captive (c)
all content copyright 2004
marc c. johnson

tell me more about CaptiveNation(s)

syndicate

captive writing
washington dispatch
eTalkinghead
reason magazine
global politician
-yet more from gp
tech central station
-more from tcs
flak photo mag
-more writing links
captive photos



captive blogsnob

captive blogs
OxBlog
Reason Mag
InstaPundit
Drudge
DefenseTech
amygdala
buzzmachine
IranExpert
Daneshjoo.org
ActivistChat
NationalReview
AmericanSpectator
WeeklyStandard
Samizdata
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
BalticBlog
Cold Fury
EjectEjectEject
Volokh Conspiracy
Russ Pundit
LGF
Cato the Youngest
PoliBlog
Priorities/Frivolities
Tim Blair
Citizen Smash
Tacitus
BlogoSlovo
EuroPundits
Siberian Light
Swanky Conservative
Spinsanity
Truth Laid Bear
RealPolitik
Atlantic Blog
The Weblog Review
The Donovan
Summit
H.A.C.
alphapatriot
Blogroll Me! EuroBlogReview Listed on Blogwise Blogarama - The Blog Directory

captive author

captive archives
02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007

captive designer:
:: maystar * designs ::


maystar * designs
Thursday, September 16, 2004

several days late, many dollars short
(originally appeared on eTalkinghead.com, 16 Sep 04)

It took Kofi Annan quite a while to come to the conclusion that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, didn't it?

You'll note that Annan (who took his current office in 1997) didn't make this assertion when NATO embarked on its bombing campaign on Serbia -- without a UN Security Council resolution. In fact, although he gave a half-hearted criticism of the action against Serbia, he ultimately gave the Clinton administration political cover:
...on the one side, the question of the legitimacy of action taken by a regional organization without a U.N. mandate; on the other, the universally recognized imperative of effectively halting gross and systematic violations of human rights with grave humanitarian consequences. The inability of the international community in the case of Kosovo to reconcile these two equally compelling interests was a tragedy.
Take out the word 'Kosovo' from the last sentence and insert 'Iraq' and you have to wonder what was different from 1999 to 2003:

* Gross and systematic violations of human rights? Check.
* Grave humanitarian consequences? Check.

Critics of this line of thinking will contend that NATO was a 'regional' organization different from the 'coalition of the willing;' therefore it was marginally permissible for NATO to act under Article 52, Section 1, of the UN Charter (which discusses to 'regional arrangements'). But why a regional arrangement includes NATO, which was outside the sphere of the former Yugoslavia, and doesn't include the 'coalition of the willing,' which included states in the surrounding region as well as those which had an interest in the Middle East and South Asia, is clearly a subject for debate but hardly one for static and far-reaching pronouncements such as the one made by Annan to the BBC.

The chief difference between the two situations, of course, was that Bill Clinton was President of the United States when NATO bombed Serbia, and George W. Bush was president when the coalition attacked Iraq.

I'm not one to go for conspiracy theories, but coming -- as it does -- so close to both the Australian and U.S. elections, this declaration seems suspect at best and reckless at least.

At worst it looks like Kofi Annan is trying to declare himself one of those foreign leaders that John Kerry counted as anonymous supporters.

Marc posted this at 16.9.04 | Permalink

Comments on the post above - [ comments.]