Military Intervention in Syria
The UK should intervene militarily to halt the Syria regime’s slaughter of innocent civilians. Please discuss critically using at least one case study of military intervention.
Nowadays, we can scarcely turn on our televisions or pick up a newspaper without being confronted with yet another depressing news item about the Syrian civil war. As the crisis in Syria rages the question of whether western countries especially UK should intervene militarily in order to halt the Syria regime’s slaughter of innocent civilians is raised. Should the western countries turn a blind eye to the atrocities that take place in Syria or should they use force and intervene to the state affairs of another state in order to quell the violence? This essay is an attempt to evaluate the arguments for and against such a proposition considering the legal and political nature that a military intervention has. Specifically, I argue that UK has the legal right to intervene in Syria by examining articles of the United Nations Charter and by proving that the criteria of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ concept are met in a high degree when concerned the case in Syria. Moreover, I analyze in depth the arguments of the supporters and the opponents of a forceful intervention in Syria by using other examples of military intervention especially Libya. I concluded that if the Assad government does not comply and if the escalation of violence continues then there is no other solution than a coercive armed intervention.
Does UK have the legal right to intervene in Syria? This is the first question that comes up when confronting such a controversial issue. In the UN Charter of 1945 article 2(4) provides “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purpose of the United Nations.” This core rule of the UN Charter is a controversial subject
Nowadays, we can scarcely turn on our televisions or pick up a newspaper without being confronted with yet another depressing news item about the Syrian civil war. As the crisis in Syria rages the question of whether western countries especially UK should intervene militarily in order to halt the Syria regime’s slaughter of innocent civilians is raised. Should the western countries turn a blind eye to the atrocities that take place in Syria or should they use force and intervene to the state affairs of another state in order to quell the violence? This essay is an attempt to evaluate the arguments for and against such a proposition considering the legal and political nature that a military intervention has. Specifically, I argue that UK has the legal right to intervene in Syria by examining articles of the United Nations Charter and by proving that the criteria of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ concept are met in a high degree when concerned the case in Syria. Moreover, I analyze in depth the arguments of the supporters and the opponents of a forceful intervention in Syria by using other examples of military intervention especially Libya. I concluded that if the Assad government does not comply and if the escalation of violence continues then there is no other solution than a coercive armed intervention.
Does UK have the legal right to intervene in Syria? This is the first question that comes up when confronting such a controversial issue. In the UN Charter of 1945 article 2(4) provides “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purpose of the United Nations.” This core rule of the UN Charter is a controversial subject
Bibliography: Books Christine Gray, International Law and the Use of Force, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 2008), pp Aidan Hehir, “What Can Be Done in Response to the Crisis in Syria?” e-International Relations, 19 March, 2012 Bruce D Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect’, (2006) Wisconsin International Law Journal 24, 703-722 Online Journals Amos Yadlin, “ Only bombing Assad’s forces will stop the slaughter now” (2012) < http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/amos-yadlin-only-bombing-assads-forces-will-stop-the-slaughter-now-8106818.html> accessed 3 January 2013 Websites [ 1 ]. Christine Gray, International Law and the Use of Force, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 2008), 30 3 [ 2 ] [ 3 ]. Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect’, (2006) Wisconsin International Law Journal 24, 703 704 [ 4 ] [ 5 ]. Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect’, (2006) Wisconsin International Law Journal 24, 703 704 [ 6 ] [ 7 ]. Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect’, (2006) Wisconsin International Law Journal 24,703 708-709 [ 8 ] [ 9 ]. Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect’, (2006) Wisconsin International Law Journal 24, 703 710 [ 10 ] [ 11 ]. Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect’, (2006) Wisconsin International Law Journal 24,703 711 [ 12 ] [ 13 ]. New York Times, ‘Syria’ (2013) accessed on 4 January 2013 [ 14 ] [ 15 ]. New York Times, ‘Syria’ (2013) accessed on 4 January 2013 [ 16 ] [ 17 ]. Amos Yadlin, ‘Only bombing Assad’s forces will stop the slaughter now’ (2012) < http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/amos-yadlin-only-bombing-assads-forces-will-stop-the-slaughter-now-8106818.html> accessed 3 January 2013 [ 18 ] [ 19 ]. New York Times, ‘Syria’ (2013) < http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html> accessed on 4 January 2013 [ 20 ] [ 21 ]. Bruce D. Jones, ‘Libya and the Responsibilities of Power,’ Survival 53:3 (2011), 51 53 [ 22 ] [ 23 ]. Amos Yadlin, ‘Only bombing Assad’s forces will stop the slaughter now’ (2012) < http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/amos-yadlin-only-bombing-assads-forces-will-stop-the-slaughter-now-8106818.html> accessed 3 January 2013 [ 24 ] [ 25 ]. Amos Yadlin, ‘Only bombing Assad’s forces will stop the slaughter now’ (2012) < http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/amos-yadlin-only-bombing-assads-forces-will-stop-the-slaughter-now-8106818.html> accessed 3 January 2013 [ 26 ] [ 27 ]. UN News Centre, ‘Syria: UN-Arab League envoy warns of limited options, dangers of fragmentation’ (2012) < http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=43856&Cr=Syria&Cr1=#.UOgtLaSowVl> accessed on 5 January 2013 [ 28 ] [ 29 ]. Aidan Hehir, “What Can Be Done in Response to the Crisis in Syria?” e-International Relations, 19 March, 2012 [ 30 ] [ 31 ]. Amos Yadlin, ‘Only bombing Assad’s forces will stop the slaughter now’ (2012) < http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/amos-yadlin-only-bombing-assads-forces-will-stop-the-slaughter-now-8106818.html> accessed 3 January 2013 [ 32 ] [ 33 ]. YouGov, ‘ Syria’s conflict: what can the UK do?’ (2012) < http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/02/23/what-could-uk-do-about-syria/> accessed on 4 January 2013 [ 34 ] [ 35 ]. UN Security Council, Resolution 1973, UN Doc. S/Res./1973 (17 March 2011), paragraphs 1, 3-4 [ 36 ] [ 37 ]. New York Times, ‘Syria’ (2013) < http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html> accessed on 4 January 2013 [ 38 ] [ 39 ]. Christine Gray, International Law and the Use of Force, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 2008), 30 3 [ 40 ] [ 43 ]. New York Times, ‘Syria’ (2013) < http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html> accessed on 4 January 2013