Connect With Us on Twitter
For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.
Re "The Duty to Protect, Still Urgent" (Op-Ed, Sept. 14):
Prof. Michael Ignatieff's argument fails to persuade.
First, it doesn't apply to the Syria case, since President Obama's purpose was to punish President Bashar al-Assad for an attack that had already happened, rather than "protect" victims of continuing chemical warfare.
Second, the protect doctrine would have us abandon the rule of law. Whatever its shortcomings, the United Nations is an expression of the international community, the ultimate source of international law. To accord to the United States or to any nation the right to determine when to use force strikes me as a dangerous proposition. We need to strengthen the United Nations, not weaken it further.
Third, Professor Ignatieff's argument rests on the notion of American exceptionalism, a belief that we Americans know better than anyone else how and when to attack unilaterally. Who has given the United States the right to police the world?
Lastly, Syria is horrible, but so are many other global spots, past and present. How can a "responsibility to protect" principle be implemented on a consistent basis?
L. MICHAEL HAGER
Eastham, Mass., Sept. 15, 2013
The writer is co-founder and former director general of the International Development Law Organization in Rome.
To the Editor:
Michael Ignatieff worries that his version of the responsibility to protect — known as R2P — is facing a crisis of "legitimacy." His notion of R2P asserts a right to violate United Nations Charter rules prohibiting resort to force for certain humanitarian purposes.
In 2005, United Nations members rejected this assertion. The members reached the decision after the hard lessons of the 2003 Iraq invasion, an unlawful use of force that Mr. Ignatieff initially supported. United Nations members renewed the consensus that the measure of international legitimacy is international legality.
R2P has, unfortunately, distracted academics from thinking creatively about how to enforce international norms like the chemical weapons ban without resort to unlawful war. Popular pressure has forced our leaders to look for those solutions in the Syria crisis and, one hopes, beyond.
MARY ELLEN O'CONNELL
South Bend, Ind., Sept. 14, 2013
The writer is a professor of international law at the University of Notre Dame.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Letters: Deciding When to Use Force for Humane Reasons
Dengan url
http://opinimasyarakota.blogspot.com/2013/09/letters-deciding-when-to-use-force-for.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Letters: Deciding When to Use Force for Humane Reasons
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Letters: Deciding When to Use Force for Humane Reasons
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar