U.S. 'self-defense' argument for killing Soleimani meets skepticism

 kazukazu88さんがリツイート

焦点：イラン司令官殺害、米政府の法的根拠に疑問の声 https://t.co/xVBtVVPTWS 2020-01-05 10:30:09

— ロイター　トップニュース (@reuters_jptop) 2020年1月5日

U.S. 'self-defense' argument for killing Soleimani meets skepticism

The U.N. Charter generally prohibits the use of force against other states but there is an exception if a state gives consent to the use of force on its territory. Legal experts said the absence of consent from Iraq makes it difficult for the United States to justify the killing.


Under historic norms of international law, a country can defend itself preemptively if it acts out of necessity and responds proportionally to the threat.

Agnes Callamard, the U.N. special rapporteur on extra-judicial executions, questioned whether the attack met this threshold.
The targeting of Soleimani “appears far more retaliatory for past acts than anticipatory for imminent self-defense,” she said. “Lawful justifications for such killings are very narrowly defined and it is hard to imagine how any of these can apply to these killings.”

“This administration, like all others, has the right to act in self-defense,” said Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a former Central Intelligence Agency analyst who worked in Iraq focusing on Iranian-backed militias. “But the administration must come to Congress immediately and consult.”

その国の承認なくしてアメリカの宿敵をその国の領土で殺してしまうのは、今回がはじめてじゃないだろうけど、そりゃ、違法だろう、どう考えても。

まして、自衛かどうかも疑わしい。

さらに、議会にも相談してないし。

更新 オバマも議会から承認なしに軍をだしているって、そりゃオバマも悪いんじゃないの？