webmaster
© Copyright DEHAI-Eritrea OnLine, 1993-2010
All rights reserved
From: Berhane Habtemariam (Berhane.Habtemariam@gmx.de)
Date: Wed Aug 18 2010 - 15:19:42 EDT
The UN Security Council Regime of Tribunals and Sanctions: A Smokescreen for
Military Seizure of Regions and Resources
by Niloufer Bhagwat
http://www.globalresearch.ca/coverStoryPictures2/20670.jpg
Global Research <http://www.globalresearch.ca> , August 18, 2010
The government of Israel orchestrated after 'Operation Cast Lead' the brutal
military attack and bombing of Gaza with prohibited weaponry, the
pre-meditated racist killings of Turkish citizens and a US citizen of
Turkish origin on the Mavi Marmara. Confused about the next move
contemplated by the Freedom Flotilla for Gaza and disconcerted at the
dialogues between different political formations in Lebanon, the government
and the opposition, including the Hezbollah-led 'National Resistance',
instructed Lt.General Gabi Ashkenazi to position a 'cat among the pigeons',
by informing the Knesset Foreign Relations Committee on 8th July 2010 that
“with lots of wishes and a little bit of information the situation in
Lebanon will deteriorate following the issuance of an indictment by the UN
Special Tribunal for Lebanon over the assassination of former Prime Minister
martyr Rafiq Hariri”.
General Ashkenazi’s official statement before the Israeli Parliament, even
before any indictment was officially issued, that the Hariri Tribunal would
implicate members of the Hezbollah and destabilize Lebanon to the advantage
of Israel, by sowing internal discord between different religious
denominations, indicated insider knowledge of the functioning and objectives
of the Hariri Tribunal for reasons now disclosed by Sayyed Hassan Nasrullah,
the Secretary General of the Hezbollah, at his press conference held on
August 9th. The aforesaid facts publicly expose the design for the
geopolitical and strategic use of the Hariri Tribunal and its investigative
machinery for subverting justice. An earlier investigation by the Chief
Investigator, Detlev Mehlis of Germany, had successively pointed its needle
of suspicion first at Syria and thereafter at four Lebanese Senior Police
Officials falsely implicated, jailed for four years, released after being
found innocent, as false witnesses were encouraged by the investigators and
never proceeded against. In recent weeks it was hinted that members of the
Hezbollah were to be indicted by the Tribunal, which coincided with the
preparations of the US–Israeli axis to unleash a nuclear war in the region,
even as an economic and financial collapse looms over the United States
which will adversely impact Zionism and Zionist controlled Banks and
financial institutions, among others, even in Europe.
The government of Lebanon alarmed at the disclosures supported by evidence
at the 9th of August 2010 by the Secretary General of the Hezbollah,
revealing that the government of Israel had actually stalked the late Prime
Minister Rafiq Hariri’s convoy with MK Spy Drones and through intelligence
agents on the ground and the earlier revelations on Israeli infiltration of
the State Telecom Company,with documentation produced at the press
conference of the footage of Israeli drone transmissions[1], has now
officially sought an investigation of the complicity of the Israeli
government into the assassination, an angle which was never investigated by
the Hariri Tribunal, despite the fact that the government of Israel had the
most to gain from assassinations in Lebanon of leaders of different
political formations, as a powder keg for religious and sectarian strife, to
destabilize Lebanon to pursue its strategic aims of further colonization and
restructuring of the entire region, in collaboration with the United States
and its allies.
It is not surprising that the Security Council-appointed Hariri Tribunal
continues the murky traditions of all hitherto Security Council-appointed
special international tribunals, including for Rwanda and Yugoslavia, among
others. They were uncovered by leading jurists and Defense Counsel for what
they really are: geopolitical instruments to camouflage dark deeds in
various regions, committed by the Anglo–American-Israeli governments axis
with the acquiescence of other permanent members of the Security Council, in
collaboration with governments who are their military proxies. They carried
out military aggression, merciless bombings of the civilian population,
sectarian killings by more than one group to fracture existing societies and
regime change and pre-planned assassinations to replace governments. They
also pillaged hydrocarbons and minerals, among other financial and economic
objectives, including the lethal trade in drugs for money laundering into
Banks and financial institutions of the coalition of the willing. Further
acts include stationing military troops to re-colonize countries, a joint
enterprise of major banking, financial and corporate entities of more than
one country recently facing a financial denouement in their own heartlands,
bailed out by massive subsidies from the public exchequer at the cost of
citizens everywhere.
