Skip to main content

Mr. President, the US Congress and SCOTUS are on same page with you on use of explicit threat for a sovereign agreement with Iran?

 The President of US, Trump, has declared often that he lives by his understanding of values and morality and not as per domestic and international. Which is fine as an individual, but is it fine for a President of a country, that has to be decided by the Americans, the US Congress and that still makes it a domestic matter. But, when the President of US threatens other countries and thinks he has the freedom to break international law to do so; then it is a matter to be decided upon by the international communities and other UN member states or other countries. Then the question to be answered, Isn’t the US President accountable for using force or threatening to use force to make Iran to adhere to US terms and recommendation against Iran’s will and sovereign rights.

Mr. President, here below are instance of you declaring and communicating your threats, based on willingness to use force along with clear examples of you willing to fall through with your plans, be it bombing school children or assassinating Iranian leaders, Scientists, Politicians or any other change agents considered threat by the US or Israel.

 First Threat: Will not lift blockade until a final deal is signed



    Threat Two: To steal enriched Uranium from Iran


     Threat 3: Will Start  Bombing Again.

Mr. President Trump, are you aware that it is illegal and criminal to make such explicit threats, as indicated by UN Charter with regard to use of force against another sovereign nation, Iran. Article 2(4) bans the use of force in international relations and separately bans any threat of force, whether explicit or implicit. “All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations”.

Mr. President you have already committed war crimes and terror acts against Iran when bombing their nuclear facility and facilitating through your war mongering strategy the death of 168 children and teachers in their school through tomahawk missile attack. When there is a history of crime associated with you, then that makes your threat more real and thus a serious crime, here probably a war crime.

International Law Commission provides a framework for identifying threat of force, it has four elements 1) the action 2) Credibility 3) the author of the threat 4) the single category of the threat [1]. Since your action have left no doubt about the force involved as bombing is central part of your strategy; with regard to credibility, you have made it clear to the world, Mr. President that your threats are credible and that you enjoy destroying lives along with boats as you were gleeful about the same online; with regard to author of threat, here as the President of the US you have power to carryout your threat, though that is not generally what Presidents do, even if not part of democratic governance model; since you have credibility and case examples of different types of attack your threat is very explicit and vivid in Iranian mind as well as in minds of most global viewers.

Since you evidently don’t about terror act and war crimes you commit and the US Congress has given you a free hand. Just want to point out have you considered the fact that most of the agreement made under duress can be considered void or voidable; it can be void because it is happening within a process of committing war crimes and clear threat of death of people including assassination of leaders is carried out and then agreement is put forward within the circumstance. It is voidable as Iran can indicate the threat involved and ask for legal intervention.

Mr. President since you are busy trying to teach countries across the globe about Human Rights Violations,  a small clip of what is happening with US may be interesting. Mr. President, you clearly have no legal right to interfere in another nation’s sovereign reality, the question still remains do you have the moral right. It should also be pointed out your ICE officials have been documented shooting unarmed citizens and the Government had underplayed that reality. With regard to exploring your moral right, the visuals below on Human Rights within US.

    

    Human Rights being enshrined by the Police in New York, US, as their President bombs                                            countries for  not  respecting Human Rights!



It is time the US President understood the world is not his backyard, where he can carry out war crimes and terror acts at will. If the US President and Israel are not held accountable the world will never know peace.

Rights for all!

Justice for all.

 

Molly Charles

 

Reference

1. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law/article/mind-the-gap-the determination-legality-and-consequences-of-implicit-threats-of-force


 













Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Peace, Security & Fourth Industry, Technology—impact on Us and Our Becoming

                                                                                                                                                   Peace is something everyone can sense, and yet, find difficult to define. Its complexity, and simplicity is reflected in our restricted definition of peace as an absence of war/violence, even though we sense it is far beyond that.    Peace is a concept that exists beyond the boundaries of empirical reality, but we seek it within the realms of empirical reality, where power has the final say. We conceive it as a static state, where a world view palatable to u...

The President of US stands accused of Genocidal intent?

Mr.President Trump, after hinting at his intent for days, now allegedly has stated loud and clear he would like to own another sovereign state, Palestine and wants to remove the entire population of Palestinians from there. For which he is bidding with nations in the middle east, almost creating a new form of slave trade.  The President of US standa accused of:  a) Clearly expressed Genocidal intent, expressed to entire world totally in free will, standing in a position of power as the greatest spender on Military industry.  2. As specified in Article two of genocide convention he state he wants to destroy an entire nation by erasing its existence and using organised crime methods for the same.  3.Totally against the UN charter Article 2 (4) for it "prohibits use of force (which could be physical and psychological) and calls on all Members to respect the Sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of other states.  4. Whether US and Israel want...

Living in the Margins

 Molly Charles (1) Margin, a term familiar from tender age; notebooks with clear cut margins to delineate the main body of text, define it. The margins give it definite shape, a practice that continues into the virtual world. Among humans, it is these margins that give identity to the large majority we term normal. The often, porous boundaries offer a chance for individuals to slip through and slip back into either ‘normal’ or ‘marginal’ spaces. The decision to identify with marginal groups or positions can be a conscious one as with (gender identity, drug use), enforced as in (mental health, racial and caste based discrimination) and accidental for (drug use, stigmatized diseases). In certain instances, as with mental health, some individuals may find their being part of marginal groups a permanent reality, in most other instances individuals do move in and out of marginal groups, as a survival strategy to deal with marginalization. Even when physical spaces merge, with an emph...