Cheney’s Statements on Justification of War Must Be Challenged
by International Scholars/Leaders (Signatories appended)
Sent by Fax to all members of the United States Congress
September 27, 2006 :: Common Dreams
On September 10th in a televised interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, Vice President Dick Cheney stated with little ambiguity that we would have invaded Iraq in 2003 even if we knew that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction. This statement by our nation’s Vice President repudiates the legal and moral principle of non-aggression which has been accepted by the international community and has won the United States international trust and respect. This repudiation must not go unnoticed or unchallenged by Congress and the American people.
Of the many findings of “fact” in the Joint Congressional Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, the key finding was that Iraq was producing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction and had both the capability and intent to use them in short order. Under the principles of international law that we helped design, and to which we have committed ourselves, only a perception of imminent armed attack justified our first use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Iraq in 2003.
Congress must clarify to the administration and to the American people that Congress would not have supported an invasion of Iraq in the absence of the intelligence reports and administration assurances that Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction posing a threat of imminent attack to us and our allies. In addition, it is vital that Congress demand that the President correct, or repudiate, the recent remarks made by Vice President Cheney.
In the aftermath of the death and economic devastation of World Wars I and II, the United States led the world in the development of an international legal framework condemning non-defensive acts of war. This was codified and ratified by all major powers in the United Nations Charter, and explicitly accepted as binding by all members of the United Nations (now including virtually every nation in the world). Regardless of other concerns we have had about the UN over the ensuing years, this aspect of international law codified particularly in Articles 2 and 51 of the UN Charter has often been re-affirmed and never repudiated by the United States.
For over half a century our government has recognized that this legal framework serves our long-term interests and faithfully reflects the moral stance of the American people. The American people do not approve of war as an instrument of foreign policy, but only as a justified and necessary response to forceful attacks upon us or our allies. Even when the case was not clear, in certain conflicts, our government has at least formally supported the international legal framework of the UN Charter.
In 2003, the Bush administration assured Congress and the American people that there was no doubt that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Many in our military, intelligence, and diplomatic communities still had doubts. Many in Congress expressed concerns, but in the end a majority decided to authorize the President to respond to the immediate threat his administration described.
Alternative justifications offered by Vice President Cheney during the recent interview are clearly legally insufficient for military action. A capability to produce weapons of mass destruction in the future, the use of weapons of mass destruction in the past, crimes against the people of Iraq, possible connections with terrorist organizations – all of these qualify as grievances which the United States might bring against Iraq in the United Nations, as we did, but do not constitute grounds for the first use of force without UN approval.
In particular, the justification offered by Cheney that Iraq would have become a threat in the future is exactly the kind of argument that the international legal principles are designed to inhibit. Any nation might perceive another nation as a future threat. Germany perceived France and Russia as threats in 1914. Japan perceived the United States as a threat in 1941. North Korea and Iran view the United States as a threat today, particularly after our invasion of Iraq. China could view Taiwan or the United States as a future threat. A non-imminent future threat justifies preparedness, diplomacy, changes in policy, and appeals for UN action, but does not justify military force.
Vice President Cheney’s statement that we would have invaded Iraq even if we knew they had no weapons of mass destruction is a repudiation of what we have repeatedly avowed for more than fifty years: that we shall not attack another nation in the absence of an attack or truly imminent attack on us or our allies, unless it is done under the authority of international law and/or the direction of the United Nations, e.g. in response to a humanitarian crisis. We cannot allow Cheney’s repudiation to stand, even if it was made extemporaneously and unofficially. Congress and the President must provide a clear statement that Vice President Dick Cheney’s remarks do not represent U.S. policy and that we remain committed to a policy of non-aggression.