In this context, Professor Michael Mandel, an eminent Professor of Law,
Co-Chair of Lawyers Against the War (Canada) described appropriately what
happened in Rwanda:
“...It was another case of Western greed (again mostly US) and IMF-imposed
austerity throwing a match into an ancient and highly volatile
inter-communal conflict left over from colonial times.”
In a recent memorandum dated 25th July 2010[2] addressed to the
International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda and to the Security Council and
Secretary General of the United Nations, detainees who are accused persons
before the Rwandan Tribunal invited urgent attention to the fact that
Defense Counsel were being terrorized by the government of Rwanda, headed by
President Paul Kagame. It is well known that President Kagame's special
relations with the United States and the UK protected members of the Rwandan
Patriotic Front, led by President Kagame, from being indicted for genocide
by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. This Memorandum refers to
threats, arbitrary arrests and assassinations of Defense Counsels, including
the recent assassination of Professor Jwani Timothy Mwaikissa one of the
Defense Counsel before the ICTR from Tanzania. It was accompanied by thefts
of his documents, the deaths of other Defense Counsel in suspicious
circumstances and the illegal arrest and detention of lead ICTR Counsel
Professor Peter Erlinder by the government of Rwanda for alleged “genocide
denial”. This was carried out under a statute enacted specially for that
purpose to deter the truth from emerging about the role of the Rwandan
government’s Patriotic Front in the genocide, in violation of the impunity
conferred on Professor Erlinder from prosecution, as Defense Counsel before
the ICTR. Professor Erlinder was granted bail only on medical grounds, after
Bar Associations and Jurists and Heads of Law Schools all over the world
protested. Several Defense lawyers have earned the wrath of the regime and
of the Permanent Members of the Security Council who are prime movers of the
ICTR,in view of their carefully researched facts, exposing that collective
killings amounting to genocide was resorted to by both a section of the
Hutus and Tutsis, following the entry into Rwanda of the military forces of
the Rwandan Patriotic Front of then General Kagame (now President of
Rwanda), former head of the military intelligence in the Ugandan government
of President Museveni, supported by the military forces of Uganda and that
the genocide was triggered by the assassination of the head of the previous
government of President Habariyama, in circumstances indicating conspiracy
with powers external to the region. Articles written by Professor Erlinder
based on his work before the ICTR exposing the role of the governments of
Rwanda and Uganda in the pillaging of the mineral resources of the Congo, as
the avant guard for some members of the Security Council and their allies,
devouring resources in colonial style, leaving 5 million dead in the region,
incensed those involved in the pillage of the Congo.
The US-UK governments and the government of Rwanda closely monitor the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, move for the removal of
inconvenient prosecutors and the harassment and elimination of Defense
Counsel. The former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal
for Rwanda Carla Del Ponte has written her own account, exposing her
removal, when the Chief Prosecutor attempted to investigate charges against
the Rwandan Patriotic Front government headed by President Kagame, for the
collective killings of Hutus, she was replaced.[3]
The Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia were similarly influenced. When NATO
commenced the bombing of Yugoslavia with the civilian population and the
entire infrastructure was deliberately targeted, the Chief Prosecutor of the
International Criminal Tribunal on Yugoslavia, hand-picked for the
assignment by the same culprits of the Security Council, was served with a
complaint by the entire faculty of Belgrade University that Solana be
indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity in violation of all
norms of International Law, as NATO was responsible for civilian deaths.
This was followed by a several complaints against NATO bombings from all
over the world including from Canada, demanding that the Chief Prosecutor
charge NATO leaders with war crimes, the only steps taken by the Chief
Prosecutor against the merciless bombing of Belgrade was to state that:
“...I accept the assurances given by NATO leaders that they intend to
conduct the campaign in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in full
compliance with International Humanitarian Law.”[4]
This illegal position was taken by the Chief Prosecutor of the ICTY, despite
the fact that the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War of 1928 signed
by the USA, France and 13 other States including Germany and Great Britain
which was ratified by 62 nations; the Nuremberg Principles and the UN
Charter have declared that the use of war is illegal for the solution of
international controversies or as an instrument of national policy.
