International Law and Terrorism: America Reprises 'The Lone Ranger' in Response to International Terrorism

摘要

The United States launched tomahawk cruise missiles against suspected terrorist camps in Afghanistan and a terrorist-affiliated chemical plant in the Sudan. Suspects in the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kenya are to stand trial in New York. Reputed terrorist leader Osama bin Laden reportedly had a sealed indictment returned by a New York grand jury. These actions reflect some recent developments in the U.S. response against international terrorism. Although it is a reliable assumption that significant diplomatic coordination with other nations occurred during these incidents, they were predominantly unilateral actions on the part of the United States. The question presented by the author is twofold: (1) What, if any, international rules exist to deal with terrorists and other new and dangerous nonstate actors on the world scene; and (2) Is the United States pursuing the most prudent policy in its response to the problems of terrorism and other transnational threats. The author contends that, in its visceral response to international terrorism, the sword of the United States may be cutting the Gordian knot of international law without sufficiently deliberating the use of indirect or co-optive power. It would be untenable to challenge the proposition that the United States must lead the global effort against terrorism. Nonetheless, an enhanced U.S. strategy should intensify efforts to create a comprehensive international legal framework for addressing terrorism and threats from other transnational actors. Skillful development of the role of international law would be consistent with McDougal's wise quotation that law is 'an integral part of the world power process.' A new international legal framework for responding to terrorism would promote global order in the next millennium more effectively than continuing the U.S. policy of unilateral efforts against terrorism.