Book Review:

Armageddon or Brave New World?     by C.G Weeramantry

reviewed by Vernon Abeysekera

Like so many thinking people all over the world Christie Weeramantry has 
been very perturbed by the tragedy in Iraq -- the invasion of the country 
by the US, British, and Australian forces. In the weeks leading up to the 
event, when France and Russia resolutely refused to allow the Security 
Council to sanction a war, it became very clear that the US would 
arbitrarily lead an attack on its own.

In protest against this planned invasion, Mr Weeramantry wrote articles, 
gave interviews and addressed meetings, which included a sessions of 
British parliamentarians in London.

The general thrust of his arguments was that an attack on Iraq without the 
approval of the Security Council would be unconstitutional.

He specified ten principles in the UN Charter which would be violated. An 
invasion would also be morally indefensible, as it would inevitably result 
in the killing of numerous lives and serious damage to the infrastructure, 
hospitals, schools and religious and cultural institutions.

In his book Armageddon or Brave New World? -- Reflections on the 
Hostilities in Iraq, Mr Weeramantry enlarges on the opinions he has 
expressed earlier and stresses the fact that we have a task to counter the 
dangers ahead of us. He refers to the UN Charter as "the basic document of 
today's international law".

It is a document which was carefully drafted with one overriding objective 
in mind -- the promotion of international peace. The Charter created the 
UN, and by invading Iraq in the circumstances they did, the US and its 
allies have challenged the moral power and legitimacy of both of them. The 
actions of the US are particularly reprehensible, as it is the only 
superpower today and a responsibility devolves on it to set an example to 
the other nations of the world.

The allies purported to act under Resolution 670 of the Security Council 
which was passed in 1990. It was a weak argument which was squashed by Mr 
Weeramantry. He has pointed out that it was irrelevant and out of date, as 
its objectives were fully realised in the first Iraq war.

The allies gave two reasons for launching their attack.

1) Locating "Weapons of mass destruction", which they accused Iraq of 
amassing in violation of Security Council resolutions.

2) Ending the despotic rule of Saddam Hussein and setting up a democratic 
government in its place.

Actually, the UN and the Security Council had the powers to tackle both 
problems. They had in fact appointed a team of inspectors who had been busy 
making a strenuous search for any WMD (weapons of mass destruction) in the 
country.

However, they were recalled on the eve of the invasion, before they could 
finish their assignment. Up until then they could find no incriminating 
weapons. Nor indeed, though many weeks have passed, have the allies been 
able to find any since the invasion.

Though Saddam's record was a black one, the means adopted to overthrow him 
were unconstitutional. Here again there are adequate provisions in the 
Charter under which the Security Council could have acted. The first and 
obvious line of action could have been to resort to diplomatic procedures 
such as mediation and negotiations.

However, if there were evidence of the violation of human rights, the 
Security Council would have the authority to set up a tribunal, such as a 
War Crimes Tribunal.

Many people are tempted at this stage to shrug their shoulders and say the 
damage has already been done and nothing can be done about it now. This, Mr 
Weeramantry says, is erroneous thinking.

The international situation is in a dangerous pass. The violence we have 
seen in Iraq may well be inflicted on other countries as well -- Iran, the 
Democratic People's Republic of Korea ("North Korea"), or anywhere else. 
President Bush keeps making ominous references to "rogue states" and an 
"Axis of evil."

Each of us can in our own small way help to build public opinion. Community 
organisations (lay and religious) can in this respect make a larger 
contribution. We have after all to remember that it was public opinion more 
than anything else which ended the Vietnam War. So what lies ahead of us? 
Armageddon or a brave new world? A world of violence or a world of peace?

Mr Weeramantry's book is a source of valuable information as well as a 
guide to the action which all of us should now be taking.

Mr Weeramantry was until recently Vice President of the International Court 
of Justice. Before leaving Australia he was Professor of Law in Monash 
University.

* * *

Armageddon or Brave New World?,
published by Sarvodaya Vishva Lekha, 173 pages,
is available from SPA Books, 65 Campbell St, Surry Hills, NSW 2010,
for $12.50 plus $2.50 p&p.