There is a very interesting poll question on CNN.com today that I wanted to share with you.
Does one nation have the right to tell another nation whether it can launch a rocket?
Like most of these poll questions on CNN, it doesn’t frame the question correctly and/or it doesn’t provide more than just a “yes” or “no” answer. Here is my take (and why I cannot answer the question as asked).
Does on nation have the right? In the sense of a legal term, there is no law that either provides for or denies the “right” of one country to tell another country what to do. On the flip side, there is no legal expectation of one country to think another country should respond to the above request. I think the question could be phrased in two different ways to cover the issue without using the word “right” in the question (without getting into the muddy waters of dealing with the UN).
Can one country tell another country not to launch a rocket without legal reprisal?
In my view, the answer to this question would be “yes.” I think any country can freely express their desires regarding the actions of another country. The US is often expressing their desires for Iran to not develop nuclear weapons, for example.
Should one country expect another country to respond to a command or stated desire?
For this question, my answer would be “no.” In regards to the US position towards Iran, Iran has stated that the US has no authority what to tell them to do. We do not have any legal authority over Iran, and therefore they are free to proceed as they please.
If you add the UN into this mix, however, things become fuzzy. Does the multinational organization have any legal say over the other nations? It depends on your view of what power the UN actually has. As I type this, the UN Security Council has gathered to determine what type of response (if any) to take towards N. Korea. In my view, this really won’t make a difference other than a group of nations stating their displeasure. N. Korea can easily play their “sovereignty” card and declare that the UN has no legal authority over the Asian nation. And with that, I would agree with N. Korea.
What do you think?
Loading ...
Interesting post. If that nation has signed a treaty saying they will not do X and they do it anyway then this is one matter. If they have not signed the treaty and do it then it is up for debate. India and Pakistan managed to get nukes despite what other nations said. In our modern world of manners and protocol it is not “polite” to tell another country what to do. However, I think you have to look at the history of that nation. Are they peaceful? How do they interact with other countries? Some would say Iran is trying to get a nuke so they will not have to worry about being put in their place by the U.S. or Israel so it is a matter of self defense. Others say that India and Pakistan got their nukes to protect them from each other. The problem is that when countries which could easily become or are unstable get nukes they place everybody else at risk. If the common good dictates that getting nukes would lower the safety of the world then they should not be allowed to acquire these weapons.
For example, nobody thinks that France, England, Russia, China, or the U.S. would actually set a nuke off so the danger to the rest of the world is minimal. Israel apparently does have nukes (to protect them from their neighbors) but I would apply the same standard to them as I would to Iran or North Korea not because of the type of government they have but because the chances for having them use a nuke are so high.
In the end, legal means are worthless and it seems that nobody has the will to militarily prevent another country from getting nukes. However, the chances of one of these things going off are growing every year and, once Iran tests their impending nuke, the situation will get far worse.
This all pre-supposes that the “West knows best” and many do not subscribe to this view. I think, however, that they are rationalizing themselves closer to WWIII.