By: David Commissiong.

As a law student at the Cave Hill campus of the University of the West
Indies, I made a study of Public International Law. And I am not aware
of ANY principle of International Law that would confer upon the
United States of America the right to inflict a punitive missile
attack on the nation of Syria in the currently prevailing
circumstances.

My understanding of International Law tells me that if it is being
alleged that the Government of Syria carried out a chemical weapons
attack against any group of human beings— civilian or military— the
institution that is invested with the power and responsibility to
determine whether the allegation is true and to decide upon punitive
measures is the United Nations Security Council.

I would therefore like to publicly challenge the current U S
Ambassador to Barbados — His Excellency Larry Palmer — to bring to the
attention of the Barbadian people any International Law principles
that would confer on the Government of the USA the right to
unilaterally supplant the United Nations Security Council on this
issue. I am absolutely certain that no such principle of law exists!

The USA is a member-state of the United Nations, and is one of the
five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. Thus,
the USA is bound by the principles and stipulations of the United
Nations Charter.

And this is what the U N Charter specifies in relation to a matter of
this nature:-

" Article 2
4. All members shall refrain in their international relations from
the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity of any
state...... or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of
the United Nations.

"Article 39
The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to
the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make
recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance
with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain of restore international peace
and security.

"Article 41
The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of
armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions....

"Article 42
Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in
Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may
take such action by air, sea or land forces as may be necessary to
maintain or restore international peace and security.....

"Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of
individual or collective self- defence if an armed attack occurs
against a Member of the united Nations, until the Security Council has
taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and
security..."

It is clear from the foregoing that the only circumstance in which the
Government of the USA would possess the right to make a unilateral
decision to launch a military attack on Syria is if Syria had engaged
in an "armed attack" on the USA, and the USA was responding in
self-defence. Clearly, there has been no such armed attack on the USA,
and the responsibility for dealing with this matter rests solely with
the United Nations Security Council.

It is therefore extremely regrettable that in the midst of an on-going
investigation into the chemical attack in Syria by Security Council
experts, the Government of the USA should be guilty of
deliberately "jumping the gun" and publicly declaring that the Syrian
Government is the guilty party.

It is even more regrettable that, to date, the Government of the USA
has brazenly refused to share its alleged evidence with the United
Nations Security Council, in spite of the fact that it has been
requested to do so.

Based on the foregoing, the only logical conclusion that we Barbadians
can come to is that the Government of the USA is determined to attack
the nation of Syria, and is equally determined to establish a pretext
or justification for doing so, even if such a course of action causes
them to act illegally and in breach of some of the most fundamental
principles of International Law.

It is "Iraq 2002" all over again — only this time it is qualitatively
worse! On that occasion, the Government of the USA brazenly lied to
the entire world when they asserted that President Saddam Hussein
possessed "weapons of mass destruction". Back then, they used that lie
to gain the support of the United Nations Security Council. Now,
however, their contempt for International Law is so extreme that they
are not even bothering to seek the cover of Security Council support!

Truly, we have returned to the era of the Law of the Jungle!

On behalf of the officers and members of the Clement Payne Movement
and the Peoples Empowerment Party I hereby call upon the Governments
of Barbados and the Caribbean Community to speak up now and to
register their collective disapproval of this lawless behaviour on the
part of the Government of the USA.

DAVID COMISSIONG
President
Clement Payne Movement
Peoples Empowerment Party