American Militarism Threatening To Set Off World War III
The Condition of Human Rights at the International Setting
By Professor Francis A. Boyle
Text of speech by Professor Francis A. Boyle at the Puerto Rican Summit
Conference on Human Rights - University of the Sacred Heart - San Juan,
Puerto Rico - December 09, 2012
December 10, 2012 "Information Clearing House" - Historically this latest
eruption of American militarism at the start of the 21st Century is akin to
that of America opening the 20th Century by means of the U.S.-instigated
Spanish-American War in 1898. Then the Republican administration of President
William McKinley stole their colonial empire from Spain in Cuba, Puerto Rico,
Guam, and the Philippines; inflicted a near genocidal war against the Filipino
people; while at the same time illegally annexing the Kingdom of Hawaii and
subjecting the Native Hawaiian people (who call themselves the Kanaka Maoli)
to near genocidal conditions. Additionally, McKinley’s military and colonial
expansion into the Pacific was also designed to secure America’s economic
exploitation of China pursuant to the euphemistic rubric of the “open door”
policy. But over the next four decades America’s aggressive presence,
policies, and practices in the
so-called “Pacific” Ocean would ineluctably pave the way for Japan’s attack
at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 194l, and thus America’s precipitation into the
ongoing Second World War. Today a century later the serial imperial
aggressions launched and menaced by the neoconservative Republican Bush Junior
administration and the neoliberal Democratic Obama administration are now
threatening to set off World War III.
By shamelessly exploiting the terrible tragedy of 11
September 2001, the Bush Junior
administration set forth to
steal a hydrocarbon empire from the
Muslim states and
peoples living in Central Asia and the
Middle East and
Africa under the bogus pretexts of (1)
fighting a war
against “international terrorism” or
“Islamic
fundamentalism”; and/or (2) eliminating
weapons of mass
destruction; and/or (3) the promotion
of democracy; and/or
(4) self-styled humanitarian
intervention/responsibility to
protect (R2P). Only this time the
geopolitical stakes are
infinitely greater than they were a
century ago: control and
domination of the world’s hydrocarbon
resources and thus the
very fundaments and energizers of the
global economic system
– oil and gas. The Bush Junior/ Obama
administrations have
already targeted the remaining
hydrocarbon reserves of
Africa, Latin America (e.g., the
Pentagon’s reactivization
of the U.S. Fourth Fleet in 2008), and
Southeast Asia for
further conquest or domination,
together with the strategic
choke-points at sea and on land
required for their
transportation. Today the U.S. Fourth
Fleet threatens Cuba,
Venezuela, and Ecuador for sure.
Toward accomplishing that first objective, in 2007 the
neoconservative Bush Junior
administration announced the
establishment of the U.S. Pentagon’s
Africa Command (AFRICOM)
in order to better control, dominate,
steal, and exploit
both the natural resources and the
variegated peoples of the
continent of Africa, the very cradle of
our human species.
In 2011 Libya then proved to be the
first victim of AFRICOM
under the neoliberal Obama
administration, thus
demonstrating the truly bi-partisan and
non-partisan nature
of U.S. imperial foreign policy
decision-making. Let us put
aside as beyond the scope of this paper
the American
conquest, extermination, and ethnic
cleansing of the Indians
from off the face of the continent of
North America. Since
America’s instigation of the
Spanish-American War in 1898,
U.S. foreign policy decision-making has
been alternatively
conducted by reactionary imperialists,
conservative
imperialists, and liberal imperialists
for the past 115
years and counting.
This world-girdling burst of U.S. imperialism at the start
of humankind’s new millennium is what
my teacher, mentor,
and friend the late, great Professor
Hans Morgenthau
denominated “unlimited imperialism” in
his seminal book
Politics Among Nations 52-53 (4th ed.
1968):
The outstanding historic examples of unlimited imperialism
are the expansionist policies of
Alexander the Great, Rome,
the Arabs in the seventh and eighth
centuries, Napoleon I,
and Hitler. They all have in common an
urge toward expansion
which knows no rational limits, feeds
on its own successes
and, if not stopped by a superior
force, will go on to the
confines of the political world. This
urge will not be
satisfied so long as there remains
anywhere a possible
object of domination–a politically
organized group of men
which by its very independence
challenges the conqueror’s
lust for power. It is, as we shall see,
exactly the lack of
moderation, the aspiration to conquer
all that lends itself
to conquest, characteristic of
unlimited imperialism, which
in the past has been the undoing of the
imperialistic
policies of this kind….
The factual circumstances surrounding the outbreaks of both
the First World War and the Second
World War currently hover
like the Sword of Damocles over the
heads of all humanity.
