A Supreme International Crime
'The threatened war against Iraq will be a breach of the United Nations Charter and hence of international law unless it is authorized by a new and unambiguous resolution of the security council. The Charter is clear. No such war is permitted unless it is in self-defense or authorized by the security council. Self-defense has no application here. Neither the United States nor the UK, nor any of their allies, is under attack or any threat of immediate attack by Iraq.

'Nor is there any authority from the security council. Resolution 1441 does not constitute any such authority as the reference to "serious consequences" is not sufficiently precise to justify war. Whatever the US may have wanted, the resolution was deliberately vague because the council had not agreed on the use of force. A new resolution would therefore be required. It would have to be in unambiguous terms authorizing the use of force. In the absence of such a resolution, the attack would, be unlawful. On this point I agree completely with the terms of the letter from 16 eminent international lawyers to 10 Downing Street'

A Supreme International Crime
'The threatened war against Iraq will be a breach of the United Nations Charter and hence of international law unless it is authorized by a new and unambiguous resolution of the security council. The Charter is clear. No such war is permitted unless it is in self-defense or authorized by the security council. Self-defense has no application here. Neither the United States nor the UK, nor any of their allies, is under attack or any threat of immediate attack by Iraq.

'Nor is there any authority from the security council. Resolution 1441 does not constitute any such authority as the reference to "serious consequences" is not sufficiently precise to justify war. Whatever the US may have wanted, the resolution was deliberately vague because the council had not agreed on the use of force. A new resolution would therefore be required. It would have to be in unambiguous terms authorizing the use of force. In the absence of such a resolution, the attack would, be unlawful. On this point I agree completely with the terms of the letter from 16 eminent international lawyers to 10 Downing Street'