25.03.2013 Views

Noam Chomsky - Turning the Tide U.S. intervention in

Noam Chomsky - Turning the Tide U.S. intervention in

Noam Chomsky - Turning the Tide U.S. intervention in

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Patterns of Intervention<br />

Classics <strong>in</strong> Politics: <strong>Turn<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Tide</strong> <strong>Noam</strong> <strong>Chomsky</strong><br />

144<br />

about be<strong>in</strong>g attacked” to <strong>the</strong> UN and OAS, “yet, he said, nei<strong>the</strong>r El<br />

Salvador nor <strong>the</strong> United States has moved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> OAS or <strong>the</strong> U.N. to<br />

formally charge Nicaragua with aggression”; <strong>the</strong> US has not even<br />

notified <strong>the</strong> Security Council of warlike measures such as <strong>the</strong> m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g of<br />

Nicaraguan waters, which it claimed fell under “self-defense” when <strong>the</strong><br />

facts were exposed, <strong>in</strong> explicit violation of <strong>the</strong> Supreme Law of <strong>the</strong> Land,<br />

which requires that measures taken <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> exercise of <strong>the</strong> right of selfdefense<br />

shall be “immediately reported to <strong>the</strong> Security Council” (UN<br />

Charter, Article 51). 10 Nor is <strong>the</strong> US will<strong>in</strong>g to permit <strong>the</strong> World Court to<br />

hear its claims <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case brought aga<strong>in</strong>st it, s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> this forum too <strong>the</strong><br />

US charge of armed attack would simply elicit ridicule.<br />

The Rule of Law, however, does not apply to <strong>the</strong> US and its clients,<br />

or <strong>the</strong> USSR, or o<strong>the</strong>r violent powers that observe only <strong>the</strong> Rule of<br />

Force. 11<br />

The US refusal to accept <strong>the</strong> jurisdiction of <strong>the</strong> International Court of<br />

Justice <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> matter of <strong>the</strong> Nicaraguan charges, unanimously rejected<br />

by <strong>the</strong> Court apart from <strong>the</strong> US representative, aroused much criticism.<br />

The American Society of International Law denounced it<br />

“overwhelm<strong>in</strong>gly” <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> first such action <strong>in</strong> its 78-year history. Their<br />

position is understandable. When <strong>the</strong> US government accepted <strong>the</strong><br />

compulsory jurisdiction of <strong>the</strong> Court <strong>in</strong> 1946, <strong>the</strong> Senate observed that<br />

<strong>the</strong> force of that commitment “is that of a treaty” and entailed “a<br />

renunciation of any <strong>in</strong>tention to withdraw our obligation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> face of a<br />

threatened legal action.” A six-month notice was required “to term<strong>in</strong>ate<br />

this declaration,” a commitment pla<strong>in</strong>ly violated when <strong>the</strong> Reagan<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istration, three days before Nicaragua’s compla<strong>in</strong>t was filed,<br />

attempted to modify <strong>the</strong> 1946 declaration so as to exclude “disputes<br />

with any Central American states or aris<strong>in</strong>g out of or relat<strong>in</strong>g to events <strong>in</strong><br />

Central America.” 12<br />

The Reagan Adm<strong>in</strong>istration was also sharply criticized by Senator

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!