Reciprocal Warfare – and its Critiqué by the Natural Law School
Draft – submitted to the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs for
further development and analysis of Vattel's treatise, and for
supplemental comparative law studies of natural law influences of
[non-Scandinavian] constitutions, in preparation for a reparations
tribunal for the Arab nation, Afghanistan and former colonial
possessions.
Reciprocal Warfare – and its critiqué by the Natural Law School
The purpose of this article is not to present the Socialist arguments against war. As such this is available. It is not universally recognized among the Arab League and Organisation of Islamic Conference member states, the dialectic-materialist considerations as pertains to domestic and legal considerations.
As such the Socialist treatises on war are well developed and readily available.
The purpose rather is to develop the writings of Emerich de Vattel 1758 (Schweiz) on [war, and] the law of nations according to the Natural Law School. [1]
In this manner jurists and advisers of kings of the Arab League and OIC member states may have reference to pluralistic views of different legal systems [and schools of thought] as pertains to the current conflicts, thus as pertains to policy directions and foreign relations.
Vattel addresses the offensive and defensive war, as such the reciprocal warfare was not addressed or not fully addressed at the time of his writings.
The first physical manifestation of reciprocal warfare is the attack of Prussia and Austria-Hungary against the Kingdom of Denmark [2] (1864) but it is inseparable from the financial and industrial currents of England and the United States of the mid-1800's of which the American Civil War is a manifestation.
The industrial state is the antithesis of the agrarian state. Krupp arms, the breech-loading monobloc gun, other ordnance with rifling and built-up and shrinkage construction the Chambers gun (United States, 1849), Armstrong gun (Britain, 1855), Blakely gun (Britain, 1855), Tredwell gun (United States, 1855), and Parrot gun (United States, 1861).
(photos) An original Chassepot, but has been subjected to modifications in 1870 and 1877. It was used by the French colonial forces, this being borne out by the Arabic symbols on the receiver and barrel.
Colonel de Reffye's machine gun or mitrailleuse, and the breech-loader of Antoine Alphonse Chassepot being superior to Prussia's Dreyse needle rifle, were not sufficient to overcome the Krupp artillery at Seden.
The expenditures of the Exchequer towards the purchase of matériel, and the conduct of the sovereign and the affairs of nations (Vattel) result in reciprocal warfare, wherein the conduct of Government follows a mutual pattern of that of another nation, wherein treaties could be forwarded to avoid such expenditures of the Exchequer. The Franco-German War is directly reciprocal warfare. The War of 1864 merely a precursor. The content of the Ems telegram (reproduced below), and the rapidity of the French Parliament's response to the Ems telegram, supports the premise of the Franco-German War, as a reciprocal war.
Ems telegram
Sent by Heinrich Abeken of the Prussian Foreign Office under King Wilhelm's Instruction to Bismarck.
(Unedited Version)
His Majesty the King has written to me:
"Count Benedetti intercepted me on the promenade and ended by demanding of me in a very importunate manner that I should authorize him to telegraph at once that I bound myself in perpetuity never again to give my consent if the Hohenzollerns renewed their candidature.
I rejected this demand somewhat sternly as it is neither right nor possible to undertake engagements of this kind [for ever and ever]. Naturally I told him that I had not yet received any news and since he had been better informed via Paris and Madrid than I was, he must surely see that my government was not concerned in the matter."
[The King, on the advice of one of his ministers] "decided in view of the above-mentioned demands not to receive Count Benedetti any more, but to have him informed by an adjutant that His Majesty had now received [from Leopold] confirmation of the news which Benedetti had already had from Paris and had nothing further to say to the ambassador.
His Majesty suggests to Your Excellency that Benedetti's new demand and its rejection might well be communicated both to our ambassadors and to the Press."
(Bismark's Published, Edited Version)
After the news of the renunciation of the Prince von Hohenzollern had been communicated to the Imperial French government by the Royal Spanish government, the French Ambassador in Ems made a further demand on His Majesty the King that he should authorize him to telegraph to Paris that His Majesty the King undertook for all time never again to give his assent should the Hohenzollerns once more take up their candidature.
