Content area
Full Text
I. INTRODUCTION
In March 2003, a small group of states led by the United States1 invaded Iraq. Determining the exact policy reason for invading Iraq is a somewhat complicated task; government officials offered a variety of policy justifications that both differed in their emphases depending on the audience being addressed and evolved over time.2 In some instances, U.S. officials expressed concern for U.S. national security, sometimes relating to the threat of terrorism.3 In other instances, U.S. officials asserted a need to protect Iraq's neighbors or the international community at large, including the need to uphold resolutions of the UN security Council ordering Iraqi disarmament of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).4 At times, attention was called to the welfare of the Iraqi people and the need to help them throw off a despotic and abusive ruler.5 Many commentators noted the importance of Iraq in a region from which the United States and the global community derive energy resources.6
As for the basis for the invasion of Iraq under international law,7 in the months leading up to March 2003, considerable attention was paid to the doctrine of "preemptive self-defense" expressed by the Bush Administration in its September 2002 report to the Congress on national security. That report, among other things, asserted an evolved right under international law for the United States to use military force preemptively against the threat posed by "rogue states" possessing WMD.8 The doctrine no doubt was attractive to the Bush Administration, as it resonated with the fears of many Americans-in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks by the terrorist organization Al Qaeda-that at some point WMD would be unleashed against the United States by uncontrollable states or organizations.9 Yet, ultimately, when explaining the legal basis for its action against Iraq, the United States did not assert that the invasion of Iraq was permissible under international law due to an evolved right of preemptive self-defense10 or that international law was irrelevant.11 Rather, the United States asserted that the invasion was lawful because it was authorized by the Security Council.12 That authorization was not issued in 2002-03, but rather in 1990, when the Security Council adopted Resolution 678,13 and thereby authorized a coalition of states to repel Iraq from Kuwait and to restore...