August
8th, 2012 by Kirsty Sutherland
The
Public International Law & Policy Group (“PILPG”) has released a legal
memorandum setting forth the legal basis for humanitarian intervention
in Syria. The memorandum argues that under the doctrine of Responsibility
to Protect (“R2P”), there is a sufficient legal basis to use military force
against the Syrian regime for the limited purpose of stopping the ongoing and
dramatically escalating atrocity crimes.
The
Syria crisis continues, and the violence is escalating. Tens of thousands of
refugees have fled to neighbouring countries. Diplomatic measures and
sanctions have proven ineffective, and, with Russia and China having
vetoed three Security Council resolutions aimed at stopping the
violence, the Security Council is paralyzed.
The
memorandum analyses the Syria crisis through the lens of R2P. PILPG
argues that because there are ongoing atrocity crimes in Syria, peaceful
measures have been exhausted, and the Security Council is deadlocked, there is
a sufficient legal basis for the international community to use force for the
limited purpose of stopping atrocity crimes and protecting civilians.
Military intervention in Syria would be legal, even without prior Security
Council approval, as long as it satisfied R2P’s procedural and operational
safeguards.
============
DO- one question: How does the distinction b/w IAC and NIAC make a difference in terms of R2P? The author implies that it does make a difference, citing Rwanda case.
Syria is NIAC or IAC? some would argue it is a proxy war. ICRC is of the opinion that it is NIAC.
============
DO- one question: How does the distinction b/w IAC and NIAC make a difference in terms of R2P? The author implies that it does make a difference, citing Rwanda case.
Syria is NIAC or IAC? some would argue it is a proxy war. ICRC is of the opinion that it is NIAC.
