Letter: US missile attacks

Gabriel Carlyle
Sunday 23 August 1998 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Conor Cruise O'Brien says that "there is nothing in the [UN] Charter to prevent any power from acting unilaterally, or in concert with others, if it considers its vital interests are at stake" ("At least the Cold War kept the terrorists at bay", 22 August).

The Charter states that "the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42," which detail the preferred "measures not involving the use of armed force" and permit the Security Council to take further action if it finds such measures inadequate.

The only exception is Article 51, which permits the "right of individual or collective self-defence" against "armed attack ... until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security". Under international law, such self-defence is authorised only when its necessity is instant, overwhelming, leaving no moment for deliberation.

Citing these facts in the wake of the June 1993 missile strikes on Iraq (which killed eight civilians) Alfred Rubin, a specialist on international law, observed that "the law of self-defence has nothing to do with retaliation or reprisals".

Were Cuba to strafe Miami with Libyan support in defence of its "vital interests" I think Mr O'Brien's response would be different.

GABRIEL CARLYLE

Magdalen College

Oxford

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in