Iraq war allies lash out at Annan

[cal04]

Key states who joined the US-led invasion of Iraq have rejected claims by the United Nations Secretary-General that the war was illegal.
Kofi Annan told the BBC the decision to take action in Iraq contravened the UN charter and should have been made by the Security Council, not unilaterally. But Australia's Prime Minister John Howard said it was entirely valid. And a former Bush administration aide, Randy Scheunemann, branded Mr Annan's comments "outrageous". The UK and Japanese governments also responded sharply. 'Political interference'

Mr Howard, fighting a cliffhanger re-election battle, insisted the invasion was legal. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal. Labelling the international body "paralysed", he said it was incapable of dealing with international crises. "The legal advice we had - and I tabled it at the time - was that the action was entirely valid in international law terms," he said. Randy Scheunemann, a former advisor to the US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, accused Mr Annan of trying to influence the outcome of the forthcoming US presidential election. "I think it is outrageous for the Secretary-General, who ultimately works for the member states, to try and supplant his judgement for the judgement of the member states," he told the BBC.

"To do this 51 days before an American election reeks of political interference," Randy Scheunemann said. He said the UN's failure to act in Sudan, and in other areas around the world, was proving that effective multilateralism may be a contradiction in terms.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661736.stm


Britain on Thursday rejected a claim by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan that the U.S.-led Iraq war was "illegal" because Washington and its coalition allies never got Security Council backing for the invasion. Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, reminded reporters that Britain's attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, had found before the war that Britain was acting legally, citing three U.N. resolutions justified the use of force against Iraq.
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBE25CV6ZD.html

[Just Me]

1. Yup,...well,...they can't handle the truth,...

,...because the truth isn't politically expedient for them.

[Briar]

2. Bush knows it is safe to diss the UN

since after years of propaganda a large number of Americans are prepared to believe all sorts of "World Government" crap about it. So the one hope of keeping the US in line with international law has been effectively neutralised.

[DarkPhenyx]

3. I believe the judgment of the Member States was...

...that the invasion of Iraq was not justified and should not have happened. It was Bush who supplanted his judgment for theirs. Not Annan.

[Mika]

4. How long before a coalition is formed against the USA?

A coalition of the willing, too.

[Bridget Burke]

8. If Bush is actually legally elected this time--

The rest of the world may finally give up on the USA. They know the last election was stolen & many have been giving the American people the benefit of the doubt.

[sniffa]

5. but what does tonga think?

i'd hate to get on the bad side of tonga.

[thebigidea]

6. reeks of political interference?

What's that stupid bullshit about? The UN has to sit down and shut up because of our election?

[leftchick]

7. allies? What allies?

NZ snuck out in the dark of night last night. Who is left besides the poodle?

[David__77]

9. He should have said this BEFORE it happened!

Instead, he was a flunkey for neo-colonialism. It's plain and simple. He abetted aggression against a sovereign nation. Now he's trying to salvage his reputation before global public opinion.

[xchrom]

10. indeed!