First Query: Will our policies and actions adhere to and uphold the rule of law, especially international law?
This query may seem strange indeed. Nearly everyone believes that we are already on firm ground as a victimized nation which surely has a prime facie legal and moral case for taking reprisal action. That the United States is a nation victimized by a horrendous act of violence resulting in thousands of deaths and millions of dollars in damage is an established fact. But all the other facts, that is, the intelligence information and the forensic data that will matter most regarding targets of our response to this atrocity, should be under investigation for considerable time. The highest form of evidentiary standards must guide our policy at the international level in a manner equivalent to those of a grand jury indictment in the domestic sector. To hold actions, especially those of a military variety, to a lesser legal standard will not benefit our policy goals. Upholding such legal standards also is likely to guarantee that response actions will be taken later, rather than sooner. This
Related Questions
- What is the date and significance for the rule of peaceful dispute settlement in international law of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation signed by Britain and the United States?
- Isn’t there some rule or law against frivolously using public resources to enforce non-existent corporate policies?
- Is Public Participation a Rule of the Law of International Watercourses?