In contrast a few weeks later, after the intensive bombing campaigns by NATO
commenced, on 22nd May President Milosevic among other four top officials
were indicted and all except one crime in the indictment,were alleged to
have occurred on dates after the bombing started and President Milosevic was
handed over to the International Criminal Tribunal on Yugoslavia by his
government, when an economic boycott was imposed on Serbia. To perpetuate
the myth of a one-sided alleged ethnic cleansing by the Serbs, as Yugoslavia
had to be balkanized to seize its economic space in the financial interests
of Western Corporations and Banks, despite the fact that there was evidence
that UN troops were positioned at the relevant places where Bosnians among
others had been killed and did nothing to prevent it. The earlier ethnic
cleansing of the Serbs by the Croats and others in Krajina, among many other
places including in Kosovo, where the Kosovo Liberation Army of criminals
pillaged, killed and drove out 100,000 Serbs and 100,000-150,000 Romas has
never been the subject matter of any serious indictment against leaders of
the Republics, who were used by NATO as an instrument of the balkanization
of former Yugoslavia. The Chief Prosecutor of the ICTY had been handpicked
and closely monitored by the US, UK and other NATO powers, with Russia and
China then frozen into inaction by deals struck with those Permanent members
from the NATO dominating decision making in the Security Council, even
though thousands of lives could have been saved and later hundreds of
thousands in Iraq during the 13 year regime of sanctions imposed by the
Security Council, including the half a million children who died, with the
total toll from sanctions on Iraq between 12 May 1996 to 22 May 2003
estimated at 1.5 million, that is even before the military aggression of the
US-UK led coalition of the willing in 2003. As a consequence monstrous
sacrilege of justice and collective killings have been permitted by the
Security Council on defenseless civilian populations, in absolute violation
of its role to ensure security to the people of the world.
These are only very few examples of how countries have been devastated and
destroyed, exposing without a shadow of doubt that the security system of
the United Nations, with the Security Council as the pivot, no longer
protects member states of the United Nations. It is controlled on behalf of
the dominant financial and commercial oligarchy astride the world acting
through the Permanent Members, incorporating other governments into their
strategy in different regions to wage war or acquiesce to the waging of war
for a quid pro quo, as a “continuation of policy by other means”. Military
power has been used to enforce a military and economic order to seize
resources, national budgets and to control trade in vital commodities,
including hydrocarbon resources, to provide immediate liquidity to US, UK
and NATO Banks and Financial institutions or those of its alliance partners,
including arrangements with other Permanent members and with members of the
G8 countries and others, including Banks and Corporations under Zionist
control, to establish a so called “International Security Assistance Force”
as in Afghanistan of almost 50 countries and earlier the coalition of the
“willing” for Iraq and Yugoslavia. It is in this context, that the case
studies on behemoth corporations including financial institutions taking
decisions for war through their governments, have to be understood by those
who claim to be serious members of the Anti–War movement.
Dr. Frederic F. Clairmont, writing on “British Petroleum: The Unfinished
Crisis and Plunder of Anglo-American Imperialism" perceptively observes:
“The Anglo–Persian Oil Company’s ascendancy owed nothing to free play of
markets idealized by myth makers of economic liberalism but to the marriage
of big capital and thrust of imperial financial power for the enhanced
control of world markets. As with earlier conquests and brutal territorial
annexation of Cecil Rhodes... it signalized the marriage of Big Capital and
the Imperial Political Military Complex.”[5]
The case of British Petroleum is only a case study of one company, which is
present through military forces of its government in those hydrocarbon
regions of the world presently occupied.
When Tribunals cannot be appointed by the Security Council or when regime
change and the forced restructuring of governments is difficult in view of
internal cohesion, sanctions are resorted to by the US led Security Council,
to weaken countries before imposing the “killing fields” of war on an
already weakened and demoralized population, as happened in Iraq. The
sanctions imposed on Iran by the permanent members of the Security Council,
all heavily armed “Nuclear Weapons States” with nuclear arsenals capable of
destroying the entire world, in order to implement so called Chapter VII
procedures in the face of the alleged threat to peace by Iran (as in the
earlier onslaught on Iraq with the fictional weapons of mass destruction
theory advanced) conclusively establishes that there is presently no
international security system protecting countries who are member states of
the United Nations. It also shows that the Security Council and its
Permanent Members are initiating or acquiescing in a brutal ‘Military
Order’, for the seizure of markets and resources imposed on one country
after another, evidenced by successive occupations of former Yugoslavia,
followed by Afghanistan still ongoing and Iraq. This comes among many other
brutal military interventions in the Congo, in Haiti in the Horn of Africa,
in Lebanon, in Gaza and in Palestine, apart from other countries and regions
where covert intervention or open warfare is being waged.
Scientific opinion has recently become more vocal, claiming that Bunker
Busters and small nukes (micro–nukes), with depleted uranium weaponry termed
as the “Trojan Horse” of nuclear weapons[6], have been used in Afghanistan,
Iraq and former Yugoslavia among other regions. The infamy of what was
visited on Iraq, though it was known that there were no weapons of mass
destruction, has been confirmed by a Commission constituted by the
Netherlands Parliament [7]. The Davids Committee, with a former Chief
Justice of the Netherlands Supreme Court as the President of the Committee
of jurists, historians and diplomats among its members, opined that the Iraq
war was illegal in international law and there were commercial reasons for
the UK influencing the decision of the government of the Netherlands to join
the alliance for aggression against Iraq. These commercial reasons in the
report clearly point to the interests of the Oil majors among other UK
companies.
To further understand the diverse commercial and trade interests behind
these wars, it is necessary to refer to the 100 orders of Paul Bremer,
derogatively referred to as the US Pro-Consul for Iraq. These 100 orders
constitute another case study of “war as policy by other means”, the
military seizure of the resources of Iraq and the corporate interests
involved. One of these illegal orders which have no sanctity under
International Law as it is imposed by an occupying power which is not
authorized to alter or pillage the economy of countries occupied, prohibited
Iraqi farmers from using their seeds, mandating that hereinafter the Iraqi
farmers were to buy their seeds from the US or Australian agribusiness
companies. The 100 orders of Paul Bremer reveal the reasons for sanctions on
Iraq followed by the brutal war, just as the increase in the cultivation of
opium and the manufacture of heroin and its sale for laundering into Banks
and Financial Institutions, with the drug trade providing the third largest
returns among international commodities, is evidence of one of the major
objectives of the occupation of Afghanistan. And this occupation is still
ongoing, whatever the camouflages of the internecine international alliances
and their interests in Afghanistan.
To date, billions have disappeared from the account of the ‘Iraqi Oil for
Food Fund’ and the national treasury of Iraq, not accounted for by the
Permanent members of the Security Council or the alliance for the occupation
of Iraq, as these sums were to be seized and never to be accounted for.
Billions were quickly swallowed up by those on whose behalf the war was
waged. Some of the “Best and Brightest Companies” and Security Agencies of
the United States and UK (among other companies of the US-led military
alliance) were awarded one contract after another, including to advise
municipalities in Iraq, the cradle of one of the world’s oldest
civilizations. Whereas the UN Security Council was quick to appoint an
investigating committee for those who had allegedly violated the sanctions
on Iraq and were allegedly favoured by special contracts from the Saddam
Hussein government, in what was alleged to be an attempt to defeat
sanctions. There is significantly no Security Council-appointed Commission
to investigate and recover the ‘Oil for Food’ funds of Iraq and the money
siphoned off from the national treasury of Iraq. Significantly, the Bush
government passed a special Executive order that Courts in the United States
would have no jurisdiction in respect of disputes related to agreements and
contracts in respect of Iraqi Oil.
Even apart from the fact that after the ‘Tehran Declaration’ by Brazil and
Turkey, with Iran agreeing to exchange 1,200 Kg of its 3.5 % enriched
uranium with Turkey in exchange for 20% uranium to be used in its Medical
Research Reactor, there is no case whatsoever for imposition of sanctions on
Iran. Even apart from the Tehran declaration there is prima facie no case
for sanctions and the Resolution of the Security Council imposing a fourth
round of sanctions is a blatant violation of the UN Charter with all earlier
Resolutions imposing sanctions against Iran similarly tainted. Chapter VII
of the UN Charter can only be resorted to if there is in existence “any
threat to the peace or breach of the peace, or act of aggression”. However,
the only threat to peace, breach of the peace or acts of aggression to-day
in the region, is from the United States and Israel supported by NATO and by
other Permanent Members of the Security Council and some of the G8, horse
trading their veto powers or votes in the Security Council.
