was used – particularly in the press. For instance, the Hungarian Népszabadság on May 2, 2009, cites the Slovak “SME” comparing the Czech and Hungarian government crisis, and concludes that “What is...

This post is an assessment of the recent Syrian missile attack by the armed forces of the U.S., UK, and France from a variety of perspectives. It is a modified and expanded version of a text earlier published in The Wire  (Delhi) and Il Manifesto(Rome). I intend to write two further posts suggested by the controversy generated by the airstrikes of April 14, 2018, against sites associated with Syria’s alleged chemical weapons capabilities. These strikes raise questions of international law, domestic constitutional authorization for international uses of force, strategic logic, and moral imperatives and rationalizations. Each of these issues is capable of multiple interpretations raising further concerns about the appropriate location of the authority to decide given the nature of world order in the 21stcentury.  Preliminary reflections At this stage, it seems reasonable to wonder whether Syria was attacked because it didn’t use chemical weapons rather than because it did....

 In the park today I saw a teenager watching two little kids, one of whom apparently stole a piece of candy from the other. The teenager rushed up to the two of them, reprimanded one of them, and stole both of their bicycles. I felt like it was my turn to step in at that point, and I confronted the bicycle thief. “Excuse me,” I said, “what makes you think you can commit a larger crime just because you witnessed a smaller one? Who do you think you are?” He stared at me for a while, and replied: “the U.S. military.” Originally published at David Swanson here There is no crime larger than war. There is no way to legalize it. The Kellogg-Briand Pact bans it, and the United Nations Charter bans it with narrow exceptions that have not remotely been met by any of the U.S. wars of the...

TFF Associate John Scales Avery presents his latest book on one of the most destructive institutions in modern societies and of our time. I would like to announce the publication of a new book entitled “The Devil’s Dynamo”. It is a collection of articles and book chapters that I have written about the way in which military-industrial complexes throughout the world drive and perpetuate the institution of war. A considerable amount of new material has also been added. The book can be freely downloaded and circulated from the Danish Peace Academy. Why call a book about military-industrial complexes “The Devil’s Dynamo”? A military-industrial complex involves a circular flow of money. The money flows like the electrical current in a dynamo, driving a diabolical machine. Money from immensely rich corporate oligarchs buys the votes of politicians and the propaganda of the mainstream media. Numbed by the propaganda, citizens allow the politicians...

    By Richard Falk March 14, 2018   It is now known by virtually everyone who follows the Palestinian struggle that a 16 year old girl, now 17, named Ahed Tamimi, confronted Israeli soldiers on her family’s land shortly after her cousin, Mohammed, was shot in the face with a rubber bullet, causing a coma. The video of her actions has gone viral, showing the world a courageous young woman engaging in nonviolent acts of resistance, and then a day later in the middle of the night being arrested in her home and then charged with a series of crimes; as is standard Israeli practice in the arrest of children, Aden was hauled off to an Israeli prison facility out of reach of her family and then denied bail. As has been widely noted, Ahed Tamimi is a heroic victim for those in Palestine and elsewhere who approve of...

New book by TFF Associate, Richard Falk, on the Vietnam War Revisiting the Vietnam War And International Law: Views and Interpretations of Richard Falk Editor Stefan Andersson Cambridge University Press, 2017 (US $ 157) Paperback UK £ 28 here Why the Legal and Political Debate on the Vietnam War Still Matters Introduction There has been recently a revival of interest in the Vietnam War, perhaps most notably as a result of the quite extraordinary 10-episode Ken Burns & Lynn Novick’s ten-part, eighteen hour documentary film as aired on PBS, which although somewhat ideologically slanted toward an American audience has much illuminating footage, especially bearing on various Vietnamese perceptions of the war experience. I would also call attention to a series of articles by Matthew Stevenson describing his recent visit to Vietnam – “Why Vietnam Still Matters: An American Reckoning” – which combines acute journalistic observation with impressive commentary on the...

  By Richard Falk Prefatory Note This post is a somewhat revised version of a book review that was published by the Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. XLVII, No. 2 (Winter 2018), p. 81. The book is an important contribution to an understanding of two dimensions of the Palestinian experience within the state of Israel: First, the reliance on law to ‘legalize’ discrimination, and the accompanying denial of fundamental rights that has resulted. Secondly, to develop a distinct Israeli jurisprudence that seeks to legitimize ‘ethnocracy,’ yet disguise this reality by claiming that the nationality laws and regulations distinguishing Jews and non-Jews do not invalidate Israeli claims to be a democracy. •   The Dynamic of Exclusionary Constitutionalism: Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State By Mazen Masri Hart Publishing, 2017 Oxford, UK & Portland 256 pages. $79.70 hardcover. • This book is an odd scholarly achievement. It relies on a...

The time of the Clinton administration. There is a very good article with links and a PDF on OffGuardian here. It’s a mind-boggling story about how five Americans were tasked with influencing the election of Boris Yeltsin in competition with other candidates who, when they started working in Moscow, had much higher poll figures than he had. This was a couple of years after Bill Clinton had broken all important Western politicians promises to Mikhail Gorbachev to the effect that NATO would not expand “an inch” and started doing exactly that – a process that ended with the crisis and tension in today’s Ukraine. Fortunately, there are Western media that have told you quite a bit about US meddling in the elections and other political affairs of other countries: Huffington Post“The US has been meddling in other countries’ elections for a century. It doesn’t feel good.” Los Angeles TimesThe US...