His Majesty the King thereupon refused to receive the Ambassador again and had the latter informed by the adjutant of the day that His Majesty had no further communication to make to the Ambassador."
Jay Cooke, the fiscal agent for the United States Government, in a banking circular from 1865 referred to the war or 'national' debt as a 'national blessing' :
“We lay down the proposition that our national debt made permanent and rightly managed, will be a national blessing. The funded debt of the United States is the addition of $3,000,000,000 to the previously realized wealth of the Nation. It is three thousand millions added to the actual available capital.”
Herein lies the premise of violation of the “natural rights” of citizens under the sovereign. The entire basis of militarism, and fiscal policy associated with militarism, lies contrary to the law of nature theory, the latter upon which the American Constitution was founded.
On the colonies:
Self-governance movements were developing in the Spanish possessions in the late 1800's, the Philippines, among the British dependencies, in Egypt and India, and in the Turkish Empire, in Palestine and other Arab territories. France and England maintained the greater majority of colonies among world powers.
The Spanish-American War 1898, following the loss of the Spanish fleets at Santiago de Cuba and at Manila, merely transferred custody of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Sulu Islands and the largest of the Marianne Islands for the payment of $20,000,000. Two additional islands, which had been delimited at the peace conference of Paris, were purchased by the United States in 1900.
Concomitant with reciprocal warfare is the premise that colonial possessions remain in the hands of world powers, in this regard the Covenant of the League of Nations, Article 22, was established, and the League's 'Economic Council' following the Great War, the latter to combat the spread of Bolshevism in the East European states.
It is clear from such developments that the reciprocal war prolongs the possession of colonial territories by the Great Powers, and that the political developments and reparations should for the greater part be allocated to such 'former' colonies.
Such is the premise of the Natural Law School in response to the premise of policy as law of the Soviet Marxists. [3]
The Geneva convention(s), in not addressing reciprocal warfare, are insufficient [on a juridical basis] to prosecute [the perpetrators of] the current conflicts.
Reciprocal warfare, in its domestic manifestations, that is violating of the “natural rights” of its citizens, is primarily a phenomena of the Anglo-American alliance as can be seen in the present war. [4] [5]
The Charter of the United Nations, in spite of its signatory by various states, as it supports reciprocal warfare, cannot be considered as consistent with international law.
In absence of international mandate, as (mandate) corresponding to international law, regarding the United Nations Assembly vote in 1947 on partitioning of the Palestinian Mandate, obliges international rejection of the legitimacy of such vote and premise.
Eric Lindblad - 2 April 2007
[1] Vattel, Emerich de, 1714-1767, « The law of nations, or Principles of the law of nature, applied to the conduct and affairs of nations and sovereigns », new edition by Joseph Chitty, London : S, Sweet 1834, 532 p.
[2] The war pursued under the “pretext” of the Schleswig-Holstein question, was used by Prussia to test the Dreyse needle rifle as a precursor to the Franco-German War.
* Krupp capital standing at £ 9,000,000 was augmented in 1908 by an additional £ 2,500,000 in association with their manufacture of armour plates and guns required for the new ships of the German navy.
[3] On which see especially I.P. Trainin, "The Relationship Between State and Law", Izvestiya of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences (Econ. and Law), No. 5, 1945, translation in « Soviet Legal Philosophy » – Harvard University Press, Cambridge 1951.
[4] « Arming America », by Michael A. Bellesiles, Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y. 2000.
[5] Other world powers or the corporations thereof, NATO member states and Japan, having a subordinate matériel and/or financial supply to such conflicts.
Addendum:
The Great War and Second World War were reciprocal wars, though the fiscal policies associated with militarism of the US and UK place those states with initiation of these wars.
Korea, Vietnam, and the Balkan War were all offensive wars.
The Cold War was an offensive war, against the Soviet Union
Draft – submitted to the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs for
further development and analysis of Vattel's treatise, and for
supplemental comparative law studies of natural law influences of
[non-Scandinavian] constitutions, in preparation for a reparations
tribunal for the Arab nation, Afghanistan and former colonial
possessions.
Reciprocal Warfare – and its critiqué by the Natural Law School
The purpose of this article is not to present the Socialist arguments against war. As such this is available. It is not universally recognized among the Arab League and Organisation of Islamic Conference member states, the dialectic-materialist considerations as pertains to domestic and legal considerations.
As such the Socialist treatises on war are well developed and readily available.
The purpose rather is to develop the writings of Emerich de Vattel 1758 (Schweiz) on [war, and] the law of nations according to the Natural Law School. [1]
In this manner jurists and advisers of kings of the Arab League and OIC member states may have reference to pluralistic views of different legal systems [and schools of thought] as pertains to the current conflicts, thus as pertains to policy directions and foreign relations.
Vattel addresses the offensive and defensive war, as such the reciprocal warfare was not addressed or not fully addressed at the time of his writings.
The first physical manifestation of reciprocal warfare is the attack of Prussia and Austria-Hungary against the Kingdom of Denmark [2] (1864) but it is inseparable from the financial and industrial currents of England and the United States of the mid-1800's of which the American Civil War is a manifestation.
The industrial state is the antithesis of the agrarian state. Krupp arms, the breech-loading monobloc gun, other ordnance with rifling and built-up and shrinkage construction the Chambers gun (United States, 1849), Armstrong gun (Britain, 1855), Blakely gun (Britain, 1855), Tredwell gun (United States, 1855), and Parrot gun (United States, 1861).
(photos) An original Chassepot, but has been subjected to modifications in 1870 and 1877. It was used by the French colonial forces, this being borne out by the Arabic symbols on the receiver and barrel.
Colonel de Reffye's machine gun or mitrailleuse, and the breech-loader of Antoine Alphonse Chassepot being superior to Prussia's Dreyse needle rifle, were not sufficient to overcome the Krupp artillery at Seden.
The expenditures of the Exchequer towards the purchase of matériel, and the conduct of the sovereign and the affairs of nations (Vattel) result in reciprocal warfare, wherein the conduct of Government follows a mutual pattern of that of another nation, wherein treaties could be forwarded to avoid such expenditures of the Exchequer. The Franco-German War is directly reciprocal warfare. The War of 1864 merely a precursor. The content of the Ems telegram (reproduced below), and the rapidity of the French Parliament's response to the Ems telegram, supports the premise of the Franco-German War, as a reciprocal war.
Ems telegram
Sent by Heinrich Abeken of the Prussian Foreign Office under King Wilhelm's Instruction to Bismarck.
(Unedited Version)
His Majesty the King has written to me:
"Count Benedetti intercepted me on the promenade and ended by demanding of me in a very importunate manner that I should authorize him to telegraph at once that I bound myself in perpetuity never again to give my consent if the Hohenzollerns renewed their candidature.
I rejected this demand somewhat sternly as it is neither right nor possible to undertake engagements of this kind [for ever and ever]. Naturally I told him that I had not yet received any news and since he had been better informed via Paris and Madrid than I was, he must surely see that my government was not concerned in the matter."
[The King, on the advice of one of his ministers] "decided in view of the above-mentioned demands not to receive Count Benedetti any more, but to have him informed by an adjutant that His Majesty had now received [from Leopold] confirmation of the news which Benedetti had already had from Paris and had nothing further to say to the ambassador.
His Majesty suggests to Your Excellency that Benedetti's new demand and its rejection might well be communicated both to our ambassadors and to the Press."
(Bismark's Published, Edited Version)
After the news of the renunciation of the Prince von Hohenzollern had been communicated to the Imperial French government by the Royal Spanish government, the French Ambassador in Ems made a further demand on His Majesty the King that he should authorize him to telegraph to Paris that His Majesty the King undertook for all time never again to give his assent should the Hohenzollerns once more take up their candidature.
His Majesty the King thereupon refused to receive the Ambassador again and had the latter informed by the adjutant of the day that His Majesty had no further communication to make to the Ambassador."
Jay Cooke, the fiscal agent for the United States Government, in a banking circular from 1865 referred to the war or 'national' debt as a 'national blessing' :
“We lay down the proposition that our national debt made permanent and rightly managed, will be a national blessing. The funded debt of the United States is the addition of $3,000,000,000 to the previously realized wealth of the Nation. It is three thousand millions added to the actual available capital.”
Herein lies the premise of violation of the “natural rights” of citizens under the sovereign. The entire basis of militarism, and fiscal policy associated with militarism, lies contrary to the law of nature theory, the latter upon which the American Constitution was founded.
On the colonies:
Self-governance movements were developing in the Spanish possessions in the late 1800's, the Philippines, among the British dependencies, in Egypt and India, and in the Turkish Empire, in Palestine and other Arab territories. France and England maintained the greater majority of colonies among world powers.
The Spanish-American War 1898, following the loss of the Spanish fleets at Santiago de Cuba and at Manila, merely transferred custody of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Sulu Islands and the largest of the Marianne Islands for the payment of $20,000,000. Two additional islands, which had been delimited at the peace conference of Paris, were purchased by the United States in 1900.
Concomitant with reciprocal warfare is the premise that colonial possessions remain in the hands of world powers, in this regard the Covenant of the League of Nations, Article 22, was established, and the League's 'Economic Council' following the Great War, the latter to combat the spread of Bolshevism in the East European states.
It is clear from such developments that the reciprocal war prolongs the possession of colonial territories by the Great Powers, and that the political developments and reparations should for the greater part be allocated to such 'former' colonies.
Such is the premise of the Natural Law School in response to the premise of policy as law of the Soviet Marxists. [3]
The Geneva convention(s), in not addressing reciprocal warfare, are insufficient [on a juridical basis] to prosecute [the perpetrators of] the current conflicts.
Reciprocal warfare, in its domestic manifestations, that is violating of the “natural rights” of its citizens, is primarily a phenomena of the Anglo-American alliance as can be seen in the present war. [4] [5]
The Charter of the United Nations, in spite of its signatory by various states, as it supports reciprocal warfare, cannot be considered as consistent with international law.
In absence of international mandate, as (mandate) corresponding to international law, regarding the United Nations Assembly vote in 1947 on partitioning of the Palestinian Mandate, obliges international rejection of the legitimacy of such vote and premise.
Eric Lindblad - 2 April 2007
[1] Vattel, Emerich de, 1714-1767, « The law of nations, or Principles of the law of nature, applied to the conduct and affairs of nations and sovereigns », new edition by Joseph Chitty, London : S, Sweet 1834, 532 p.
[2] The war pursued under the “pretext” of the Schleswig-Holstein question, was used by Prussia to test the Dreyse needle rifle as a precursor to the Franco-German War.
* Krupp capital standing at £ 9,000,000 was augmented in 1908 by an additional £ 2,500,000 in association with their manufacture of armour plates and guns required for the new ships of the German navy.
[3] On which see especially I.P. Trainin, "The Relationship Between State and Law", Izvestiya of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences (Econ. and Law), No. 5, 1945, translation in « Soviet Legal Philosophy » – Harvard University Press, Cambridge 1951.
[4] « Arming America », by Michael A. Bellesiles, Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y. 2000.
[5] Other world powers or the corporations thereof, NATO member states and Japan, having a subordinate matériel and/or financial supply to such conflicts.
Addendum:
The Great War and Second World War were reciprocal wars, though the fiscal policies associated with militarism of the US and UK place those states with initiation of these wars.
Korea, Vietnam, and the Balkan War were all offensive wars.
The Cold War was an offensive war, against the Soviet Union