Iraq and Kuwait.. Kuwait was liberated, and Iraq remained suffering from Chapter VII and the demarcation of borders

Iraq and Kuwait.. Kuwait was liberated, and Iraq remained suffering from Chapter VII and the demarcation of borders

8-7-2023

Ambassador Dr. Jawad Al-Hindawi
Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait did not last more than a few months (from the date of 2/8/1990 until 25/2/1991), but Iraq’s suffering continues, not only from the crimes, mistakes and recklessness of the previous regime, but also from a UN blockade, international occupation, and a military package. Unfair UN resolutions, marred by a legal flaw, against the sovereignty and unity of the lands and waters of Iraq, issued and implemented by the Security Council under its Resolutions No. 687 in 1991, and 833 in 1993.

Whoever carefully reads the aforementioned resolutions and their annexes of documents, appendices, and minutes of committee meetings that were formed according to the resolutions and decisions of the committees, will see an unprecedented bias on the part of the United Nations, the Security Council, the formed committees, and some experts who were delegated by the Security Council to implement The aforementioned decisions, especially with regard to border demarcation, and he will also see the Security Council’s transgression of the powers granted to it, under the Charter of the United Nations.

Not for the first time, I write about the subject (Iraq and Chapter VII), and I have already dealt with it, more than once, since 2004, in special professional reports, and in articles published in more than one source.

Now write down the most important of your opinions and observations:

1- Iraq should have been removed from Chapter VII since the date of the formation of the Iraqi Governing Council and Iraq was placed legally under the authority of the American occupation, as it was no longer at that time a country threatening global peace and security. And it could have been placed only under Chapter Six for Kuwaiti and international dues and compensations.

How is it possible to explain the continuation of the status of Iraq, under Chapter VII, and classified as a threat to global peace and security, while it is, at the same time, occupied by America?

How can the legal description of Iraq be accepted as a country that threatens global peace and security, while it is occupied by America? And it became, after legally ending its occupation in 2011, linked to a joint strategic agreement with America?

Legitimate questions and we mentioned them, at the time, but the political interest of the state and the constitutional institutions was focused on managing the country and fighting terrorism and not entering into a legal and political debate (which may be sterile, according to their opinion, with the American administration), and perhaps some political forces had an interest in him remaining Iraq is weak and under Chapter VII and lacks sovereignty.

Now, it is the right of the citizen and the official to ask, did Iraq come out practically and legally from the provisions of Chapter VII?

Practically, yes.

Legally, there are two opinions: the first is based on the continuation or termination of the measures taken in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII. According to this opinion, the termination of all sanctions and coercive measures taken under the provisions of Chapter VII, and in accordance with resolutions issued successively by the Security Council, this means Iraq’s exit from Chapter VII . The owners of this opinion consider that the announcement of Iraq’s exit from Chapter VII, by the Security Council, is a media and political declaration more than it is legal.

The second opinion considers the need for the Security Council to issue a clear and explicit decision to force Iraq out of Chapter VII. The owners of this opinion, most of them from the classical, Francophone legal school, adopt the following idea: “Just as Iraq was placed under the provisions of Chapter VII according to a clear and explicit decision, the Security Council should issue Also, a clear and explicit decision to liberate Iraq from the provisions of Chapter Seven, and otherwise, the continuation or liberation of Iraq from the provisions of Chapter Seven is a matter of controversy and subject to interpretation and interpretation, and it could be an opportunity for blackmail and political pressure by one of the major powers.

The latest resolution issued by the Security Council No. 2622 dated 2/2/2022 explicitly declares that Iraq has ended all of its financial and procedural obligations with the Compensation Committee, and thus the termination of all measures taken by the Security Council, based on Chapter VII, with regard to the compensation file. The decision did not declare explicitly and clearly the liberation of Iraq and its departure from the provisions of Chapter VII.

2- In Resolution No. 660 of 1990, the Security Council called on both Iraq and Kuwait to work towards resolving their differences, including the demarcation of borders, but in the resolutions that followed the above-mentioned resolution, the Security Council adopted a position that contradicts its call to Iraq and Kuwait to seek to resolve their differences, as he took their place in demarcating the borders.

Resolution No. 687 of 1991, Section (a) of it, according to which the Security Council imposed the foundations and method of border demarcation, which is a UN precedent that had not happened before, and a clear transgression of the powers of the Security Council, as the UN Charter did not entrust any authority to the Security Council to carry out demarcation tasks. Border between two sovereign states. The demarcation of the borders between two countries is done by the will of the two countries and considering the issue as a sovereign matter, and in the event of a disagreement or disagreement between them, any party has the right to seek the assistance of the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

3- The Secretary-General of the United Nations, and in implementation of the aforementioned Security Council resolution, approved a British map drawn in 1989-1990, by the Director General of Military Survey in the United Kingdom, and circulated it as a document of the United Nations, and at the request of the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom in The United Nations, in his letter dated 3/28/1991, five days before the adoption of Resolution 687 in 1991. Iraq objected at the time to this, officially and supported by documents. Iraq also objected to the composition of the international committee formed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, consisting of five members, one representing Iraq, one representing Kuwait, and three experts chosen by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

4- The resignation of the Chairman of the Border Demarcation Commission, Mr. Mukhtar Kusuma, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, shortly after his work. He explicitly indicated the reasons for the resignation: the first is personal and the second is his objection to the work of the committee with regard to the eastern borders, that is, the maritime part and Khawr Abdullah.

The resignation indicates the existence of controversy and abuses by the committee’s experts, and pressures by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, in order to expedite the demarcation of the maritime borders.

almaalomah.me