Since September 11, 2001, it is the Unlimited Imperialists à
la Alexander, Napoleon, and Hitler who
have been in charge
of conducting American foreign policy
decision-making. After
September 11, 2001 the people of the
world have witnessed
successive governments in the United
States that have
demonstrated little respect for
fundamental considerations
of international law, human rights, or
the United States
Constitution. Instead, the world has
watched a comprehensive
and malicious assault upon the
integrity of the
international and domestic legal orders
by groups of men and
women who are thoroughly Hobbist and
Machiavellian in their
perception of international relations
and in their conduct
of both foreign affairs and American
domestic policy. Even
more seriously, in many instances
specific components of the
U.S. government’s foreign policies
constitute ongoing
criminal activity under well recognized
principles of both
international law and United States
domestic law, and in
particular the Nuremberg Charter, the
Nuremberg Judgment,
and the Nuremberg Principles, as well
as the Pentagon’s own
U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 on The Law
of Land Warfare,
which applies to the President himself
as Commander-in-Chief
of United States Armed Forces under
Article II, Section 2 of
the United States Constitution.
Depending on the substantive issues involved, these
international and domestic crimes
typically include but are
not limited to the Nuremberg offences
of “crimes against
peace”—e.g., Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq,
Somalia, Yemen,
Pakistan, Syria, and perhaps their
longstanding threatened
war of aggression against Iran. Their
criminal
responsibility also concerns “crimes
against humanity” and
war crimes as well as grave breaches of
the Four Geneva
Conventions of 1949 and the 1907 Hague
Regulations on land
warfare: torture, enforced
disappearances, assassinations,
murders, kidnappings, extraordinary
renditions, “shock and
awe,” depleted uranium, white
phosphorous, cluster bombs,
drone strikes, etc. Furthermore,
various officials of the
United States government have committed
numerous inchoate
crimes incidental to these substantive
offences that under
the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and
Principles as well as
U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956) are
international crimes
in their own right: planning, and
preparation, solicitation,
incitement, conspiracy, complicity,
attempt, aiding and
abetting. Of course the terrible irony
of today’s situation
is that over six decades ago at
Nuremberg the U.S.
government participated in the
prosecution, punishment, and
execution of Nazi government officials
for committing some
of the same types of heinous
international crimes that these
officials of the United States
government currently inflict
upon people all over the world. To be
sure, I personally
oppose the imposition of capital
punishment upon any human
being for any reason no matter how
monstrous their crimes,
whether they be Saddam Hussein, Bush
Junior, Tony Blair, or
Barack Obama.
According to basic principles of international criminal law
set forth in paragraph 501 of U.S. Army
Field Manual 27-10,
all high level civilian officials and
military officers in
the U.S. government who either knew or
should have known
that soldiers or civilians under their
control (such as the
C.I.A. or mercenary contractors),
committed or were about to
commit international crimes and failed
to take the measures
necessary to stop them, or to punish
them, or both, are
likewise personally responsible for the
commission of
international crimes. This category of
officialdom who
actually knew or should have known of
the commission of
these international crimes under their
jurisdiction and
failed to do anything about them
include at the very top of
America’s criminal chain-of-command the
President, the
Vice-President, the U.S. Secretary of
Defense, Secretary of
State, Director of National
Intelligence, the C.I.A.
Director, National Security Advisor and
the Pentagon’s Joint
Chiefs of Staff along with the
appropriate Regional
Commanders-in-Chiefs, especially for
U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM).
These U.S. government officials and their immediate
subordinates are responsible for the
commission of crimes
against peace, crimes against humanity,
and war crimes as
specified by the Nuremberg Charter,
Judgment, and Principles
as well as by U.S. Army Field Manual
27-10 of 1956. Today in
international legal terms, the United
States government
itself should now be viewed as
constituting an ongoing
criminal conspiracy under international
criminal law in
violation of the Nuremberg Charter, the
Nuremberg Judgment,
and the Nuremberg Principles, because
of its formulation and
undertaking of serial wars of
aggression, crimes against
peace, crimes against humanity, and war
crimes that are
legally akin to those perpetrated by
the former Nazi regime
in Germany. As a consequence, American
citizens possess the
basic right under international law and
the United States
domestic law, including the U.S.
Constitution, to engage in
acts of civil resistance designed to
prevent, impede,
thwart, or terminate ongoing criminal
activities perpetrated
by U.S. government officials in their
conduct of foreign
affairs policies and military
operations purported to relate
to defense and counter-terrorism.
For that very reason, large numbers of American citizens
have decided to act on their own
cognizance by means of
civil resistance in order to demand
that the U.S. government
adhere to basic principles of
international law, of U.S.
domestic law, and of the U.S.
