Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vagueness in Progress: A Linguistic and Legal Comparative Analysis Between UN and U.S. Official Documents and Drafts Relating to the Second Gulf War

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper is based on a doctoral thesis which aimed at investigating on whether the use of strategic vagueness in Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq has contributed to the breakout of the 2002–2003s Gulf war instead of a diplomatic solution of the controversies. This work contains a linguistic and legal comparative analysis between UN and U.S. documents and their drafts in order to demonstrate how vagueness was deliberately added to the final versions of the documents before being passed, and thus strategically used vagueness has played a crucial role in UN resolutions related to the outbreak of war in Iraq, and in relevant legislation produced by the United States for its Congressional authorisation for war. The comparative analysis between S/RES/1441(2002) and US legislation has evidenced that that there would have been diplomatic solutions to the Iraq crises which were not synonymous of light-handed intervention against Iraq, but deliberately vague UN wording allowed the US to build its own legislation with a personal interpretation implying that the UN did not impede military action.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For further information on the use of ‘weasel words’, modals, and adjectives and their use as a political strategy in Security Council Resolutions cf. Scotto di Carlo 2011 “The Language of the UN: Vagueness in Security Council Resolutions Relating to the Second Gulf War”, in International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, pp. 1–14. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11196-012-9262-0.

  2. All Security Council Resolutions quoted in this paper are available at: http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/index.shtml (Last accessed: August 2012).

  3. Source: http://www.accuracy.org/1027-an-analysis-of-the-united-nations-security-council-resolution-1441/ (Last accessed: October 2012).

  4. Chapter VII confers on the Security Council the duty of determining the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, and the duty of deciding what action should be taken to maintain or restore international peace and security (Article 39). Source: http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/index.shtml (Last accessed: January 2011).

  5. Source: http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/PublicLaw.aspx. (Last accessed: November 2012).

  6. All US Congress resolutions quoted in this section are available at : http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/.

  7. Source: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r107:./temp/~r1078CK0MR (Last accessed: January 2011).

References

  1. Institute for Public Accuracy (Bennis, Phyllis/Halliday, Denis/Paul, James/Boyle, Francis/Rangwala, Glen/Jennings, Jim/Mahajan, Rahul/Husseini, Sam/Ratner, Michael). An Analysis of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441: http://www.accuracy.org/1027-an-analysis-of-the-united-nations-security-council-resolution-1441/. 13 November 2002.

  2. Lee, Barbara [D-CA9]. H.Amdt. 608 to H.J.RES.114: Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution of 2002. http://peaceispatriotic.org/bills/WarTerror.html. 10 October 2002.

  3. Spratt, John M., Jr. [SC-5] H.Amdt.609 to H.J.RES.114: Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution of 2002. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._House_of_Representatives_votes_on_the_Iraq_War. 10 October 2002.

  4. Straw, Jack. Iraq: Second Resolution. Letter to the Attorney General. Foreign and Commonwealth Office, London. http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/43520/doc20100126110530485.pdf. 6 February 2003.

  5. United Nations 1945. Charter of the United Nations: http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/intro.shtml.

  6. US Congress. Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolutions available at: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Teorie e Metodi delle Scienze Umane e Sociali Via Rodinò, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, 22 80138, Naples, Italy

    Giuseppina Scotto di Carlo

Authors
  1. Giuseppina Scotto di Carlo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giuseppina Scotto di Carlo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

di Carlo, G.S. Vagueness in Progress: A Linguistic and Legal Comparative Analysis Between UN and U.S. Official Documents and Drafts Relating to the Second Gulf War. Int J Semiot Law 26, 487–507 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-012-9293-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-012-9293-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation