International law, politics and opposition to the Iraq War

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-195
Author(s):  
Robert Knox

Abstract A key feature of the Iraq war was the prominence of international legal argument. This article argues that the motif of the ‘illegal war’ was crucial in mobilisations against the war. It traces the reasons for the prominence of this ‘illegal war’ motif and the wider political consequences of its adoption.

Author(s):  
Anicée Van Engeland

This chapter considers the extent to which Islamic governance can integrate international humanitarian law (IHL) into its own legal system by examining the case of Iran. It addresses the consequences of the emergence of an Islamic-universal hybrid legal system. The stakes are high because IHL’s efficiency and necessity have been questioned: The existence of the Iranian hybrid system of law can be perceived as a threat by scholars arguing that international law is at risk of fragmentation due to the variety of domestic and regional approaches to fundamental legal standards. The importance of those stakes is illustrated by the Iran-Iraq War: The process of mixing a universal secular legal system with a religious domestic law occurred at a crucial time when Iran was at war with Iraq, with clear effects on the protection of civilians and the conduct of hostilities.


2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 281-293
Author(s):  
Jason De Mink

Philippe Sands (Penguin Books, London 2006) Paperback, Pp 432, ISBN 9780141017990, £8.99This being the first book that I have ever read dedicated exclusively to international law, I was not certain what to expect.  I did not feel disappointed or out of my depth with “Lawless World” however, as Professor Sands writes clearly and authoritatively on subject-matter which will be quite familiar to most readers: the Pinochet trial, the Kyoto Protocol, trade rules, foreign investment, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the Iraq War and torture.


Author(s):  
Marc Trachtenberg

This chapter considers the various issues raised in the run-up to the Iraq War. It asks: How much of a problem would the development of a mass destruction capability by a regime like that of Iraq in 2002 have actually posed? Wouldn't the development of an Iraqi nuclear capability have led to mutual deterrence and thus to a relatively stable strategic relationship? To the extent that an Iraqi capability of this sort would have posed serious problems, couldn't the Iraqis have been prevented permanently from developing such forces through nonmilitary means? Couldn't an inspection regime have done the trick? And if the control regime wasn't up to the job, would it be legitimate for a country to act essentially on its own, without first getting explicit U.N. Security Council authorization? Was unilateral action impermissible under international law, and is a country that dealt with the problem in that way to be branded a law-breaker?


2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 86-87
Author(s):  
Takanobu Kiriyama
Keyword(s):  
Iraq War ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document