[PEN-L:7234] Peace Law from Attorney Ann Fagan Ginger

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

MEIKLEJOHN CIVIL LIBERTIES INSTITUTE, a center for human rights & peace law
Box 673, Berkeley, CA 94701-0673, mcli@xxxxxxx


                               KOSOVO
       WHAT SHOULD CONCERNED PEOPLE BE THINKING & DOING NOW?

Stated purpose of NATO bombing: To prevent humanitarian catastrophe, ethnic
cleansing, mass
refugees.

Method of implementation: Massive bombing of Kosovo, Montenegro, and Serbia
with weapons
including missiles containing depleted uranium under offiial U.S. policy in
armed conflict, bombs being
supplied and   paid for by the people of the U.S. Possibility of ground
troops officially eliminated by
NATO prior to commencement of hostilities.

Initial Outcome: Humanitarian catastrophe, ethnic cleansing, mass refugees.

Question: If that is the stated purpose, and it's not working, shouldn't the
methods be changed?
          If that is not the real purpose, then we deserve to know what the
real purpose is.

NATO Conclusion: Intensify the bombing.

Further NATO methods: cluster bombs.

Further outcomes: Intentionally bombing noncombatant Serbian press, killing
some media; destruction
of infrastructure throughout Kosovo, Montenegro, and Serbia including
bridges, water supplies, electric
power, oil and gas facilities, factories, hospitals, schools, airports,
train stations, churches, and
monasteries; halting international shipping on Danube River. Accidental
strikes on Bulgaria, on Chinese
embassy in Belgrade, on buses containing civilians, on refugees and
noncombatants of all nationalities.
Collateral damage:  Destruction of opposition to Milosevic in Montenegro and
Serbia; destruction of
nonviolent opposition to Milosevic in Kosovo; scattering of unexploded
cluster bombs; cessation of
Russian participation in international talks relating to Y2K preparedness of
nuclear weapons, power
plants, and related facilities.

Unknown long-term effects: Extent of rise in cancer rates, other illnesses,
and birth defects due to
depleted uranium and other toxic chemicals including chlorine gas; number of
deaths and maimings due
to future detonations of stray cluster bombs; environmental damage due to
oil and gas spills caused by
bombing; pollution of Danube River and underground aquifers; duration and
cost of reconstruction;
nuclear damage from Y2K due to cessation of international talks with Russia.
     Unknown long-term effects on citizens of NATO countries: length of time
Americans, British,
     Germans and other Allies will be despised and mistrusted throughout the
region, in Russia, in
     China, and around the world.
Unknown damage to the United Nations, to international law, to the U.S.
Constitution.
     Unmeasurable damage to local, state, national, and international
programs to feed, clothe, house,
     educate, employ, and care for people, and to protect the environment.

Question: How many bridges to the twenty-first century is NATO bombing?

BRIEFING:
         YUGOSLAVIA v. U.S., U.K., FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY,
         NETHERLANDS, BELGIUM, CANADA, PORTUGAL, and SPAIN
               in the International Court of Justice
        for an order that the use of force cease immediately
            and provide compensation for the damage done
                filed in The Hague on April 29, 1999

The governments of the United States, Yugoslavia, the United Kingdom,
and all the NATO countries all
                                                                           j
oined the United Nations and agreed to obey the UN Charter, a treaty that
became part of "the supreme
                                                                           l
aw of the land" on ratification in 1945, under the Constitution of the
United States.

The Charter was written and signed by government leaders who had experienced
massive violations of
human rights and wars and negotiations for peace. The Charter lists a series
of steps that nations must take
when situations arise that threaten peace. The whole purpose of the UN
Charter is to establish steps to
ensure that peace will not be broken between nations, or between peoples
within nations.

By ratifying the Charter, each nation agreed, in Article 2 paragraph 3,
     to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a
manner that international peace,
     and security, and justice, are not endangered."
and in Article 2 paragraph 4:
     to "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of
force against the territorial
     integrity or political independence of any member of state, or in any
other manner inconsistent
     with the pruposes of the United Nations."
By ratifying Chapter VI, on the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, in Article
33, each state agreed that:
          "The party to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to
endanger the maintenance
          of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a
solution by negotiation, inquiry,
          mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort
to regional agencies or
          arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice."

U.S./NATO began bombing Yugoslavia on March 24. On April 29, the government
of Yugoslavia filed
a case in the International Court of Justice, (also known as the World
Court):    1)  asking the Court to
order an end to the bombings immediately as a Provisional Measure, (what we
would call an injunction);
 2) seeking a full trial of the facts and for appropriate relief, including
compensation for the damage due
to the bombing.

The Facts:
Yugoslavia alleged that the U.S., "together with the Governments of other
Member States of NATO, took
part in the acts of use of force against" Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia listed
"both military and civilian targets
[that] have come under attack during the bombings, causing many casualties.
The document then lists:
      18 cities that the U.S./NATO bombed, killing "about 1,000 civilians,
including 19 children, ..."
     (The names of many of the dead are listed.)
      More than 4,500 sustained serious injuries).
     Enormous damage to 200 schools,
     16 hospitals and health care centers,
     23 TV transmitters,
     9 cultural monuments and 18 places of worship,
     the destruction of 26 bridges,
     damage to 12 bridges;
     8 airports;
     13 roads and bus stations,
     16 railway lines, and
     51 factories and industrial facilities, including a pharmaceutical
company, automobile factory, 18
     oil refineries and a warhouse storing raw materials and chemicals
intended for oil and chemical
     industry,
     5 agricultural complexes,, forest firest destroyed 25 hectares of farm
land, and pubic housing
     facilities for tens of thousands of people were also destroyed.
resulting in serious health and
     environmental damage.

The Law:
As the legal basis for its claims, Yugoslavia cites the obligations not to
use force against another State and
not to intervene in its internal affairs in the Charter, the provisions of
the Geneva Convention of 1949 and
of the Additional Protocol No. 1 of 1977 on the Protection of Civilians and
Civilian Objects in Time of
War, the 1948 Convention on Free Navigation on the Danube, the International
Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, and the
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Yugoslavia further points out
that the activities of the States involved are "contrary to Article 53,
paragraph 1, of the Charter of the
United Nations, which requires Security Council approval of actions by
regional agencies.

The procedures:
     When a nation is sued in the World Court and no judge from that nation
is one of the 15
     permanent judges on the Court, a judge from that nation is selected by
that nation and may sit with
     the 15 judges. In this case, that means that judges from five NATO
states are sitting specially with
     the 15 regular judges.
     Because the President of the Court is now from the U.S., one of the
defendants in the suit, the
     Vice President is presiding over this case, Judge Weeramantry. He is
from Sri Lanka and  wrote
     a highly-respected, lengthy dissent in the case on the Legality or
Illegality of Nuclear Weapons,
     saying that the law requires an absolute, clear-cut Court opinion that
such weapons are illegal.
     In arguing that Yugoslavia had not presented sufficient "real evidence"
to support its allegation
     that its rights under the genocide convention had been violated, the
U.S. lawyer cited the case that
     Nicaragua had filed against the U.S. for minimng its harbor and quoted
the World Court's nothing
     "that the Applicant in that case had presented a number of items of
evidence of various types in
     support of its charges." In that case, of course, the Court did reject
the U.S. assertion that the
     Court had no jurisdiction and rejected the U.S. objection to
provisional measures, which the Court
     did issue. The U.S. did stop mining the harbors after the Court's
action, although the U.S. never
     admitted that it took this step because of or as a result of the Court
order. But this is perhaps the
     first time the U.S. has cited Nicaragua v. U.S. to bolster an argument,
particularly since the U.S.
     had rejected Nicaragua's claim that the U.S. had violated the law by
mining the harbor.

      Actually, the U.S. had been worried about ratifying the Genocide
Convention, so the U.S. added
     a formal "Understanding" that "acts in the course of armed conflicts
committed without the
     specific intent required by Article II are not sufficient to constitute
genocide as defined by this
     Convention." In other words, the U.S. military convinced the U.S.
civilian government to permit
     it to take actions that might otherwise be construed as genocide
without facing that charge.

The Official U.S. Response to the charges by Yugoslavia:
Michael J. Matheson, Deputy Legal Adviser to the Department of  State said:
     "United States and NATO actions are conventional military operations
that do not, by any stretch of
     imagination, have as their objective the destrubtion of any such group,
in whole or in part."
     [¶ 3.9 in Verbatim report of proceedings at http://www.icj-cij.org  for
11 May 99.]

However, these "conventional military operations" are not available to any
other nation on the planet because they
cost too much money.

Yugoslavia asserted "that NATO operations were directed at imposing harmful
conditions of life on the Yugoslav
nation as a whole through attacks on its electric power system and the use
of ammunition containing depleted
uranium. The suggestion was made that such operations imply intent to
destroy a nationa group. With respect,
if this was really intended as an explanation of the charge of genocide, it
is simply preposterous.
     "Proportionate attacks on infrastructure targets, such as electric
power systems, that contribute
     to the military effort are common aspects of modern warfare and can in
no way be treated as
     genocide. Similarly, munitions containing depleted uranium are standard
weapons in the United
     States inventory for use against armoured vehicles, and their use in no
way implies genocidal
     intent."  ¶ 3.11

     In its defense against the suit, the attorney for the U.S. said:
      "In the current case, no credible evidence has been presented that
would support any concern that the
     United States or other NATO countries have committeed or would commit
genocide in the Federal
     Republic of Yugoslavia."   ¶ 3.13

STEPS WE NEED TO TAKE TODAY AND TOMORROW:
     Convince the U.S. Government to stop bombing Yugoslavia.
     Convince the U.S. and Yugoslavia and every other nation involved to
stop human rights violations.
     Convince the U.S. to stop the policy of using depleted uranium in armed
conflict.
     Remember: U.S. did stop mining harbors in Nicaragua after Nicaragua
sued U.S. in World Court.
     Convince the U.S. to start obeying the UN Charter: by not using force,
by  not attacking, and by using
     peacekeeping forces.
     Convince the U.S. to take the problem to UN Security Council and all
relevant UN organs and
     specialized agencies.
     Suggest that the U.S. and NATO countries file charges of human rights
abuses against Yugoslavia in
     the World Court.
     Convince the U.S. to be prepared to obey all opinions of the World
Court in Yugoslavia v. U.S., et al.(argued May 10-12)
     Study and Support Cong. Campbell, et al v. Clinton (in federal District
Court in D.C.) seeking declaratory
     relief against war without vote of Congress and requiring compliance
with War Powers Act.
     Convince the Media to cover all sides accurately, in Kosovo,
Yugoslavia, Montenegro, U.S.
     demonstrations, etc.
     Work to close down the CIA and DOD and NATO, which we did without for
the first 150 years of this
     country, and really work for peace.

For more material, speakers, updates:
MEIKLEJOHN CIVIL LIBERTIES INSTITUTE, Box 673, Berkeley, CA 94701-0673,
mcli@xxxxxxx
510) 848-0599  FAX 510) 848-6008