This article examines the international law issues surrounding the US policy decision to arm Syrian rebels. Topics discussed as potential violations of international law include the prohibition on the use of force, the principle of non-intervention, Security Council action and State responsibility for any unlawful activities of the rebels. The Article also examines possible justifications for the action under international law including self-defense, military aid to a government, humanitarian intervention, an action against the enemy during an armed conflict, and the taking of countermeasures. The article concludes that arming the rebels is questionable as a matter of law, although it notes that it may be legitimate (it draws no conclusions on this latter point).
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Schmitt: Legitimacy Versus Legality Redux: Arming the Syrian Rebels
Michael N. Schmitt (Naval War College - Law; Univ. of Exeter - Law) has posted Legitimacy Versus Legality Redux: Arming the Syrian Rebels (Journal of National Security Law and Policy, forthcoming). Here's the abstract: