There seem to be many discussions of this. Ad nauseam one hears that there are good arguments on both sides of the issue. Some Prof from Duke just said this on CBC radio and our defence minister takes the same position. Of course there arguments on both sides but the pro legality side has quite weak arguments and ignores key aspects of resolution such as1441 that left the UN siezed of the issue and specifically used the term "serious consequences' for material breaches rather than the use of force. As Negroponte clarified when France and others worried about automaticity there was none and there was no hair trigger. Well now it seems there is!
If international law were not simply a fig leaf for great power actions France and the US could simply ask the International Court of Justice for an interpretation on the issue. I havent seen ONE source anywhere suggest this? Why is that? Or even awareness that this is an option. CHeers, Ken Hanly
