Sir, - Article 39 of the UN Charter states: "The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression . . ."
President Clinton and Mr Blair have broken the UN Charter by declaring war bi-laterally on the Iraqi people. Three of the five permanent members of the Security Council have either dissociated or condemned them for this.
The US has substituted Richard Butler's decision to pull UNSCOM out of Iraq for the legitimate decision-making agent of the Security Council . This pullout should have been followed by a meeting of the Security Council to decide what action should be taken. The Security Council could then have taken measures, either peaceful under article 41 of the Charter or involving "such force as is necessary" under article 42. Either way it was with the Security Council alone that the decision rested.
The world must ask if we wish to keep the UN as arbiter of threats to international peace and security. Are unilateral decisions to use force against a state now condoned by the US and Britain? The UN was set up in order to prevent such a scenario which had already led to the devastation of two world wars. President Milosovich of Yugoslavia has gone unpunished after similar action. Mr Clinton and Mr Blair should take note that Milosovich will be remembered in history as a war- mongering tyrant. - Yours, etc., Beth Nunan,
Blackrock, Co Dublin.