The US administration has virtually read out the Miranda warning to Pakistan. Miranda is the formal warning given by the police in the United States to criminal suspects in a custodial situation before they are interrogated to make the accused aware of and remind him of his constitutional rights. Admiral Mike Mullen, Leon Panetta and Jay Carney have virtually issued Miranda warnings to Pakistan accusing it of supporting attacks by the Haqqani network on US targets in Afghanistan, including the September 13 assault on the American Embassy and NATO headquarters in Kabul. While briefing the US Senate, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen categorically stated: The Haqqani network, for one, acts as a veritable arm of Pakistans intelligence agency. In a similar tone, US Defence Secretary Panetta told Senators that the presence of safe havens in Pakistan is giving the insurgents advantages they have otherwise lost. White House Spokesman Carney called on Pakistan to break any link they have with the Haqqani network. The synchronised blame game has, however, been refuted vehemently by Pakistans Prime Minister, Defence and Foreign Ministers and the Chief of Army Staff. History is replete with wrongful US indictments. The US attacked both Afghanistan and Iraq with apparent UN approval, but under trumped-up charges. In the case of Afghanistan, it invoked the self-defence clause, insisting that the Taliban regime was harbouring Osama bin Laden - the purported perpetrator of the 9/11 attacks. Despite the Talibans insistence that the US provide evidence pertaining to the allegations after which Osama would be tried under the Afghan law, America invaded Afghanistan that has led to the death of over 40,000 innocent civilians. But it must be understood that self-defence, firstly, in both international and US law, must be clearly distinguished from the use of force for revenge or punishment; States, like people, must not act as vigilantes. Secondly, in criminal law, self-defence may be invoked in the face of an imminent threat of death or grave bodily harm. In general, the threat must be immediate and the response must not be pushed beyond what is reasonably required to repel that threat. Thus, the invasion of Afghanistan was not a legitimate act of self-defence by the US post-9/11. There is no UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution that authorises it, whether alone or in coalition with other countries, to attack Afghanistan. Between September 11 and October 7, 2001, when the Afghanistan invasion began, the Council adopted only one resolution concerning the 9/11 attacks. Resolution 1368 (September 12) condemned the attack, while Resolution 1378 (November 14) adopted - after the bombardment of Afghanistan commenced - only condemns the Taliban and supports the efforts of the Afghan people to replace the Taliban regime The countries that plan wars in order to capture resources, conquer territories, or advance their strategic interests or hegemonic designs never lack noble-sounding pretexts: Self-defence, defending civilisation, rescuing threatened national minorities, and so on. After no weapons of mass destruction had been found to justify the invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration argued that it was legitimate to overthrow a brutal dictatorship in order to free the Iraqi people. But to allow any country to make war entirely on false pretexts means throwing out international law and replacing it with might is right. Now, the US is threatening to throw its erstwhile most non-NATO ally Pakistan to the dogs of war. It has already violated our sovereignty on two accounts: First, by launching the drone attacks, and secondly, the May 2 attack to eliminate Osama. Pakistan needs to take its case to the UN; however, this step may yield no results if former US Permanent Representative to the UN John Bolton is to be believed: There is no such thing as the UN. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States, when it suits our interest and we can get others to go along.When the United States leads, the UN will follow. The US, therefore, should take cognisance that attacking Pakistan wont be a cakewalk. It is a nuclear-equipped and battle hardened country, which will defend itself or go down fighting. It is hoped and prayed that good sense prevails in the US administration The writer is a political and defence analyst. Email: sultanm.hali@gmail.com