|
|
Haven't read the whole article yet, and unfortunately you have to pay to read it on their site, but there's what looks like a very interesting John Kampfner piece on the Attorney General's assertion that attempts to administrate post-war Iraq was illegal without a specific UN mandate (it also includes a full transcript of the warning) in this week's New Statesman.
Does this actually mean anything now, though, if it's blatantly obvious he's not going to have to face any legal consequences? Should we be feeling a warm "I told you so" glow, or stark terror that this changed nothing except to further weaken the rule of international law? |
|
|