Dennis

S N O I T C N SA

AY D I LL 994-98

1 RAL HA NE J E IS RY-G

A RET EN SEC D T BYN ASSISTAN U

of Sanctions. Both are unacceptable and uncivilised methodologies for change.

t

here is no doubt that sanctions (as in “siege”) are a part, a form of warfare. Sanctions are not a non-violent nor peaceful alternative to traditional military aggression which is designed to kill, punish and destroy. Under the various forms of sanctions existent, imposed multilaterally or unilaterally, on the citizens of a sovereign state– innocent people suffer and are punished; economies, cultural and social wellbeing collapse; human rights are swept away; external control and interference, power, greed, hegemony succeed.

Sanctions undermine the rights and protections provided by national sovereignty, domestic and international law. Sanctions can dominate the lives of millions, can destroy their humanity, and can kill. Thus, just as war must be criminalised, so must the imposition

32

CRIMINALISE WAR JUNE 2015

The challenge for us of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission is – how do we convince the Aggressor States that dominate the United Nations Security Council, the world economy and the production and sales of the weapons of war – that war is a crime? I speak of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, proven war criminals such as President Bush and Prime Minister Blair and other leaders and Governments protected by manipulation, neglect and corruption of international law, including the UN Charter itself.

You may well enquire how the Charter and other instruments of international law can be corrupted.

Chapter VII Article 41 of the Charter enables, under the concept of “nonviolence”, Permanent Member states of the Security Council to impose sanctions on States that are not behaving compatibly with the provisions of Articles I and II.

Thus, when the impact of these binding sanctions imposed by the Security Council undermine the human rights of the civilians of the victim State in question, via the application of Article 41, we have conflict within the Charter.

In other words, the Charter, under international law is being corrupted. Such sanctions may also violate the Geneva Conventions, Rights of the Child and many other protective provisions of the family of international law.

In summary, the imposition of sanctions which are often both punitive and regime-change oriented (as in the case of Iraq in 1990 and during 1991-2003), by the five Permanent Member States of the Security Council, undermine in spirit and in word the Charter.

In Iraq, comprehensive, open ended, punitive and manipulated UN Sanctions (by Washington and London) caused the deaths of over one million innocent civilians, over half of whom were children.

Not only did the UN kill civilians, the US and UK employed in 2003 a war of aggression on the good people of Iraq in the expectation of overthrowing the Government

i.e. regime-change. This one tragic case of Iraq alone underlines that sanctions are a form of warfare and must henceforth be deemed criminal.

As a consequence of the human, economic, social and cultural catastrophe created by the UN Security Council in Iraq, “smart” or “focused” sanctions were developed, discussed and implemented. The case of Iran springs to mind. Here banking, shipping, trade, insurance, currency, imports and exports were sanctioned with damaging results to the economy.

In addition, the cost of basic foods, cooking fuel, transportation went up. Employment was diminished, income reduced and the poor and the less wealthy suffered, and still do. The Government was strengthened as in the case of Iraq under comprehensive sanctions.

Regime-change did not occur.

Basic human rights were damaged, diminished and denied to many innocents.

Despite these and other models of sanctions imposed, many like to believe that sanctions are a viable alternative to war. After I departed Iraq in late 1998, I briefed the leaders of the French Communist Party, and believe they changed their policy stance thereafter once briefed on the killing and catastrophic impact of UN Sanctions on Iraq. The same changes occurred in London after similar briefings in Westminster and with British Quakers. In New York, ten years ago speaking to a large crowd of Iranian-Americans near UN Headquarters when Sanctions

on Iran were been mooted, I was booed for my opposition. However, this month, I was invited to speak in Washington on behalf of the same Iranians to condemn the impact of the “smart” sanctions that were imposed. Last month, at the University of Galway (Ireland) a lawyer and Professor from Costa Rica who spoke on neutrality (important to Irish people) failed to understand that Sanctions could be deadly and must be criminalised.

However, increasingly informed people are learning that sanctions are a form of war and warfare, and must be stopped, found unacceptable and deemed criminal. Even in the case of the Zionist Entity i.e. Israel, and despite its genocide in respect of the Palestinians, I believe the imposition of Sanctions to be unacceptable. I support the individual application of boycott and large and small scale divestment contained in the BDS progamme.

However, surely we do not want sanctions imposed on Israel that inevitably would leave the fascist government and bad leadership untouched and would instead punish the poorest, already struggling Jewish and Arab civilians.

Sanctions are simply indiscriminate, blunt instruments that diminish and often destroy basic human rights to which we are all entitled, such as food, water, housing, health care, energy, education and employment.

They fail to target bad leadership which in reality is often enhanced with increased local support as in the case of Iraq, Syria, Russia and Iran. It is the innocent people of the victim States that pay the price for bad Government and become weakened, undermined and the forgotten victims of the Security Council.

Worse, as modern history shows, sanctions that do not cripple and destroy the target country quickly enough to satisfy the Aggressor States, lead to traditional military invasion, state terrorism such as “Shock and Awe”, and the war crimes, torture and atrocities of which the USA/UK has been found guilty by the KL War Crimes Tribunal. Apart from impatience and haste, the same Aggressor States are the world’s military arms and weapons producers and salesmen. The US and less so other economies are dependent for prosperity and growth on the massive and exceedingly profitable weapons industry.

The Five Permanent Member states of the UN Security Council, entrusted by the Charter with establishing and maintaining world peace, produce and sell globally more than 85% of military weapons!

It is not hard to see the madness of this situation. US Dollars in billions are thereby wasted and diverted into killing instead of sustaining human rights and life itself.

The question is what can we do about it?

Firstly, the UN Security Council must be reformed to be representative of one hundred per cent of the world’s peoples – North and South, East and West. One way to accomplish this would be to see the world in its customary regions – South America, North Africa, West Asia, Southern Africa, Europe, etc., etc. Each Region would be allocated one permanent seat. That Regional seat would be occupied by one member state elected for a three year term by the countries of the Region. When the elected member state speaks in the Security Council, it would speak for, and represent all the States of the Region. Today we have the EU/Europe of some 500,000 being represented by two veto power and permanent member JUNE 2015 CRIMINALISE WAR

33

faiths andASEAN perceptions of the needs of the world community. No longer would the UN be dominated by the twelve per cent, but by the great majority of eightyeight per cent. The colonial era would finally end; there would be no veto. Instead, majority representative presence for the first time would be in a position to make the decisions so important to creating and sustaining world peace. This new Council could make war and warfare redundant, and enable all UN Member States to declare war to be a crime.

Secondly, and in order to underline the total unacceptability of warfare and profiteering thereby, all Member States producing and selling weapons of war would be excluded from the Security Council.

“

Sanctions undermine the rights and protections provided by national sovereignty, domestic and international law. Sanctions can dominate the lives of millions, can destroy their humanity, and can kill.

Thus, just as war must be criminalised, so must the imposition of Sanctions.

Both are unacceptable and uncivilised methodologies for change.

states (France and Britain) – a ridiculous imbalance in terms of global representation.

With Security Council reform, the ASEAN Region of some 600,000 million people, for example could elect Malaysia for a three year term and have Malaysia speak in the Security Council on major world issues of importance to peace and security. And Malaysia would do so after appropriate consultation with the other ASEAN member states. That ASEAN voice would represent the variety of ethnicities, cultures, societies,

34

CRIMINALISE WAR JUNE 2015

Thirdly, prosecution of the leaders of Aggressor and other Member States resorting to warfare would be the norm.

Acts of bombing, torture, atrocities, invasion and State terrorism would be so dealt. A reformed International Criminal Court, with authority, independence from the Security Council would be necessary for this task.

Member States guilty of military/sanctions aggression would be prosecuted by the International Court of Justice where binding reparations and other penalties would be considered.

Fourthly, remove the threat and option of warfare from the international dialogue. Commit to resolving inevitable differences between member states by nonviolent means. Establish that for global peace and justice, dialogue is the only approved route forward.

Fifthly, let’s employ global social and other media to sell and market the essential concept that war is indeed a crime. Warfare is dumb, unproductive, mass murder and is unacceptable to all thinking human beings. Let us employ the lobbyists of Washington and other capitals to influence parliamentarians to turn their backs on warfare as a tool of foreign policy. Let’s demonstrate that investment in human beings, in education provide a greater return than billions of dollars/euros poured down the drain of warfare.

Abolish military budgets and invest the dollars/euros saved in health care, employment, food and nutrition, the environment and overall human and physical sustainability. We need to invest in justice, equality, opportunities and justice. Put the “arms” money into opportunities for our young people so they can thrive and grow into mature human beings and productive civilians. Sanctions and traditional warfare would be OUT! Peaceful co-existence and human wellbeing would be IN! Our challenge here in KL is how to convince the world to join us, to see the light, to change? How to follow a road map that turns warfare into Peace with Justice for all?