Browsing by Author "Malinowski, Marek M."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item AMERYKAŃSKA OPERACJA MILITARNA W AFGANISTANIE A PRAWO PAŃSTWA DO SAMOOBRONY(Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM, 2006) Malinowski, Marek M.The US military operation “Enduring Freedom” in Afghanistan being as a reaction to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 had not, contrary to the later invasion of Iraq in March 2003, triggered off such a heated political and legal debate as the one latter one. Because of its close proximity to the terrorist attacks, the political world and international societies showed more understanding of the reasons for using a military force in the operation in Afghanistan which was, inter alia, directed against certain alleged perpetrators, or named terrorists, allegedly funding rescue in Afghanistan. It was also directed against the Talib regime which had allowed the Afghan territory to be used as a terrorist base, and which had refused the submit to the UN Security Council’s request to deport Osama bin Laden and other terrorist suspects. The US government justified its military intervention referring to the inalienable right of each state to defend its sovereignty, and indeed, the US sovereignty was violated in the September 2001 attack on the World Trade Centre. This justification, however, is not free from a number of serious doubts as to the lawfulness or legality of that act and its compatibility with the common practice of international law regarding the conditions for its application. In particular, the US government had failed to prove in a sufficient manner that the military act was really a necessary measure to be taken by the state to defend its sovereignty, or whether it was taken in a state of emergency, in the absence of other available measures, remedies or time given for lengthy deliberations. Besides, it is also doubtful whether the military operation had indeed been kept to the absolute minimum level and stayed within that limit. Its target were, after all, not only the remote and technically modest Al-kaida training bases, but also the military installations of the de facto Afghan government and some other strategic goals not at all in the terrorists’ hands. What was more, the US had not even attempted to procure from the UN a resolution available under article 42 of the UN Chart calling for the restoration of international peace and security. Instead, it decided upon a unilateral military operation. It may be therefore assumed that the main reason for the launching of the “Enduring Freedom" operation was, on the one hand, taking a revenge for the barbaric attack on the US and, on the other, a political will to overthrow the government which, apart from being hostile to the US. supported the anti-US terrorist movement (the next step of this political philosophy being the attack on Iraq).Item INTERWENCJA „SIŁ MIĘDZYNARODOWYCH” W IRAKU W ŚWIETLE PRAWA MIĘDZYNARODOWEGO(Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM, 2004) Malinowski, Marek M.Use of armed forces against territorial integrity and political independence of any state is deemed to be an act of aggression according to the contemporary international law. The UN Charter forbids on principle resorting to violence in international relations, viewing it as a basis for maintaining international peace and security. All conflicts that lead to the use of force ought to be governed by the regime arising from the Charter, which stipulates exceptions from the general prohibition. The military action taken by the United States, the United Kingdom and some other states in Iraq and the international situation arising as a result belong to one of the most sensitive political problems of the beginning of the 21-st century. Intensive debates that have taken place over the last two years, especially massive demonstrations of the intervention opponents, have concentrated mainly on political, moral and ideological issues. The legal debate was marginal and dominated by articulation of interests or convictions. The government of the Republic of Poland has firmly endorsed the US policy, which resulted in an open conflict with Poland’s European allies. Legal arguments presented by the intervention enthusiasts, including the Polish government, were extremely unconvincing and seem to have been developed ad hoc as a result of a demand for legal justification to realize political interests. The action carried out in Iraq backed by UN Security Council Resolution 1441 did not fulfill the requirements of justified military action in compliance with chapter 7 of the UN Charter, ergo: it breached the Charter. Nonetheless, the successive resolutions of the Council: 1483, 1511 and especially 1546 granted a mandate to the international forces - initially occupying forces - to exercise power until the Coalition Provisional Authority transferred power to the legal government of Iraq, and then to the stabilizing forces acting on request of the Iraqi government to stay on the territory of Iraq and act in full cooperation with its government. Despite the breach of the UN Charter, the results of the illegal intervention were in fact accepted by the international community.