Even prima facie, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty calls for the
reduction of the nuclear weapons arsenal of the nuclear weapon powers, with
the objective of complete and not selective nuclear disarmament. A Security
Council which has not imposed sanctions on Nuclear Weapon States with
formidable nuclear weapons arsenal and on Israel, despite the whistleblower
Mordechai Vanunu exposing in 1986 that Israel was a clandestine nuclear
weapons State, can hardly claim that the imposition of sanctions through the
Security Council and separately by the US, the European Union and Japan
taking unilateral measures is justified, when the evidence against Iran
continues to be fictitious and hypothetical. Beyond this, it is outrageous
to focus on countries with limited nuclear know-how and weaponry that is
purely defensive in nature and with limited delivery systems, such as that
of North Korea (excluding the Nuclear Weapons Club, which is the main threat
to peace from any sanctions or any action by the international community).
These powers admittedly and openly have weaponry to destroy the world
several times over, and with the scientific evidence to which the
international community is now privy, we know that the government of the
United States has used small nukes in the form of Bunker Busters and
Depleted Uranium weaponry in Iraq and Afghanistan and earlier in Yugoslavia,
with the acquiescence of the “coalition of the willing” which includes NATO.
It has also used conventional weapons and drawn up a military plan for the
pre-emptive use of small nukes and followed it up with the declaration that
the USA will use them if necessary against Iran and North Korea, among other
governments found violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Any such
violation is, of course, to be interpreted by the United States.
The recent resolution introduced by one-third of the members of the
Republican party in the House of Representatives is ominous, as it
categorically asserts that the United States will support Israel’s right to
militarily attack Iran. This resolution, along with acts of aggression which
have taken place, the use of ‘Bunker Busters’ and DU weaponry and threats to
use nuclear weapons, openly flouts the UN Charter and the Nuremberg
Principles which emerged from the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials. They were
termed as “Victor’s Justice” by the eminent Indian Judge on the Tribunal for
the Far East, Justice Radha Gobind Pal, in a dissenting judgment given in
the aftermath of the Second World War. Significantly no one was indicted for
the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States of
America, the first country to have used nuclear weapons and which has in the
last decade formulated a doctrine for the first use and joint use of nuclear
with conventional weapons with others like France following. And this
without a murmur of protest by the so-called international community in the
Security Council or General Assembly despite the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ
on the illegality of the use of nuclear weapons being prohibited by
International Humanitarian Law.[8]
Recalling the tragic day the atomic bomb was used on Nagasaki at the recent
Nagasaki Peace Declaration[9] on 9th August 2010, the Mayor of Nagasaki,
Tomihisa Taue, criticized the nuclear weapons states for their “lack of
sincere commitment to nuclear disarmament”. Despite the statement’s
characteristic understatement, this focus on the major nuclear weapons
states and even on the secret nuclear pact of the earlier governments of
Japan must be widely welcomed and deserves international focus. It is a
correct and open moral and legal indictment of Nuclear Weapons States
imposing selective sanctions on Iran and earlier on Iraq and North Korea by
the Mayor of Nagasaki, a city which was mercilessly bombed. The government
of Japan, on the other hand, has fallen in line with the Permanent Members
of the Security Council and the G8 and ignored the voices of the people of
Japan, declaring that Japan will also impose separate sanctions on Iran. It
will be following the USA and the European Union, in addition to the
sanctions imposed by the Security Council. And this despite the fact that
Japan supported and welcomed the ‘Tehran Declaration’, influenced in all
probability by interlocking corporate and financial interests and the
continuing presence of US bases in Japan 65 years after the Second World War
In the face of another cataclysmic threat of war with nuclear weapons, the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization has withered away for some special
consideration, trade related, financial or political, and its two powerful
members are not to be heard. It is possibly influenced by ‘Oligarchs’ in
Russia with interlocking interests and Zionist links. In the case of China,
it may be influenced by banks and companies with similar interlocking
interests with Western corporations and oil majors who have targeted Iran
and probably influenced by those who use China as a cheap labour platform
for export markets among other countries. In this context it is necessary to
reflect on what an outstanding political theorist of the 20th Century wrote
“...let us assume that all the imperialist countries conclude an alliance
for the peaceful division of these parts of Asia; this alliance would be an
alliance of 'internationally united finance capital'”.[10]
It is significant that the non-aligned group of nations has collectively
supported Iran’s access to nuclear energy. India is among one of the major
countries to finally stand up against cooperating with the regime of
sanctions on Iran, as the regime of sanctions is antagonistic to the
interests of Indian companies trading with Iran and the energy security of
the people of India, with the government’s priority in that order. This will
result in renewed pressures on India, already destabilized by the fraudulent
“War on Terror” which had become a part of its official discourse to
camouflage economic and financial policy dictated by Transnational
Companies. These include multinational companies from India, which has
distorted Indian democracy and its constitutional goal of equitable economic
growth and balanced development.
