02 Jun Remember the Global War on Terror? U.S. Navy Shells Somalia
Speaking of “unpeaceful” nations, the U.S. Navy has apparently bombarded a remote, mountainous village in Somalia where Islamic militants had set up a base.
As an international legal matter, I believe the U.S. intervention is unproblematic because it was made in cooperation with Somali authorities (this assumes that the “Somali authorities” in question are actually in charge). But maybe I’m wrong as the comments to Duncan’s earlier post on this issue (see below) suggest.
As a domestic legal matter, this is a bit trickier, because it must largely rely on the September 11 Resolution authorizing the use of military force against any Al Qaeda affiliated forces. This is the so-called “Global War on Terror” that exists beyond Afghanistan and Iraq. I assume that is the legal case here (and I somehow doubt that anyone in the U.S. Congress will complain).
Even more important. Who really cares? Even if it were the most “illegal” act in internaltional “law” (such as it is) then who would enforce it? Don’t get me wrong — it is an interesting intellectual exercise, but has almost no utility in the practical world of the GWOT or the long war or whatever it’s called now. Zounds! I hope this doesn’t knock us down to 97 on the unpeaceful list!
This is only the latest example of egregious disregard for innocent lives in Somalia on the part of the United Snakes. Those of you who foolishly depend solely on the corporate-owned media for their information may not be aware of the many such innocent people who have been slaughtered by U.S. helicopter gunships in southern Somalia this year alone. Only one example is that of about a month ago when one of their gunships murdered a group of nomads who were warming themselves by their fire in the evening.
Of course no one in Congress will complain, save perhaps two or three; they’re all spineless traitors who are enabling this Global War OF Terror and continuing to feed, fuel and empower Nemesis (Goddess of Revenge; See Chalmers Johnson’s excellent book by the same title) with every village we bombard and every group of nomads we massacre. Shame on you, America. You, like Israel, are digging our own grave.
Given the Clinton 1998 naval cruise missile attack on Afghanistan and Sudan, and the 1983 Naval artillery support of US and Lebanese army forces in Lebanon, it is likely that an operation such as this is at the discretion of the President. The AUMF provides additional legal support to any attack on al Qaeda forces anywhere in the world and satisfies in its text any requirement of the War Powers act.
Thankyou for this, Mr. Gilbert. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m virtually certain you are correct regarding presidential authority here.
As is now well known, in Afghanistan the United Snakes targeted literally hundreds of civilian villages and sites where al Qaeda or the Taliban might be located and, as the New York Times finally acknowledged, many civilians died when airstrikes hit “precisely the target they were aimed at…because in eagerness to kill Qaeda and Taliban fighters, Americans did not carefully distinguish between civilian and military targets” (Dexter Filkins, “Flaws in U.S. Air War Left Hundreds of Civilian Dead,” NYT, July 21, 2002). Marc Herold has provided compelling evidence in support of this targeting claim and his minimum estimate of civilians killed directly by U.S. bombs is some 3,100. (“Dead Afghan Civilians: Disrobing the Non-Counters”. http://www.cursor.org/stories/noncounters.htm
Many thousands more were injured or traumatized and still further thousands died of hunger, disease, and cold in refugee camps to which they fled from bombed villages.
Regardless of the War Powers Act, these are international crimes, both in Afghanistan and Sudan and in Somalia, for which the responsible parties must be held accountable.
Even more important. Who really cares? Even if it were the most “illegal” act in internaltional “law” (such as it is) then who would enforce it? Don’t get me wrong — it is an interesting intellectual exercise, but has almost no utility in the practical world of the GWOT or the long war or whatever it’s called now. Zounds! I hope this doesn’t knock us down to 97 on the unpeaceful list!
I would generally agree, but seeing as this is an International Law blog, the legality is actually relevant to this discussion.
Regardless of the War Powers Act, these are international crimes, both in Afghanistan and Sudan and in Somalia, for which the responsible parties must be held accountable.
Perhaps you’d care to make the legal case for the war crimes? You are aware that merely killing civilians as collateral is not a crime, right?