The Military Attack and Occupation of Iraq in Light of International Laws

America’s military attack on Iraq has brought about a change in the way the international community considers the system of general security as well as the reliability and power of the United Nations in managing international crises. This is why the rules of international laws have also lost their credibility. The estimation of the consequences of the attack on Iraq and the continuation of its occupation is still the most outstanding international crisis, analyzed by lawyers and researchers of international relations.The only thing to arise optimism is the common consensus that America has broken the fundamental rules of international laws by attacking Iraq without the permission of the U.N. Security Council. This is considered as a military assault and a crime of war. The United States of America’s act of resorting to force clearly indicates the fact that the country is breaking the rules of international laws and the authorities of the country are exploiting some of the principles of the international laws, such as every nation’s legitimate natural right to defend its country.In abusing the principle of legitimate defense of one’s country, America uses it as a principle sanctioning the attainment of its belligerent goals and interests. Seen in this perspective, the peacekeeping organization, the United Nations, is in a position powerless and unable to act. As the superpower of the world, the government of America tries, by way of legitimizing its authority, to use it as a tool to dominate the world.Obvious to all, there is a distinct difference between the countries of the world as far as their military, technology and economy are concerned. Yet, relying on force and legitimizing its use in solving international problems has only been to the advantage of the powerful states, whereas the countries in weak or average power positions remain defenseless.