Suchergebnisse

The purpose of the United Nations, as set forth in Article 1 of its charter, is "to maintain international peace and security, and to that end, to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace." The Security Council has made it clear that Saddam Hussein is a major threat to international peace and security.

Argues that the US Executive Branch could only continue the ABM Treaty on a temporary & conditional basis post-USSR without approval by two-thirds of the US Senate. The 1997 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) stated that ratification was subject to the approval of the states under their constitutional procedures, which requires the Senate's advice & consent. Legal precedent has allowed a president to continue a treaty after state succession without the consent of the Senate if the treaty does not involve "substantive changes" & with reasonable grounds to believe that the Senate is in full agreement. Substantive changes in the ABM treaty include the area lost to successor nations, a fundamental change of the parties involved, & the multilateralizing of the treaty. However, the US needs to consider its relations with the MOU signatories & its international leadership in abiding by its agreements. The best approach is to satisfy the requirements of Article 15 in the 1972 Treaty, which allows withdrawal 6 months after notification & to set the stage for international cooperation to protect all peaceful states. L. A. Hoffman

I am writing in response to my friend Louis Fisher's piece (89 AJIL 21 (1995)) on the legality of President Truman's commitment of troops to hostilities in Korea without specific statutory authorization. He makes a persuasive case; however, I believe there is at least equally compelling evidence for a very different conclusion. My full response will soon appear elsewhere,1 but a few brief observations may be of interest to your readers.