This paper contemplates the impact of orientalist discourse on the application of international law, with a focus on the 2003 US occupation of Iraq. The emphasis of the paper is on how international law failed to protect Iraqis from imperial US decision-making, and served US elites to the detriment of Iraqis – something which international law specifically aims to prevent. The paper argues that knowledge production in the form of orientalist discourse played a crucial role in legitimizing and expanding the meaning and application of regulations during the occupation of Iraq, served the interests of the occupiers, and led to regular violations of international law.
Bamo Nouri is Lecturer in International Relations at the School of Human and Social Sciences, University of West London. He is an independent investigative journalist and writer with interests in American foreign policy and the international and domestic politics of the Middle East. Email: Bamo.Nouri@123456uwl.ac.uk]
For example, the law of occupation seeks to protect an occupied nation and its resources from the imperial hands of the occupier, to make sure the rights of the occupied are protected and enforced and that the occupier plays an administrative protective role as opposed to a leadership role which affects the direction or culture of an occupied territory.
The CIA MKUltra program featured experiments that were carried out to determine the most effective ways for torture and interrogation through mind control.