“Whether or not recognized, acknowledged, or asserted, 9/11 attack and the response thereto brought forth a nascent legal regime that will alter the way nation states apply the rule of law in combating terrorism,” William K. Lietzau, in his research, Old Laws, New Wars: Jus ad Bellum in an Age of Terrorism.
The perfection of the world is created with reasons and purpose consistent to a universal rule, which has the foundation of upholding the basic human rights in its entirety…so must in apprehending flaws…
The War on Terror
On September 11, 2001, America entered into an era of PROFOUND CHANGE!
The world was frozen by horror when the World Trade Center building (the Twin Tower) in Lower Manhattan, New York collapsed in the morning of September 11, 2001. The tragedy that America declared it as “Terrorism Attack” – intended and deliberate!
Lead by America, the world is educated of the terms “terror”, “terrorism”, and most importantly the name of “Osama bin Laden” – who claimed to be the mastermind of the attack. Which, in turn, in my view is a bright confession of Osama to the world that America is equally destructible among other nations…
Consequently, America boldly defined the concept of terrorism and conditioned the world raw to accept WAR AGAINST IT! Whether or not generally accepted, the 9/11 attack and America’s response thereto brought forth a nascent legal landscape, structure, and rule that will alter the way nation states apply the guidelines and the rule of law in fighting against terrorism.
The world, however, was divided… While some expressed their rage to its deepest possible extent, others expressed their unification in the name of justice, peace, and worst, in the name of alliance. The latter is obviously expressed through synchronization and agreement to the international laws as defender for the preservation of life, liberty, and the sanctity to uphold peace and prosperity… which in turn, in my view, is just only their way of expressing their viral defense mechanism from the true feeling of being frightened to become America’s subject on the declared war against terrorism.
Could this be another America’s strategy to cow the world through aggression? I mean collaboration?
In effect from America’s lead to combat terrorists, several organizations and countries like:
- Abu Nidal Organization, Palistine Liberation Front, etc. in Gaza and in the West Bank;
- Ansar al-Islam, Hezbollah, etc. in Iraq and Lebanon;
- al-Qaeda, etc. in Saudi Arabia, and others are BRANDED AS TERRORISTS! (Source: Wikipedia.org)
These organizations and countries are obviously vocal in expressing opposition to America’s strategic imperialism.
Moreover, these organizations and countries have declared by America as initiator, leader, and home of terrorists. The world, most obviously accepted it. In my view, I called this declaration as MASSIVE PERSUASION – a kind term for deliberate brainwashing!
The Vindication Through Aggression
May 1, 2011, United States President Barack Obama announced the death of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Americans, with alacrity, “shindig” out in the streets in barely midnight and shouted out of joy and laughter. Pandemonium, like the 9/11 tragedy broke out and infected the whole America in celebrating THEIR success against al-Qaeda.
That time, the world again was divided… Some expressed joy and fulfillment; others expressed hatred and pity; few expressed sentiments on the ground of ethical and legal issues, and the rest expressed…simply NOTHING…
Blatant Issues Continue…
While America has gaining back the confidence of her citizens and the world at-large by killing successfully Osama bin Laden, ethical and legal issues are sacrificed, neglected, and junked OUTRIGHT for the sake of justice – a safe term for AMERICA’S GREEDY REVENGE!
Way back, Bush administration called for comprehensive immigration reforms to address America’s tight security measure quick after the 9/11 attack. This implementation has intensified making it pressing to the basic rights of the immigrants. Outright moral degradation of immigrant workers forced them to migrate back to their homelands effecting havoc to their future. Some were jailed, tortured, and stripped of basic rights as HUMAN BEING.
Below are prisoners’ and victims’ testimonies on their plight in America as a consequence of America’s stringent or to legally say, “discriminative actions against immigrants” (Source: http://restorefairness.org):
Can we blame America for her actions after 9/11 attack, after all? Yes, in two ways:
- America is serious in their fight against terrorism “with impunity” – that is with harsh reprisals, militaristic, and inconsiderate of the basic human rights;
- Another, America is folding her doors to exclusivity – that is, America is for Americans (“ostensibly for Whites!”) only.