Signatories
Organizational affiliations are listed only for identification purposes. Signatories are acting in their individual capacity and not in representation. Additional signatories are welcome. Please send Name, Titles, and State of Residency to [email protected] :: For more info, go to Advocacy for Principled Action In Government
- Bryan Long :: Social Systems Philosopher
Joe W. (Chip) Pitts III :: Lecturer in Law, Stanford University
Dr. Susan Ariel Aaronson :: Trade and Economic Policy Analyst; Author
William J. Aceves :: Professor of Law and Director of International Studies, California Western School of Law
Janet Cooper Alexander
Frederick I. Richman Professor of Law :: Stanford Law School
Professor Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na`im :: Charles Howard Candler Professor of Law Emory University School of Law
Samuel R. Berger :: Chairman, Stonebridge International LLC, Fmr. National Security Advisor
Bartram S. Brown :: Professor of Law, Co-Director, Program on International and Comparative Law Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute of Technology
Douglass Cassel :: Lilly Endowment Professor of Law Notre Dame Law School
Marie Isabelle Chevrier :: Associate Professor of Political Economy and Public Policy University of Texas at Dallas
Roger S. Clark :: Board of Governors Professor, Rutgers-Camden School of Law
Gen. Wesley Clark :: Fmr. NATO Supreme Allied Commander Distinguished Sr. Advisor, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Trustee, Center for American Progress
Sarah H. Cleveland :: Marrs McLean Professor in Law University of Texas School of Law
Joshua Cohen :: Professor of Political Science, Philosophy, and Law Stanford University, Director, Program on Global Justice
Freeman Spogli Institute, Stanford
Anthony D’Amato :: Leighton Professor of Law Northwestern University
Mohamed Elibiary :: President & CEO, Freedom and Justice Foundation
Richard Falk :: Milbank Professor of International Law Emeritus Princeton University
Martin Flaherty :: Co-Director, Crowley Program in International Human Rights Leitner Family Professor of International Human Rights, Fordham Law School
Gregory Fox :: Professor of Law, Wayne State University Law School
William B. Gould :: Beardsley Emeritus Professor, Stanford University Law School, Former Chairman, US National Labor Relations Board
Morton H. Halperin :: Director of U.S. Advocacy , Open Society Institute, Executive Director, Open Society Policy Center
Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress
Lynne Henderson :: Professor of Law, William S. Boyd School of Law, University of Nevada Las Vegas
Paul Hoffman :: Schonbrun, De Simone, Seplow, Harris and Hoffman LLP, Human Rights/Civil Liberties Lawyer
Jennifer S. Holmes :: Associate Professor of Political Economy and Political Science, School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas
Scott Horton :: Adjunct Professor, Columbia Law School, Committee on International Law, Assn. of the Bar of the City of New York
Derek Jinks :: Assistant Professor of Law, University of Texas School of Law
Frank Kendall III :: Former Vice Chairman, Defense Intelligence Agency Advisory Board, Former Director, Tactical Warfare Programs, Office of the Secretary of Defense
Anatol Lieven :: Senior Research Fellow, New America Foundation
Princeton Lyman :: Adjunct Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations
Thomas Wm. Mayo :: Director, Maguire Center for Ethics and Public Responsibility, Associate Professor, SMU/Dedman School of Law, Adjunct Assoc. Prof., Internal Medicine, UT-Southwestern Medical School
Francisco Forrest Martin :: President, Rights International, The Center for International Human Rights Law, Inc.
Ray McGovern :: Retired CIA Analyst Political Policy Analyst and Commentator
Julie Mertus :: Associate Professor and Co-Director of Ethics, Peace and Global Affairs Program, American University
2006 Senior Fulbright Fellow, Danish Institute of Human Rights
Mary Ellen O’Connell :: Robert and Marion Short Chair in Law Notre Dame Law School
John Quigley :: President’s Club Professor in Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University
Henry J. Richardson III :: Professor of Law, Beasley School of Law, Temple University
Michael P. Scharf :: Professor of Law and Director, Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University, School of Law
Thomas C. Shelling :: Distinguished University Professor, University of Maryland, Nobel Laureate 2005
Barbara Stark :: Professor of Law, Hofstra University School of Law
Beth Stephens :: Professor of Law, Rutgers-Camden School of Law
Ralph Steinhardt :: Professor of Law and International Affairs
Arthur Selwyn Miller :: Research Professor of Law, George Washington University School of Law
Andrew Strauss :: Professor of Law, Widener University School of Law
Nancy Talanian :: Executive Director, Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Connie de la Vega :: Professor of Law and Academic Director of International Programs, University of San Francisco School of Law
Jon M. Van Dyke :: Professor of Law, William S. Richardson School of Law, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Allen Weiner :: Warren Christopher Professor of the Practice of Law and Diplomacy, Stanford University
David Weissbrodt :: Professor of Law, University of Minnesota
Burns H. Weston :: Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Interim Director/Senior Scholar, UI Center for Human Rights (UICHR), Vermont Law School Visiting Distinguished Professor of International Law & Policy
College of Law, The University of Iowa
Mort Winston :: Professor of Philosophy, The College of New Jersey
Timothy Wu :: Professor of Law, Columbia Law School
Recent Comments