Voir également : "Diplomatie", "Relations internationales" et "Politique étrangère"
Phyllis BENNIS, 17 October 2003
The U.S.-driven UN resolution passed by the Security Council provides only an internationalist fig-leaf for Washington’s occupation; the occupation remains illegal and in violation of the UN Charter. The new resolution will do nothing to change the fundamental problems of the U.S. occupation of Iraq — the occupation’s illegitimacy, its unilateralism, and its responsibility for so much destruction in Iraq and for the on-going crisis of violence in the country. The new resolution, designed as much for Bush’s domestic political gain as for international purposes, does nothing to make the occupation acceptable, and we remain adamantly opposed to it.
Pascal FORTIN, 14 octobre 2003
En 2001, l’Assemblée générale de l’Organisation des Nations unies (ONU) a confié à l’Union internationale des télécommunications (UIT) la préparation du Sommet mondial sur la société de l’information (SMSI). Organisé en deux étapes, le SMSI doit aboutir lors de sa première phase à l’adoption d’une Déclaration de principe et d’un Plan d’action à Genève en décembre prochain qui fera l’objet d’une première évaluation lors de la seconde phase à Tunis en 2005.
Phyllis BENNIS, 23 September 2003
Still committed to its war drive in Iraq, Washington stands more isolated than ever. Its trade aims were defeated at the World Trade Organization in Cancun. It faces international outrage following its veto of the mildly-worded Security Council resolution challenging Israel’s threat to expel or assassinate Yasir Arafat. In response, the General Assembly overwhelming passed a resolution virtually identical to that Washington vetoed in the Council.
Phyllis BENNIS, 2 September 2003
The recent Bush administration trial balloons regarding a new role for the United Nations in Iraq reflect a growing concern regarding what the New York called the "high cost of occupation" for the U.S. in Iraq — costs both in U.S.soldiers’ lives and in dollars. The emerging reassessment is not a reflection of any concern regarding the illegality of the occupation, the lack of legitimacy of the U.S. presence in Iraq, or the impact on Iraqis of Washington’s abject failure to provide for even the minimal humanitarian needs of the population.
Karine GIRARD, 30 mai 2003
La dernière vague de massacres ethniques en République démocratique du Congo (RDC) aurait fait plus de 300 morts au cours des dernières semaines à Bunia, chef lieu de l’Ituri. Ces atrocités sont survenues sous les yeux des observateurs de la Mission de l’ONU au Congo (MONUC), qui ne se sont pas interposés.
Gabriel KOLKO, 12 May 2003
The disintegration of the Soviet bloc permitted American unilateralism on a scale the modern world has never seen. But with its war against Iraq the United States for the first time openly massed its military power and then invaded another nation, justifying the war in the name of the elimination of weapons of mass destruction and "regime change." At the same time, it staked the very future of its existing alliances—NATO above all—but also the United Nations. NATO’s demise is a major outcome of the war against Iraq.
Focus on the Global South, 7 May 2003
The US-lead invasion and occupation of Iraq is illegal. In 1946, the Nuremberg Tribunal judged that "to initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." Consequently, we demand an immediate end to the illegal occupation of Iraq by the United States and the United Kingdom and the immediate withdrawal and removal of all foreign troops, military advisers and representatives, military equipment and armaments.
Phyllis BENNIS, 2 May 2003
The war on Iraq has been waged without UN authority in violation of the organisation s charter. Because the war is illegal, any post-war US occupation will be illegal too. That means the US should not be allowed to claim any power to rule or determine economic, political or social arrangements in post-war Iraq. Only the UN has the legitimate authority to provide governance and help rebuild civil society in Iraq now Saddam Hussein’s regime has been overthrown.
Phyllis BENNIS, 11 April 2003
It is not surprising, and like everyone else we anticipated that some Iraqis would welcome U.S. troops and cheer their arrival. Many have already tempered their welcome with urging the U.S. not to stay in Iraq for long. Most Iraqis are almost certainly relieved and thrilled at the imminent end of a terribly repressive regime and an end to crippling sanctions. But if yesterday was the party — today the hangover begins. There are already reports of Iraqis saying the Ba’athist regime was bad, but that the current lack of authority and its resulting looting and chaos are worse — "at least before we had security," one said.
Pierre BEAUDET, 11 avril 2003