International Law Quotes

International Law Quote of the day

I am still profoundly troubled by the war in Nicaragua. The United States launched a covert war against another nation in violation of international law, a war that was wrong and immoral.

The sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions.

The security of which we speak is to be attained by the development of international law through an international organization based on the principles of law and justice.

Together with international unity and resolve we can meet the challenge of this global scourge and work to bring about an international law of zero tolerance for terrorism.

Our first object is... the obtaining of sovereignty, assured by international law, over a portion of the globe sufficiently large to satisfy our just requirements.

I am the president of 146 million Russians. I have to represent their interests. We are willing to settle this without any conflicts and to search for compromises on the basis of international law.

Governments are mandated by international law to protect people from genocide.

The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law.

I fight because international law recognises my right.

International law now grants rights to all human beings, not only to citizens.

The collapse of good conscience and the absence of accountability and public scrutiny have led to crimes against humanity and violations of international law.

Democracy is not just constitutional and legislative rules; it is a culture and practice and adhering by the law and respecting international human rights principles.

I think we have a very critical role to play, within the spectrum of international law and human rights.

Armed attack has a definition in international law. It means sudden, overwhelming, instantaneous ongoing attack.

Pre-emptive war might fall within the framework of international law.

The land which the Society of Jews will have secured by international law must naturally be privately owned.

The clever, albeit fragile, coalition against terrorism brought together by the U.S. government might be able to advance the transition from classical international law to a cosmopolitan order.

We checked carefully the international law - what does a nation do when terrorists are using civilians to defend their life, as a shelter. And they say you do not have a choice.

The case against the notion of historical objectivity is like the case against international law, or international morality; that it does not exist.

Whether [Turkey] is a NATO country or not, it doesn't have the right to invade any other country according to the international law or to any other moral value.

I'm telling Palestinians don't use violence. We're going to use the civilized means of international law to achieve our goals, our independence, our freedom.

It is not love, or morality, or international law that determines the outcome of world affairs, but the changing distribution of organized force

The laws of war right now say that we can respond when our country is threatened. That is what international law says.

International law? I better call my lawyer; he didn't bring that up to me.

A lot of countries break (or go against) the international law.

The United States is a rogue state violating international law in many, many ways that California wouldn't have to if it seceded and became a nation.

International law in its counter-hegemonic uses is very important in any domain where issues of legitimacy are significant, but is rarely able to have a corresponding behavioural impact.

There are both things in international law: the principle of territorial integrity and right to self-determination.

Individual and national rights to wealth rest on the basis of civil and international law, or at least of custom that has the force of law.

In my opinion, provision of military support to illegal structures runs counter to the principles of modern international law and the United Nations Charter.

The United States believes that every nation should respect international law, including in the South China Sea.

They don't want to feed an ISIS narrative that there is a religious war between Islam and the Christian West, plus genocide is carefully defined under international law.

When we talk about the assertion of basically new government privileges with weak or no justification, we don't even have to look at international law to see the failings in them.

In the corporeal world, international law is whatever the United States and Great Britain say it is.

What else is wrong with 'suicide' bombing? Legally, less than what one might believe. While it may or may not be good strategy, it appears to be permissable under international law.

We need to really use the full force of diplomacy. And we need to be seen and understood to be on the side of diplomacy and international law.

I would apply international law and I think we need to be a force for international law.

At a time of such hope and optimism in the Middle East, we cannot let the Libyan government violate every principle of international law and human rights with impunity.

The sanctions may be imposed only by the decision of the UN Security Council. A unilateral imposition of sanctions is a violation of international law.

I do think that Magna Carta and international law are worth paying some attention to.

Of course one always has to follow international law. This was also the case in Crimea. According to the Charter of the United Nations, every people has the right to self-determination.

I stress that we unambiguously support strengthening the non-proliferation regime, without any exceptions, on the basis of international law.

Setting aside human rights and international law to have an agenda of war and killing and occupation to me is totally unacceptable.

It was during the Reagan years that defiance of international law and the U.N. Charter became entirely open.

If international law is, in some ways, at the vanishing point of law, the law of war is, perhaps even more conspicuously, at the vanishing point of international law.

Endangering human life for profit should be a universal crime.

Genocide is the responsibility of the entire world.