Search: Syria Insta-Symposium

operation into Northern Syria. The United States Armed Forces will not support or be involved in the operation, and United States forces, having defeated the ISIS territorial “Caliphate,” will no longer be in the immediate area.’ The long-planned operation to which the White House statement referred was Erdogan’s plans to create a 20-mile buffer, or ‘safe zone’, within the Kurdish-controlled area of Syria in which the Turkish military plans to resettle the nearly 3.6 million Syrian refugees currently sheltered in southeastern Turkey. According to Erdogan, the Turkish military plans to...

in the blogs, for example by Dov Jacobs here and Kevin here. Nonetheless, for a Council that is deeply engaged with Syria, yesterday’s Security Council session marked another defeat for the people of Syria. Despite widespread member state support starting in 2013 for a referral, see this letter signed by 57 states to the Security Council, and reports that 60 states supported the referral yesterday, the meeting marked the fourth time Russia and China vetoed resolutions involving Syria, and the first time the veto has been used on a proposed...

said. The plan currently under consideration is for the U.N. General Assembly to adopt a resolution inviting one of Syria’s neighbors, probably Jordan or Turkey, to work with the U.N. Secretary General to establish a so-called hybrid court, comprised of local, international, and Syrian prosecutors and judges. The court would be funded by voluntary contributions from governments that support the effort. Lynch notes that a hybrid tribunal for Syria would be a first for the UNGA, because — unlike the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Extraordinary Chambers in...

There are lots of initial takes on the legality of the Syria strike. (I see, just now, a great compendium of short takes at Just Security.) Some ask for a legal justification, and other experts are holding (for a bit) until one is proffered. As the posts below by Deborah Pearlstein and Julian Ku helpfully indicate, one thing to watch for is assumed or disputed equivalencies between the positions of the United States as it contemplated these questions in 2013 and as it now confronts them. Other unfolding differences, naturally,...

...view that “by exercise of authority one should mean not only the display of sovereign or other powers (lawmaking, law enforcement, administrative powers, etc.) but also any exercise of power, however limited in time (for instance, the use of belligerent force in an armed conflict). And btw, Uganda-Gaza (360 km2) and Syria(Golan) are misleading comparisons. Matthew Mainen The ICJ case was in 2004. Israel Withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Israel most certainly does not manage civilian life in Gaza. It has zero control over day-to-day life in Gaza inasmuch as...

[Gabor Rona is a Visiting Professor of Law and Director of the Law and Armed Conflict Project at Cardozo Law School. Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum is an Assistant Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the Cardozo Law Institute in Holocaust and Human Rights, Cardozo School of Law.] “It’s not war. We haven’t gone to war against Syria.” These are the quoted words of former legal advisor of the U.S. Department of State Harold Koh in a recent New Yorker article addressing the legality of the April 6 U.S. missile strike...

Yes, according to Secretary of State John Kerry: Secretary of State John Kerry told House Democrats that the United States faced a “Munich moment” in deciding whether to respond to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. In a 70-minute conference call on Monday afternoon, Kerry derided Syrian President Bashar Assad as a “two-bit dictator” who will “continue to act with impunity,” and he urged lawmakers to back President Barack Obama’s plan for “limited, narrow” strikes against the Assad regime, Democratic sources on the call said. Kerry’s...

Karen De Young and Missy Ryan have a long article today in the Washington Post about internal USG debates over the rules of engagement in Syria. It’s a very interesting and generally excellent article, but it contain one major error: International law allows for civilian casualties, even intentional ones, providing an action is within the bounds of distinction and proportionality, a somewhat subjective judgment that the military importance of the target is worth it. No, international law does not allow intentional civilian casualties. Intentionally attacking civilians violates IHL’s principle of...

...self-defense against the non-state actor who is DPAA are not measures against the territorial state. Kevin Jon Heller The next time Syria uses a chemical weapon to defend itself against an armed attack, I look forward to your argument that Syria's "inherent right of self-defence" has "primacy" over its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention. Xavier @ Jordan: Would you apply the standard that you are invoking in your comment universally? For example, it is well known that CIA backed terrorists have organized attacks against Cuba from South Florida. One...

For those still following along, an interesting array of views on the Syria situation in a conversation this afternoon on HuffPost Live, including Michael Scharf, Jules Lobel, Eric Posner, and yours truly. Would that the link went back a bit farther, you could listen in on a lively Miley Cyrus debate as well....

...Documenting war and harsh reality of life, some Syrian media outlets are now based in Turkey informing those back home. For the past week, Turkish military forces have been shelling targets in northern Syria held by the Syrian Kurdish People’s Protection Units, the armed wing of the Syrian Democratic Union Party, a group designated by Turkey as a terrorist organisation, leading to speculation about “ethnic cleansing.” Asia U.S. President Barack Obama and allies from Southeast Asia will turn their attention to China on Tuesday on the second day of a...

My friend Dapo Akande has a superb post at EJIL: Talk! discussing whether the ICC could prosecute the use of chemical weapons by the government in Syria. I agree almost entirely with Dapo’s analysis, but I do want to offer a couple of thoughts about his discussion of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: The argument that chemical weapons are not covered by Art. 8 is thus based on the removal of the explicit prohibition and the fact that it was thought that it would be the annex...