Well, from the words of Chris Hedges, “There could be dark side of American nationalism…the flip side of it is always RACISM, it’s about self-exaltation and the denigration of the other.”
That is AMERICA – the land of free…a serious, yet conservative mockery!
When we are supposedly asked to draw conclusion from America’s implemented policies, especially in the policy to fight against terrorism, America’s democracy is FARCE! Her freedom and her Constitution do not serve well to the common good of her people and to the people outside her sovereignty, INSTEAD, her aspirations and principles serve only to the (double-crosser) leaders, the (in) famous, the (collaborators) influential, and the (cowed) allies – in which by similarity is a culture that has long been practiced in the Philippine political system!
In America’s fight against terrorism, the penultimate losers were common people, civilians, weak nations, oppositions/competitors, and the sovereignty of a nation…
These aspects are double-crossed; since the term of the game is to serve justice and that justice MUST be served…according to the rule of law.
However, what had happened is an outright breach of international treaties on human rights and the so-called standard rules and procedures on engagement! Yet, who cares when the subject is classified as top-rated terrorist all over the world?
Now, in my standard rule of inquiry, are terrorists human? If not, they are animals, of course! Then ethical and legal issues on this ground must be null and void…
However, terrorists are humans; born with rights and equality and are entitled of the basic human rights as guaranteed in every Constitution in every sovereign state.
Furthermore, another rule of inquiry is how human beings become terrorists?
Now, this is an antagonistic view that humans are born with good nature and character, basically or essentially. This is antagonistic in the view of the theory of survival of the fittest where humans are interpreted as player, fighter, and rational…rational to think of bad things that detrimental to others…
Maybe, this is how America sees things in one perspective, and the other one maybe conditional, planned, and purposive. Either of the two, America has her own reasons in accordance with her strategic plans to protect herself and maybe the world, too.
But in my several research works and readings, terrorism is not an act to harm without a sound cause. Very opposite to what America and other leaders of the world define terrorism as an act of doing harm purposively (that is with self-interest) that effected terror to people and nations at-large.
Logically, what made the bullet out of its shell is because of the trigger that has pulled out. The same way that made terrorism exists!
And I tell you, the wickedness of one can trigger the wickedness of the other, and mostly, the other exceeds to the limit. I am talking about the extent impact or the massive effect when one has been already fed up by the wickedness of one – and this one might be America…
The 9/11 attack might be the effect of the wickedness of America that triggered other nations or some organizations that are victims of American hegemony in the West, in the East, in the South and in the up North and all over the world!
Now, this may conclude to an uphill argument that the victims and the perpetrators are both should be declared terrorists, and the theory of survival of the fittest is true and evident; thus America and terrorism should be punished under circumstances in the rule of law. Yet, the latter was evidently and ostensibly suffered the punishment that is very much UNBEARABLE!
In effect, America became a HERO and JUST!
Implication on Osama bin Laden’s Demise
Osama bin Laden’s death could be the best example of event of how strong and willed America in her pursuit to attack barriers that are blocking on her way to world domination through imperialism in the pretext of declaring war against terrorism.
On the other side of the world, bin Laden’s death is a great loss; others considered it paid and that justice have been served. Yet, many asked and questioned the legality and the ethical issues America has carried out to kill Osama “with impunity”, or with brutality, or with barbarity and worst without respect to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to the International Human Rights Law!
Much has been said about Osama bin Laden’s death, and that precisely about the legality of America’s military intelligence unit actions that killed Osama most precisely, UNARMED.
As Lietzau argues (Old Laws, New Wars: Jus ad Bellum II, par. 4-5), consistent with United Nations Charter on jus ad bellum concepts, let me summarize: (1) member states shall settle and carry out their international disputes by peaceful means; (2) member states shall be guided not to endanger international peace and security in carrying out the former;* (3) member states shall refrain from the threat or use of force against other states.**
On the other hand, under the above charter paradigm, there shall only two circumstances when the use of force may be LAWFUL. Firstly, that was authorized by the Security Council (Chapter VII, United Nations Charter); secondly, when the situation of engagement obliges to use right to self-defense.***(Lietzau’s Old Laws, New Wars: Jus ad Bellum…II, par. 4-5)
However, the above charter’s provisions (the lawful use of force clause) emphasized in the Article 39 of the Charter provides 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 measures to be undertaken in accordance with the Articles 41 and 42. If all measures not involving the use of armed force are inadequate, the Security Council may take military actions as may be necessary.
NOW, America must have fair, in-depth analysis, and thorough historical review of international laws to demand recognition of their invasive action against Pakistan’s sovereignty just only to serve justice by killing Osama bin Laden brutally in Abbottabad, Pakistan!
Moreover, there was an extreme opposition and call for not recognizing as self-defense (on the part of America in killing Osama if and only if America pursue their defense on the right to self-defense as emphasized in the United Nations Charter) on what America’s military team has done in Pakistan.
More accurately, the rest of the world claimed the action as intent breach of sovereignty and deliberate neglect of the International Human Rights Law and of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights!
NOW, allow me to leave this inquisitorial line and let me answer this BOLD:
Was America lawful in killing Osama bin Laden? Or in other words, should human rights prevail in fighting against terrorism?
America, since then, was notorious of being unlawful and outright violator of several international treaties especially on the provisions of human rights and sovereignty. The international, universal rule of engagement to capture enemy of the states, terrorists, and the likes was outrightly violated! The International Human Rights Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights were deliberately neglected! Finally, America impunemente,**** breached the sanctity of sovereignty just only to serve her interest!
Men are created equal –- the bedrock principle of democracy and independence…
Terrorists are men…human being to be exact but of different brand. The branding that resulted from inequities and abuses that may in turn result to become enemy of the state…
Moreover, terrorists have lives to live, aspirations and independence to enjoy, and yet have the ire from punishment to serve for. They have human rights as well! They are criminals in its bold shades yet saints in its principles to protect and defend what are THEIRS!
The perfection of the world is created with reasons and purpose consistent to a universal rule that has the foundation of upholding the basic human rights in its entirety…so must in apprehending flaws…
Bottom line, America and Pakistan SHALL EXPLAIN AND PAY FOR THEIR INCONSISTENT, DRAMATIC, SELF-RULED ACTIONS, and the world SHALL NOT JUST “LISTEN”!
POLL QUESTION: Amid the existence of the International Human Rights Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights…
(Photo from: icjcanada.org)
Suggested further readings:
- “Death of Osama bin Laden: Human Rights Must be Respected in the Fight Against Terrorism” by fidh
- “Osama bin Laden’s Demise…” by The International Jurist
- “Was It Right to Kill Bin Laden?” by Arthur Caplan, Ph.D., msnbc.com
- “Osama bin Laden’s Death…” by Owen Bowcott, Legal Affairs Correspondent. guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 May 2011 20.13 BST
- “Restore Fairness…” by restorefairness.org
- “Osama’s Death… “ by The Express Tribune
- Al Qaeda calls for SEAL author’s death (cbsnews.com)
- Right-wing extremist terrorism more dangerous than al Qaeda? (security.blogs.cnn.com)
- ‘Brigades of Osama bin Laden’ forms in the West Bank (longwarjournal.org)
- The “War On Terror” Has Changed (ritholtz.com)
- The Life and Death of Osama Bin Laden | A Timeline (burialinsurance.org)
- Al-CIA-duh exposed! (m911t.blogspot.com)
*Article 2 (3), United Nations Charter (http://www.mpil.de/shared/data/pdf/pdfmpunyb/lietzau_8.pdf)
**Article 2 (4), United Nations Charter (http://www.mpil.de/shared/data/pdf/pdfmpunyb/lietzau_8.pdf)
***Article 42 and 51, United Nations Charter (http://www.mpil.de/shared/data/pdf/pdfmpunyb/lietzau_8.pdf)