The position of the international law of the intervention in Iraq in 2003

Jwad Al-MukhtarandAbdul Salam Alioui A. Al-Janabi, Teaba

	The position of the international law of the intervention in Iraq in 2003
AL- Mouhakiq Al-Hilly Journal for legal and political science
Article 1, Volume 7, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 260-309
Author
Teaba Jwad Al-MukhtarandAbdul Salam Alioui A. Al-Janabi
Abstract
To know the position of the international law of intervention in Iraq in 2003, we must explain the justification put forward by the coalition countries to justify military intervention in Iraq, starting raised justification Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction that threaten international peace and security, through the relationship of the former regime to al Qaeda, the terrorist responsible for the events of 11 / 9/2001 Having proven a lie these apologists raised justified another is the need of the ruling dictatorial regime change and the establishment of other democratic system that respects human rights and be a model for the Middle East countries, but all of these justifications proved to be false, even after for the intervention and to this day has not discovered evidence one confirms Iraq's possession of banned weapons. The justification system linked to al-Qaeda has not been substantiated, too, and the last justification is inconsistent with the right of peoples to self-determination through the selection of the appropriate sentence her system so this intervention is a violation of the right of the Iraqi people to self-determination and self-people are is change the dictatorial regime to a system democratic. It may also differed legal qualification for the intervention of these forces in Iraq Beginning claimed that the intervention is part of the defense of preventive self-theory for the prevention of the Iraqi threat alleged, then raised the implicit mandate given to them under Security Council resolutions theory, but these previous adaptations do not apply to intervene in Iraq because the air conditioning right to intervene is an aggression against the State and the people of Iraq and our guide in the General Assembly Resolution (3314) of 1974 on aggression as defined Article (1) of the aggression that (the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty of another state, territorial integrity or political independence ...) This definition applies to fully enter the coalition countries in Iraq, and it becomes a conditioning coalition's intervention in Iraqi affairs countries aggression. The Security Council has worked to determine the legal status of Iraq from the international side in the light of the decisions issued by, and most important of Resolution No. 1483 of 2003, which considered the US and British forces occupying forces without condemning the intervention or require intervening forces Withdrawal from Iraq, then issued Resolution No. (1511) 2004, under which were turning the occupation forces to the multinational forces, and has remained the Council follows the case of Iraq until the conclusion of the Agreement between the Republic of Iraq and the United States on the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and the organization of its activities during the temporary presence in 2008, which identified the relationship between the two parties.
Keywords
Most charters of international organizations have stressed that all states are prohibited from interference in the affairs of other countries; either directly or indirectly

Statistics Article View: 79 PDF Download: 69