Constitution in its conduct of
foreign affairs and military
operations. Mistakenly,
however, such actions have been defined
to constitute
classic instances of “civil
disobedience” as historically
practiced in the United States. And the
conventional status
quo admonition by the U.S. power elite
and its sycophantic
news media for those who knowingly
engage in “civil
disobedience” has always been that they
must meekly accept
their punishment for having performed a
prima facie breach
of the positive laws as a demonstration
of their good faith
and moral commitment. Nothing could be
further from the
truth! Today’s civil resisters are the
sheriffs! The U.S.
government officials are the outlaws!
Here I would like to suggest a different way of thinking
about civil resistance activities that
are specifically
designed to thwart, prevent, or impede
ongoing criminal
activity by officials of the U.S.
government under
well‑recognized principles of
international and U.S.
domestic law. Such civil resistance
activities represent the
last constitutional avenue open to the
American people to
preserve their democratic form of
government with its
historical commitment to the rule of
law and human rights.
Civil resistance is the last hope
America has to prevent the
U.S. government from moving even
farther down the path of
lawless violence in Africa, the Middle
East, Southwest Asia,
military interventionism into Latin
America, and nuclear
confrontation with Iran, Pakistan,
North Korea, Russia, and
China.
Such measures of “civil resistance” must not be confused
with, and indeed must be carefully
distinguished from, acts
of “civil disobedience” as
traditionally defined. In today’s
civil resistance cases, what we witness
are American
citizens attempting to prevent the
ongoing commission of
international and domestic crimes under
well-recognized
principles of international law and
U.S. domestic law. This
is a phenomenon essentially different
from the classic civil
disobedience cases of the 1950s and
1960s where incredibly
courageous African Americans and their
supporters were
conscientiously violating domestic laws
for the express
purpose of changing them. By contrast,
today’s civil
resisters are acting for the express
purpose of upholding
the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution,
human rights, and
international law. Applying the term
“civil disobedience” to
such civil resistors mistakenly
presumes their guilt and
thus perversely exonerates the U.S.
government criminals.
Civil resistors disobeyed nothing, but to the contrary
obeyed international law and the United
States Constitution.
By contrast, U.S. government officials
disobeyed fundamental
principles of international law as well
as U.S. criminal law
and thus committed international crimes
and U.S. domestic
crimes as well as impeachable
violations of the United
States Constitution. The civil
resistors are the sheriffs
enforcing international law, U.S.
criminal law and the U.S.
Constitution against the criminals
working for the U.S.
government!
Today the American people must reaffirm their commitment to
the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and
Principles by holding
their government officials fully
accountable under
international law and U.S. domestic law
for the commission
of such grievous international and
domestic crimes. They
must not permit any aspect of their
foreign affairs and
defense policies to be conducted by
acknowledged “war
criminals” according to the U.S.
government’s own official
definition of that term as set forth in
U.S. Army Field
Manual 27-10 (1956), the U.S. War
Crimes Act, and the Geneva
Conventions. The American people must
insist upon the
impeachment, dismissal, resignation,
indictment, conviction,
and long-term incarceration of all U.S.
government officials
guilty of such heinous international
and domestic crimes.
That is precisely what American civil
resisters are doing
today!
This same right of civil resistance extends pari passu to
all citizens of the world community of
states. Everyone
around the world has both the right and
the duty under
international law to resist ongoing
criminal activities
perpetrated by the U.S. government and
its nefarious foreign
accomplices in allied governments such
as Britain, the other
NATO states, Australia, Japan, South
Korea, Georgia, Puerto
Rico, etc. If not so restrained, the
U.S. government could
very well precipitate a Third World
War. Here in Puerto Rico
we saw the stunning example of the most
courageous civil
resistors against Yankee Imperialism on
Vieques.
The future of American foreign policy and the peace of the
world lie in the hands of American
citizens and the peoples
of the world—not the bureaucrats,
legislators, judges,
lobbyist, think-tanks, professors, and
self-styled experts
who inhibit Washington, D.C., New York
City, and Cambridge,
Massachusetts. Civil resistance is the
way to go! This is
our Nuremberg Moment now!
Thank you.
Francis A. Boyle teaches law at the University of Illinois. He is a graduate
of the University of Chicago and Harvard Law School. He has advised numerous
international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes, genocide,
nuclear policy, and bio warfare. He received a PHD in political science from
Harvard University.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33272.htm
P.S. Of course, Dr. Boyle has left out earlier developments, such as the
genocidal Holocaust of native Americans.
Hajja Romi/"Blue"
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com
laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
