Foreign Policy and International Law

President Bush, on April 25, announced that he would not grant safeguard relief from imports of Chinese wire garment hangers requested by the US industry under Section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974.1 In doing so the President rejected a unanimous recommendation from the US International Trade Commission that duties be raised for a three-year period.2 This is the second time relief has been sought under Section 421, and the second time relief has been denied by the Bush Administration.3

 

Background

            According to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1511, the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), the recognized occupying power in Iraq, [1] will dissolve on June 30, and an interim Iraqi government will begin to exercise Iraqi sovereignty. [2]   The United States, however, has repeatedly stated that its troops will remain in Iraq after the handover, pursuant to an expected request by the Iraqi government.  Given the questions surrounding the legitimacy of any Iraqi government, what would be the legal status of such a request?

 

Introduction

 

British news headlines have recently been dominated by the General Election, which took place on 5 May 2005. Predictably, the Iraq war was one of the "hot topics" of the election, and received much air time from politicians of all persuasions. One comment, which sparked a flurry of press attention, may have been confusing both to lay observers in Britain and to watchers abroad. On 30 April 2005, Gordon Brown, the current Chancellor of the Exchequer, stated that, in future, Members of Parliament should be allowed to decide whether Britain goes to war.[1]