|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The Saker Indymedia Ireland is a volunteer-run non-commercial open publishing website for local and international news, opinion & analysis, press releases and events. Its main objective is to enable the public to participate in reporting and analysis of the news and other important events and aspects of our daily lives and thereby give a voice to people.
Lockdown Skeptics
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Dispelling the Government's myths about Shannon Airport national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Thursday March 20, 2003 11:57 by Eoin Dubsky - Refueling Peace info at refuelingpeace dot org 087-6941060
 Reported on RTE News yesterday, Bertie Ahern, defended the Irish government's decision to allow US military flights still overfly and refuel here. I want to briefly dispell some of the myths he is relying on to win support from the parliament (Dail Eireann) later today. Speaking on RTÉ's Six One News, Mr Ahern said that he was not prepared to withdraw access to the airport which had existed since 1955. ** MYTH ****************
(Hague Convention V, 1907: Convention Respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land) ** MYTH ****************
Art. 5: A Neutral Power must not allow any of the acts referred to in Articles 2 to 4 to occur on its territory. The Hague Conventions are part of international customary law and our Constitution at Article 29.3 states that "Ireland accepts the generally recognised principles of international law as its rule of conduct in its relations with other States." "There is little doubt that under international law our duties as a neutral state in a case of hostilities would be to use the means at our disposal to prevent the entry of belligerent military aircraft into our airspace, to compel such aircraft to alight and to intern aircraft and crew." These are the words Con Cremin used considering a request for blanket permission by the US for military overflights. Mr. Cremin isn't a peace activist or a subversive. The quotation comes from a government document now in the National Archives on the subject of neutrality, written in 1958 by Mr Cremin, one of the most eminent figures in the history of the Irish diplomatic service. The law of neutrality defines the legal relationship between nations engaged in an armed conflict (belligerents) and nations not taking part in such hostilities (neutrals). See also:
"Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:… (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State;" Shannon Airport as 'human shield' "War crimes means...serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts;…(xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;" Depleted Uranium According to Article 36 of Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions, States are required to ensure that any new weapon, means or method of warfare does not contravene existing rules of international law. These rules prohibit weapons, means or methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, which have indiscriminate effects or which cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment. The Geneva Conventions have been brought into Irish law most recently with the GENEVA CONVENTIONS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1998. Depleted uranium weapons and nuclear weapons obviously fall fowl of this Act.
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (7 of 7)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Eh tank you Owen for dat enlitening contribewshun .... eh very well spoken .... almost better dan I cudda done meself ....
However I don't ackshewally agree with yewer anal assys of de international shit-you-way-shun ...
I mean tings have eh moved on a bit since 1958 and we don't want to be stick-in-de-muds now do we ...
Ireland's place is clearly summwhere in de new world ordure and eh I tink we have to find it even by trial and eh eh eh error if need be ....
However, I must admit dat all dat ould legal and diplomatic shite was never really my strong point. As yew all know I am happiest nursin a pint of Guinness down in de local.
Derefore I am heartened to see dat people are really puttin in de effort to clarify matters and I tink dat we will get it all worked out to everybody's satisfaction sooner or later ..... hopefully as soon as dis terrible war is over ....
Thanks for this, Eoin - you're informative as ever. And, unlike the first commentator on your piece, "Bartholomew", also extremely literate. This stuff is good to know for those of us who have Shannon-related court cases coming up.
Personally, I'd rather die than see Ireland integrated utterly into the "new world order" proposed by the current belligerent, imperialistic and corrupt U.S. administration. And the scary thing is that we're getting there.
Deirdre.
For reminding us that you guys had your sense of humour sucked out through your left nostril.
Get a dictionary, look up, satire and irony.
Then hit yourself over the head with said dictionary.
The satire I enjoy is usually actually amusing and witty, rather than lame and pointless. The letter referred to doesn't qualify in my book as satirical or ironic. So, ironically indeed, it's you who should be looking those words up the dictionary. And perhaps a get decent book on proper punctuation while you're at it.
It's not that "us guys" don't have a sense of humour; it's just that most normal people are in a rather sombre mood today, given that it's the start of an unjustified act of agression against an innocent civilian population. But perhaps you wouldn't be able to relate to that.
By the way, the name is Deirdre; drop the familiarity.
Or you will what.....
I adore threats and demands over the net.
Although I am sure that you have a brillant and razor sharp wit about you, and chuckle at all the suitable bits in Dave Rovac or whatever "right on" comedian "satirist" that floats your boat.
Admit it, you didnt have a clue that that was a very good version of Da Diary of a Northside Taoiseach, put together quickly. You couldnt spot funny if Tom Lehrer and Groucho Marx were serenading you about it.
And spare me the people dying bit, god you are so po faced you could make me puke, satire is one of the most effective tools when all you have is words.
Cop on
eoin, i fully agree with your stance. i only came across the vth hague convention recently. i thought i was onto a winner (belligerents may not move troops, etc.) but later read that "irish neutrality is not the neutrality in the sense of the 1907 Hague Convention, since it isnot discussed in practice in relation to a particular conflict but in the first place as a peacetime policy." that's from "Riding the Tiger" by jerome connolly, 1992. if you or anyone else knows how to counteract this statement, i would be most obliged.
"DCU student" is probably not a student anymore, and probably won't be reading this, but to answer her/his question: What "Riding the Tiger" says about "Irish Neutrality" may be true, but it doesn't matter.
"Irish Neutrality" could mean all sorts of things, especially if you mean it to say "Irish version of neutrality". Like American Football is an American version of football, not just Americans playing football (what they call "soccer"). When Americans play football against another country, they are obliged to respect the international rules of the game -- They can't pick up the ball, smash into players who get in their way, and proclaim "well, geez, I'm an American. I thought we could play American Football!". The same goes for Ireland.
Whereas "Irish Neutrality" may be a matter of domestic politics, Ireland's rights and duties during a time of war are a matter of international law. To say that we can ignore international law, and instead observe a lesser standard set by our government, is no different from what America is doing over torture and prisoner's rights.