Dr. Rick Lorenz
Professor of International Studies, University of
Washington: Jackson School of International Studies
Part Four:
Islam, Afghanistan and the Issue of Terrorism
Response to Terrorism: Military Force and International Law
On November 27, Dr. Rick Lorenz spoke to Richland staff about the
United State's military response to the attacks on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon, and the legality of this response under
international law. Lorenz is an international law expert with almost
three decades of experience as a United States military judge advocate,
and has served in a legal capacity on United Nations missions in
Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo. His lecture was the final of a four-part
series focusing on the events of September 11th, sponsored by the
Pacific Northwest Center for Global Security.
"International law is 90 percent politics and 10 percent
law," Lorenz told his PNNL audience. He explained that one of the
great challenges of international law is that, unlike national law,
there are no police to enforce it. There is one international court, the
International Court of Justice, and the International Court of Criminal
Justice is in the process of being ratified. International law is
voluntarily adhered to by states. This voluntary compliance is generally
motivated by the desire to see other states contained, and to gain
acceptance in the international community and the consequent economic
advantages. However, the lack of enforcement can result in great
inconsistencies in application of international law and codes of
conduct.
International law is undergoing changes as the nature of conflict
evolves; traditionally international justice had been applied to
state-to-state conflict, however, over recent decades it has
increasingly focused on internal conflict and war crimes. However, many
states are uncomfortable with having their citizens judged by
non-nationals. In particular, the United States has voiced strong
opposition to permitting its service members to be judged by an
international tribunal, fearing that they could be charged as war
criminals for following orders.
"There are three classic tools of diplomacy," Lorenz told
his audience. These tools are diplomacy, economics and military action.
The latter is forbidden under the United Nations Charter unless the UN
Security Council approves, or unless Article 51 of the UN Charter, which
upholds the inherent right to self-defense, is invoked, as the United
States did before attacking Afghanistan. Lorenz expressed his support
for the United State's course of action, distinguishing between the
United State's attack on Afghanistan for harboring the Taliban from
Germany's harboring of individuals responsible for the 1993 bombing of
the World Trade Center by declaring that the Taliban was aware of who
they were harboring, while Germany was not. However, Lorenz also stated
that he believed diplomacy and economic sanctions would be most
effective in countering terrorism in the long-term.
While unification of the international community against terrorism
has been impressive, Lorenz told his audience, there is no standard
definition of "terrorism." The Russians have declared Chechen
separatists to be terrorists. The Kosovar and Bosnian Serbs accuse their
Muslims populations of being terrorists. Furthermore, individuals
considered terrorists in their own country are able to seek asylum in
other nations by claiming that they are being persecuted for their
political beliefs.
Turning his commentary to issues related to the current military
conflict such as the United State's role in the Israeli-Palestinian
peace talks, the delicacy of the American-Saudi alliance and the current
threat to civil rights in the United States, Lorenz stated, "Things
not on CNN are the most important part of this war, in my opinion."
