Profile picture
, 4 tweets, 1 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
#Pentagon statement on targeted killing of #suleimani: 1. It mentions that it aimed at “deterring future Iranian attack plans”. This however is very vague. Future is not the same as imminent which is the time based test required under international law. (1)
2. Overall, the statement places far greater emphasis on past activities and violations allegedly commuted by Suleimani. As such the killing appears far more retaliatory for past acts than anticipatory for imminent self defense.
3. The notion that Suleimani was “actively developing plans” is curious both from a semantic and military standpoint. Is it sufficient to meet the test of mecessity and proportionality?
4. The statement fails to mention the other individuals killed alongside Suleimani. Collateral? Probably. Unlawful. Absolutely.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Agnes Callamard

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Related hashtags

#Pentagon #suleimani

More from @AgnesCallamard see all

Profile picture
Agnes Callamard
@AgnesCallamard
#Iraq: The targeted killings of Qasem Soleiman and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis are most lokely unlawful and violate international human rights law: Outside the context of active hostilities, the use of drones or other means for targeted killing is almost never likely to be legal (1)
To be justified under international human rights law, intentionally lethal or potentially lethal force can only be used where strictly necessary to protect against an imminent threat to life. (2)
In other words, whoever targeted these two men would need to demonstrate that the persons targeted constitute(d) an imminent threat to others. An individual’s past involvement in “terrorist” attacks is not sufficient to make his targeting for killing lawful. (3)
Read 6 tweets
Profile picture
Agnes Callamard
@AgnesCallamard
Why the sentence today is anything BUT Justice for #JamalKhashoggi: a) the hearings were held behind closed door even though none of the justification for holding a trial in camera under international law applied to this particular trial
b) The 18 Saudi officials, present on their own in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul for more than 10 days, cleaned up the crime scene. This is obstruction of justice and a violation of the Minnesota Protocol for the investigation of arbitrary killings (2)
c) Under international human rights law, the killing of Mr. #Khashoggi was an extrajudicial execution for which the State of #SaudiArabia is responsible. But at no point did the trial considered the responsibilities of the State.
Read 11 tweets

Related threads

Profile picture
Anthony Clark Arend
@arenda
1/ So . . . it is strange that we were discussing this just as it was unfolding! Here is a quick initial analysis:
a) First, as a general disclaimer, we don't yet know all the facts;
b) But it is clear that Soleimani has been responsible for orchestrating acts against US forces;
2/ c) The Pentagon statement noted that the goal was "deterring future Iranian attack plans." This would indicated that there *may* have been evidence of an imminent attack by elements of the Iranian Quds force.

Thus, there are strong arguments the US strike was legal . . .
a) Under Art 51 of the UN Charter, states have an inherent right of self-defense if an "armed attack has occurred."

b) It could be argued that Quds force actions have constituted an ongoing armed attack against the US, thus an armed attack has occurred OR . . .
Read 8 tweets
Profile picture
Fionna O'Leary, 🕷 #FBPE
@fascinatorfun
Holy Shit. Pentagon issues a statement saying they were responsible for this.

They say it is retaliatory for actions authorised by Suleimani against US interests.

This is going to go pear shaped very very fast.

What is the authorisation process for this?
Apparently the Trump administrators contacted US personnel in the region telling them they should write a will so they must be expecting retaliatory action from Iraq.
Pentagon: "At the direction of the President, the U.S. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel abroad by killing Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization."
Read 46 tweets
Profile picture
Dan Lamothe
@DanLamothe
Pentagon:

"At the direction of the President, the U.S. military has taken decisive defensive action to protect U.S. personnel abroad by killing Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization."
More from statement:

"General Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region."
"General Soleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more."
Read 6 tweets
Profile picture
Hassan Hassan
@hxhassan
Holy cow! Senior militia leaders killed in American strikes in Iraq, and could include Iran’s Qassem Soleimani or one of his top aides from Iraq. Beyond insane.
So far confirmed — the Pentagon is saying two senior operatives “linked to Iran” were targeted.

Iraqi TV claims that Qassem Sulaimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis were killed.

If true, this is no doubt the most significant/consequential killing probably in a decade.
Whoa! Iraq’s Hashd al-Shaabi (iranian-backed popular mobilization forces) is reportedly confirming that its deputy and Qassem Sulaimani have been indeed killed in American strikes.
Read 72 tweets
Profile picture
🏴‍☠️ FJ 🏴‍☠️
@Natsecjeff
NEW: Multiple rockets fired at Baghdad International Airport. Initial reports of a direct hit on a vehicle. #Iraq

It looks like at least two vehicles were hit. Also unconfirmed reports of several Iraqi soldiers injured. #Baghdad #Iraq
IMAGE circulating from near Baghdad Airport shows a vehicle burning. #Iraq
Read 95 tweets
Profile picture
Filomena Rocha
@Filomen03258997
50. The Legacy of US, UK, France, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, Canada, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Australia, Jordan, Nato in Syria
#RegimeChange #FakeNews #FalseFlag #terrorism #SyriaInvasion #WarCrimes #CrimesAgainstHumanity
1 to 20. The Legacy of US, UK, France, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, Canada, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Australia, Jordan, Nato in Syria 🤨👇🏼
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1136642…
21 to 40. The Legacy of US, UK, France, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, Canada, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Australia, Jordan, Nato in Syria 🤨👇🏼
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1164175…
Read 547 tweets

Trending hashtags

#French #Baghdadi #Iraq #Suleimani #surrendered #HormuzStrait #SaudiArmy #Sana #Abu #CrimesAgainstHumanity #Trump #Qatar #economic #enrichment #Syrian #SOHR #Iranfreedom #IRGC #PeacewithIran #space #SattarBeheshti #IS #IraniansWantRegimeChange #Iranian #Zionist
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!