Skip to main content

International Law and the Use of Force in Syria


A major topic in current events is the questionable legality of any potential move by the United States to intervene in the ongoing Syrian civil war.  For those interested in better understanding this issue by reviewing the state of the laws governing the use of force, here are some resources that may be useful:
Article 2(4) of the United Nations (UN) Charter pledges member states to refrain from the threat or use of force against other states.  However, there are two exceptions: Articles 34 and 51 permit the use of force when authorized by the UN Security Council or in self-defense, respectively.  Although these articles constitute the law on the international use of force, many modern legal theorists have nonetheless developed justifications for humanitarian intervention when the UN refrains from authorizing the use of force for political or procedural reasons rather than declining to do so on the merits of a given case.
These justifications were used in 1999 when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) intervened in Serbia to put an end to attacks on ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.  In the case of Kosovo, the UN Security Council vetoed the use of force, but NATO’s actions were condoned by the international community despite the fact that the intervention did not accord with international law.  The case of Kosovo is seen by some as a precedent for similar intervention in Syria: both situations involve similar accusations of domestic war crimes, and both are in a legal grey area created by objections on one side that the use of force without UN authorization would be illegal, and objections on the other side that the Security Council veto has broken the process that could result in UN authorization.
A legal analysis of this issue is beyond the scope of this posting; fortunately, legal scholars elsewhere have already done an excellent job.  Anyone looking for an informed consideration of international law regarding the unauthorized use of force may be interested in essays posted here, here or here.

Comments

  1. Very helpful and clear analysis of international law! Thanks for posting this. I found this Washington Post article about the Syrian civil war helpful to understanding the conflict--http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/08/29/9-questions-about-syria-you-were-too-embarrassed-to-ask/.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Law School Exams: A Guide to Better Grades

It’s that time of year again. Law students across the country are poring over their class notes and supplements, putting the finishing touches on their outlines, and fueling their all-night study sessions with a combination of high-carb snacks and Java Monsters. This can mean only one thing: exam time is approaching.

If you’re looking for a brief but effective guide to improving your exam performance, the O’Quinn Law Library has the book for you. Alex Schimel’s Law School Exams: A Guide to Better Grades, now in its second edition, provides a clear and concise strategy for mastering the issue-spotting exams that determine the majority of your grade in most law school classes. Schimel finished second in his class at the University Of Miami School Of Law, where he taught a wildly popular exam workshop in his 2L and 3L years, and later returned to become Associate Director of the Academic Achievement Program. The first edition of his book was written shortly after he finished law school, …

Citing to Vernon's Texas Codes Annotated: Finding Accurate Publication Dates (without touching a book)

When citing to a current statute, both the Bluebook (rule 12.3.2) and Greenbook (rule 10.1.1) require a  practitioner to provide the publication date of the bound volume in which the cited code section appears. For example, let's cite to the codified statute section that prohibits Texans from hunting or selling bats, living or dead. Note, however, you may remove or hunt a bat that is inside or on a building occupied by people. The statute is silent as to Batman, who for his own safety, best stay in Gotham City.
This section of the Texas Parks and Wildlife code is 63.101. "Protection of Bats." After checking the pocket part and finding no updates in the supplement, my citation will be:
Tex. Parks & Wild. Code Ann. § 63.101 (West ___ ). When I look at the statute in my bound volume of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, I can clearly see that the volume's publication date is 2002. But, when I find the same citation on Westlaw or LexisNexis, all I can see is that the …