It is in the context of this ‘Military Order’ imposed by the US-led NATO
alliance in several regions of the world, acquiesced to by Russia, China and
Japan and other G8 countries, that the whole objective and purpose of the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has to be understood, amongst other
disarmament measures imposed by the Security Council selectively. A military
order imposing colonial regimes by companies and governments for the seizure
of whole continents and colonial control of resources by military mean was
historically possible only because of military superiority and fostering of
internal divisions in the society sought to be colonized. More recently by
encouraging fractious infighting between neighbouring states, such as the
Iraq–Iran war.
Iran is not the first country to be targeted in quick succession, nor will
it be the last. Increasingly events indicate that some governments and their
ruling elites may not be in a position to stand up and be counted. This
reflects the harsh facts that those governments which are not equitable to
their own citizens and allow the seizure of savings, resources or land
within their own countries of working people, cannot always be relied upon
internationally to protect international security based on a just world
order and equitable terms of trade. Yet all strategies to militarily seize
regions, including sanctions and blockades, have to be defeated and exposed.
Militaries and military alliances which are the instruments of aggression
have to be disrupted and defeated and the dominant economic and political
order in the world today controlling international finance, trade and
manufacture in the interests of a few financial centres and behemoth banks
and corporations, pauperizing many societies, including people from within
the country in which these entities are based, has to be overturned in the
interest of civilization itself. It is these same entities are destroying
the fragile of ecosystem of our entire planet with impunity ravaging the
environment on a colossal scale. These large financial and corporate
entities are controlling their governments, have bankrupted their own and
other societies and have a history of using the imperial and colonial system
and with superiority of weaponry. They must be refrained from seizing the
resources of whole countries by war or sectarian strife, including the
resources of people in their own societies. To trust them would be an
exercise in extreme naiveté, if not outright collaboration.
Notes
1. Press Conference held at Beirut of the Secretary General of the
Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrullah, 9th August 2010.
2. Memorandum of detainees of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
addressed to the ICTR, to the Security Council, to the Secretary General of
the United Nations, 25th July 2010.
3. Carlo Del Ponte and Sudetic, ‘ Madame Prosecutor: Confrontations with
Humanity’s Worst Criminals and the Culture of Impunity ‘( The Other Press
NY,2009)
4. Michael Mandel ‘ How America Gets Away With Murder ‘,2004 Pluto Press.
5. Dr. Frederic F. Clairmont,’ British Petroleum : The Unfinished Crisis and
Plunder of Anglo-American Imperialism’,9.8.2010 Globalresearch.ca.
6. Leuren Moret, Depleted Uranium : The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War,
presentation in proceedings before the International Criminal Tribunal for
Afghanistan, at Tokyo, a civil society initiative of Jurists and Law
Professors of Japan 2003.
7. Davids Committee on the Iraq War, constituted by the Netherlands
Parliament, Report submitted to Parliament on 12th January 2010.
8. International Court of Justice,’ The Legality of the Threat or Use of
Nuclear Weapons’ Advisory Opinion of 8 July,1996, I.C.J. Reports 226.
9. Tomihisa Taue, Mayor of Nagasaki, Nagasaki Peace Declaration, 9th August
2010.
10. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin,’ Imperialism, the Highest stage of Capitalism’,
1917, Zizn i.Znaniye Publishers, Petrograd, Russia.
----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----