2003년 미국 - 이라크 전쟁과 현대국제법의 과제
- 주제(키워드) 이라크(Iraq) , 2003년 미국-이라크 전쟁(2003 US led-led Invasion of Iraq) , 무력사용(Use of Armed Force) , 국제인도법(International Humanitarian Law) , 테러리즘(Terrorism) , 예방전쟁론(pre-emptive war doctrine) , 1949년 제네바협약(1949 Geneva Conventions) , 국제인권법(International Human Rights Law) , 이라크(Iraq) , 2003년 미국-이라크 전쟁(2003 US led-led Invasion of Iraq) , 무력사용(Use of Armed Force) , 국제인도법(International Humanitarian Law) , 테러리즘(Terrorism) , 예방전쟁론(pre-emptive war doctrine) , 1949년 제네바협약(1949 Geneva Conventions) , 국제인권법(International Human Rights Law)
- 발행기관 고려대학교 법학연구원
- 발행년도 2006
- 총서유형 Journal
- UCI G704-001888.2006..46.001
- KCI ID ART001536714
- 본문언어 한국어
초록/요약
Abstract The 2003 Iraq War and International Law by Ki-Gab PARK (Professor, Faculty of Law, Korea University) This article examines diverse phases of the Iraq War from 2003 to 2006 and analyzes the war's effects on international society and international law in the 21st century. There are, at least, five important issues caused by the 2003 Iraq War: the unilateralism of President Bush's adminstration; the preemptive military action doctrine; disturbing the United Nations' mission; the question of the legality or legitimacy of the use of force under the pretext of spreading democracy around the world; and finally increasing the gray zone in the application of International Humanitarian Law. After having examined the above-mentioned five aspects, the conclusion is that the unilateral acts done by the United States' Government has had a negative impact on international society, especially on the UN; in particular those acts emphasize subjective ‘Justice’ to such an extent that it can not be accepted by other countries. Also we find that the UN's reputation and confidence have been damaged. This can be attributed to unilateral use of force by the United States and Great Britain. Complicated relations among the permanent members of the Security Council of the UN also have led to their estrangement, which might take considerable time to be healed. This article analyses the status of terrorists in International Humanitarian Law because it seems unclear whether terrorists can be protected by that legal system. There are confusions regarding the applicability of International Humanitarian Law to terrorists and how States encounter violations and frictions to International Humanitarian Law as a result of terrorism. Considering recent judicial decisions made by a District Court and a Court of Appeal of the United States and a report published by the Commission on Human Rights of the UN, the author's conclusion is that although International Humanitarian Law can not be applied to terrorists, the essential principles enshrined in International Human Rights Law should be applied to terrorists.
more

