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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS