----- Original Message ----- From: Shayna Lazarevich To: mailto:Undisclosed-Recipient:;@cats.ucsc.edu Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 1:44 AM Subject: [STOPNATO] Fw: GREEK? BE PROUD OF IT! STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM >> >>http://www.zmag.org/judges.htm > > >> Twenty members of the Council of State (Greece's supreme >> administrative court) have issued a statement deploring the >> international crimes against Yugoslavia ... >> >> NATO was found guilty of an unprecedented and barbaric attack >> against Yugoslavia...the judges condemn the NATO >> bombardments, denounce the international crimes being >> committed by the NATO countries through this armed attack, >> and warn that any law passed deciding to involve Greece in this >> war will constitute a gross violation of the Constitution.=20 >> >> Following is the full text of the statement > >> 1. NATO's offensive against a sovereign European state, unprecedented >> >> in the post-war years, is an affront not only to the ethical principles >> >> of Greek and European civilisation, but also to the fundamental precepts >> of international law. This latter is a legal issue and should not be >> overshadowed by the moral revulsion that is justly provoked by this >> cowardly and barbaric attack. On the contrary, this issue is of primary >> importance and must be clarified in particular by those who have a >> competent opinion about the Law, since their duty is to serve it >> >> X 2. This inexcusable attack is taking place in flagrant violation of >> articles 1 and 2 of the United Nations Charter, which expressly >> prohibits the use of violence in international relations, and designates >> the Security Council (article 41 ff.) exclusively competent in >> international crises. According to these provisions, but also to the >> generally recognised precepts of international law, there is no room for >> self-appointed crisis managers, nor is it permitted, on any pretext >> whatsoever, for third countries to intervene in the internal affairs >>of a > sovereign state. > >> X 3. But this attack even violates the NATO Charter, the exclusive >>purpose >> of which is collective defence of the area defined therein that >>coincides >> with the boundaries of its member states, and which has expressly >> committed itself in its international relations to refrain from the >> threat or use of violence in any way whatsoever that is incompatible >> with the principles and purposes of the UN (article 1). That is, by >>its own >> Charter, NATO has been placed under the rule of the UN Charter. >> And it could not have been otherwise, >> since no international organisation or alliance can be placed above >> the United Nations >> >> X 5. And, in this case, the United Nations, respecting these >>restrictions, >> remained within its jurisdiction, recommending to the lawful government >> of Yugoslavia that they fulfil their obligations (Security Council >> >> resolutions No 1160/31.3.1998 and 1199/23.9.1998). But, behind the >> scenes, the NATO military alliance appeared in a self-appointed role, >>and >> without having nor could it have had any competence to become >> involved in this matter, having first dictated an insolent ultimatum >> disputing the very sovereignty of Yugoslavia, then launched an >> aggressive war against this state, demandingthat it conform to NATO >> > demands. This attack is accompanied by the revival of dark >>propaganda >> that attempts to exploit the misery of the refugees to draw public> >>> > attention away from the violation of international law...... > >> 6. ...<b> By their armed attack, the NATO countries are committing >> the following international crimes >> /b>, in accordance with the charter being drafted for the International >> Criminal Court, which refers >> <b>to the Geneva Conventions >> </b> dated 12 August 1949 (UN Doc. A/CONF/183/9) and >> <b>in particular: a) the crime of waging an offensive war, with the >> violent destruction of human life, cultural monuments and entire >> settlements, b) the crime of genocide by the deliberate destruction >>of the >> infrastructure of the Serbian community and the creation in it of >> conditions that lead to its physical annihilation, and c) the crime >> of ecological destruction by the use of military technology that causes >> damage to people=92s health and to the natural >> environment, a crime also committed against third countries to >> which deadly pollution is carried. >> </b>=20 7. During the recent Washington summit, the leadership of the >> attacking NATO countries tried to amend the provisions of its Charter to >> make it autonomous in continuing the attack on Yugoslavia, and also with >> regard to its plans for the future in carrying out so-called >>peace-making >> and humanitarian interventions under the pretext of 'crisis >> management'! It tried in vain. The only valid crisis management, >>according >> to international law, remains as ever the UN. And no other organisation >> that is by definition inferior to it can remove or usurp this role. >> <b>NATO cannot abolish international law nor can it produce new, >>generally >> recognised precepts of international legality. Its new Charter affects >> only the governments that signed it. And even if it is ratified by the >> national Parliaments of its member states, it will declare the >>intentions >> of just 19 out of a total of 158 states on >> the planet. >> </b> The remaining states will not tolerate the falsification or mockery >> of international law. They reject the theory that might is right, >> whether overt or disguised. And small states like Greece will be in >>danger >> if they relinquish rights which have been undisputed for centuries. >> The truth is that NATO's attack on Yugoslavia inaugurates a period of >> lawlessness in international relations. We are returning to the era >>of the >> Holy Alliance and the Axis, against which humanity, and the Greeks in >> particular fought with such great sacrifices. >> 8. ...<b>the Constitution of the Hellenic State... make it possible >> for foreign troops to sojourn in or travel across the Hellenic State >> ... to be restricted... to the participation of Greece in a defensive >>war, >> and not to facilitate an attack against a third state. Consequently, >> the involvement of Greece in this on-going war against Yugoslavia cannot >> be decided upon even by law because such a law would be totally >> unconstitutional. " To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________________________________ Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com
