Fletcher's crusade is off-base
George Fletcher's article proclaiming the illusionary supremacy of international law over the sovereignty of traditional nation-states ("Is this really war?," Oct 23, page 9) is not in the least enlightening.
If such transnational entities like "Terror Inc" are to be recognized as agents of war under the laws of land warfare, then Fletcher would have us believe that these landless sovereign entities should be officially recognized as the juridical person of a foreign state equivalent, only without the territory.
There are precedents. From around 1870-1945, the Holy See was recognized as a sovereign entity despite lacking the critical qualification of terra imperium or territorial jurisdiction under international law. Due in part to the realpolitik of the likes of Bismarck, the papal states of the feudal era had disappeared from the maps of Europe by that time. But the Vatican, in its capacity as an enduring ecclesiastical sovereign entity, also still legally claimed it had a supreme dominion over all the earth, including those successfully Christianized nation-states of the fallen Roman Empire.
Fletcher is on a crusade to establish the UN's universal jurisdiction, just as the "Terror Inc" is on a jihad to establish an ecclesiastical dominion over the earth. In Afghanistan, the destruction of ancient Buddhist statues is evidence of the disregard for cultural and religious relics protected by the 1907 Hague Convention. This treaty includes a clause for settling disputes arising out of hostilities and military occupation of claimed territory at the International Court of Justice.
Rather than abide by the laws of land warfare, Fletcher promotes the rule of landless jurisdictional authority to combat the "landless revolutionaries" of a new jihad. Perhaps he should read FM 27-10 Rules of Land Warfare, which is the US Army's manual on the Hague Convention of 1907. It is the authoritative source for clearly defining the elastic legal circumstances of effective military control of an occupied area including its transnational jurisdictional authority.
I think Fletcher should remember that `landless revolutions' never worked and the unconventional soldiers of the "American Empire" on the ground in Afghanistan are not in a state of decline.
Jeff Geer
Las Vegas, Nevada
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS