User:Inclusionist/Nicaragua vs. US
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Understanding, responding to, and preventing terrorism
The United States assistance to the contras in Nicaragua, condemned by the International Court of Justice in Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. US.), Merits Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, could be considered State-sponsored terrorism.
Cohn, Marjorie Understanding, responding to, and preventing terrorism. Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ) March 22, 2002, Pg. 25
[edit] UN
See also the case concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, in which the International Court of Justice acknowledged the customary international law quality and characteristics of this instrument (paras. 188, 191-192). Furthermore, while terrorism was not the focus of the proceedings before it, some of the conclusions reached by the Court are very relevant, albeit indirectly, to the issue of State-sponsorship of terrorism. For example, the Court held that the United States by its assisting the contras, where its activities involved a threat or use of force, and by “training, arming, equipping, financing and supplying the contra forces or otherwise encouraging, supporting and aiding military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua”, had violated its customary international law obligations not to use force against another State and not to intervene in the affairs of another State (paras. 228, 238 and 292).
http://www.hri.ca/forthereCord2001/documentation/commission/e-cn4-sub2-2001-31.htm#_ednref84
[edit] nicaragua urges u.s. to comply with world court judgment
The Xinhua General Overseas News Service
OCTOBER 21, 1986, TUESDAY
nicaragua today urged the united states to renounce its policies against the country in accordance with a ruling of the international court of justice. nicaraguan foreign minister miguel d'descoto brockmann made the demand at an urgent meeting of the u.n. security council, which coincided with a trial in managua of american flier eugene hasenfus who was captured after his plane was shot down inside the country. the urgent meeting of the security council was called at the request of nicaragua to consider the united states' failure to comply with the judgment of the international court of justice concerning "military and paramilitary activities in and against nicaragua." the nicaraguan foreign minister told the meeting that for more than five years, the united states has been waging a war of aggression against nicaragua. the case of hasenfus provides fresh proof of u.s. government involvement in support of the nicaraguan anti-government forces, he said. he said the reagan administration was clearly violating the ruling of the international court of justice, which was made public on june 27, 1986, on the basis of the legal proceedings filed by nicaragua against the u.s. policy of force and intervention against nicaragua. according to the ruling, the united states, "by training, arming, equipping, and aiding military and paramilitary activities in and against nicaragua," "has acted, against the republic of nicaragua, in breach of its obligation under customary international law not to intervene in the affairs of another state." the united states "is under a duty immediately to cease and to refrain from all such acts as may constitute breaches of the foregoing legal obligations," the ruling says. the nicaraguan foreign minister denounced the reagan administration for mining nicaraguan ports in 1984, launching armed attacks against nicaraguan territory, introducing a trade embargo against the country, and supporting the nicaraguan rebels with a 100-million-dollar aid. "the reagan administration has become the first and sole government in history to receive the shameful honor of being condemned by the international court of justice for promoting and encouraging terrorism," he said. the meeting adjourned after hearing the nicaraguan foreign minister's statement.
[edit] Terrorism & International Law
The judgement of the International Court in the case of Nicaragua v United States is a striking example of how relevant subject-matter can be dealt without invocation of "terrorism". In that case many of the claims advanced by Nicaragua against the United States were of a category frequently included in the concept of "terorism". Thus, among other things, Nicaragau charged that the United States was "recruiting, training, arming, financing, supplying and otherwise encouraging, supporting, aiding and directing military and parlimary actions in and against Nicaragua..." and "killing, wounding and kidnapping citizens of Nicaragua"...Almost the only reference to terrorism is in the factual references to US legislation whereby aid was conditional upon the recipient country not "aiding, abetting or supporting acts of violence or terrorism in other countries."
Terrorism & International Law ISBN 0415116066 Publisher: Routledge (UK) Higgins Publication Date: Jan 24, 1997 p. 20
[edit] Forum on the American Invasion of Iraq
The UN’s General Assembly Resolution 3314 (1974:143) described“the first use of armed force” by one state against another as “primafacie evidence of an act of aggression,” which it defined as “the invasionor attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of anotherState, or any [resulting] military occupation, however temporary.” In 1986, the International Court of Justice in The Hague (the “WorldCourt”) declared this definition to be customary international law, inits 12–3 decision in Nicaragua v. US. This was the same decision inwhich the World Court found the United States guilty of employing“the unlawful use of force”—that is, terrorism.
INTERVENTION SYMPOSIUM
Forum on the American Invasion of Iraq
Organizer: Gearóid Ó Tuathail (Gerard Toal)
“Collateral Damage” from Cambodia to Iraq
Ben Kiernan
Department of History, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA;
ben.kiernan@yale.edu
p. 4
