![]() ![]() Thomas, Non-Intervention: The Law and Its Import in the Americas (1956) R. The Security Council has also affirmed the importance of non-interference in internal affairs: Resolution 1790 (2007).ģ9 A. A/RES/62/3, 30 October 2007, which was adopted by 184 votes to 4 (Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States), with 1 abstention (Federated States of Micronesia) and three states absent (Albania, El Salvador, Iraq). The principle of non-intervention continues to be referred to in resolutions of the UN General Assembly, for example in the annual resolution on the US embargo against Cuba. A/Res/40/9 (1985) Economic Measures as a Means of Political and Economic Coercion against Developing Countries, UN Docs. A/Res/36/103 (1981 Declaration) Solemn Appeal to States in Conflict to Cease Armed Action Forthwith and to Settle Disputes between Them through Negotiations, and to States Members of the United Nations to Undertake to Solve Situations of Tension and Conflict and Existing Disputes by Political Means and to Refrain from the Threat or Use of Force and from any Intervention in the Internal Affairs of Other States, UN Doc. A/Res/31/91 (1976 Declaration) Non-interference in the Internal Affairs of States, UN Docs. A/Res/3201 (S-VI) (1974) Non-interference in the Internal Affairs of States, UN Doc. A/Res/3281(XXIX) (1970) Declaration on the Establishment of the New International Economic Order, UN Doc. A/Res/2625(XXV) (1970) Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States, UN Doc. A/Res/2225 (XXI) (1966) Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, UN Doc. ![]() A/2131 (XX) (1965 Declaration) Status of the Implementation of the Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of their Independence and Security, UN Doc. ![]() A/1236 (XII) (1957) Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of their Independence and Sovereignty, UN Doc. This may be the law, but should it be?’ Speech on the threat of global terrorism, 20 Peaceful and Neighbourly Relations among States, UN Doc. Already, on 5 March 2004, Blair had proclaimed in a speech at his Sedgefield constituency that ‘t may well be that under international law as presently constituted, a regime can systematically brutalize and oppress its people and there is nothing anyone can do about it unless it come within the definition of a humanitarian catastrophe. Shortly before leaving office, the then British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, described his foreign policy as ‘very interventionist’ (Oral Evidence before the Liaison Committee, 6 February 2007, answer to Q1). ![]() In recent years certain politicians have referred a good deal to ‘intervention’, but it is doubtful how far they have legal considerations in mind, even when their remarks are cloaked in legal language. International law does not usually change even if governments act as though it has changed, unless they are explicit about the new legal basis for the action and states generally accept that new basis. 3 It should at the same time be recalled that international law does not change merely because politicians say it should. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |