Turkish invasion of Syria is a breach of International Law

Turkish invasion of Syria constitutes a breach of international law and the UN Charter. It reflects a grand new strategy that articulates a vision of Turkey as a unipolar state entitled to operate above the confines of international law and international institutions to further its national interest. It introduces in international law the “safe zone” concept as a unilateral right to invade without the need to show grounds of “self-defence”. It provides a dangerous precedent that inevitably risks undermining global peace and security whilst questioning the legitimacy and effectiveness of international law.

Background 

A few days ago, Turkish President Erdogan announced to the world that Turkey was unilaterally beginning “Operation Peace Spring” - an assault on Syrian-Kurds living in northeastern Syria. He further announced that the operation also aimed to establish a “safe zone”, facilitating the return of million Syrian refugees to their country. Turkish troops have now invaded Syria and bombed Kurds living in the north-east region. It has been reported that within 48 hours hundreds of people have died and 64,000.00 people have been forced to leave their homes - this number is expected to soon rise to 300,000.00. 

In effect what Turkey is really trying to do is to contain Syrian-Kurdish power. It wishes to quash any future possibility that a Kurdish state may be created. By creating a space inside Syria, where millions of Syrian refugees currently hosted in Turkey can be settled (disposing of the existing Kurds), it creates a buffer zone that serves its perceived national interest. 

United Nations Charter 

Pursuant to Article 2(4) of the UN Charter “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 Purposes of the United Nations”. The UN Charter makes it clear that the use of military force in the territory of a sovereign state without its consent is permissible only under at least one of two conditions: 

• By unanimous approval of the Security Council pursuant to Chapter VII whereby the Security Council should authorize what action should be taken to restore peace and security; and 

• Pursuant to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Amongst other this Article states that “nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” 

To date the UN Security Council has not authorized any invasion of use of force. 

Self Defence? 

Turkey has defended it invasion pursuant to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. It maintains that there is a presence of what it views as a “terrorist organization,” and maintains that pursuant to Article 51 it has the right to invade and create a “safe zone” or “peace corridor” along its border. 

Such defence is absent of any legal merit. Firstly, the people Turkey refers to as a Terrorist organization are the same Syrian-Kurdish fighters who are US allies and instrumental in delivering recent victory against ISIS. Indeed only a few days ago US President Trump referred to them as “special people and wonderful fighters”. Secondly, Turkey has not provided any evidence to the Security Council of any existing or imminent attack. Indeed, no armed attack against Turkey has taken place, has been threatened or is imminent or may reasonably be deemed imminent and arising from Syrian-Kurds. 

Turkey is attempting to re-write international law and create a new “safe zone” doctrine that grants it a “right to invade”. This concept means self-defense is no-longer a necessary pretext. To accept Turkish claims means to accept that, without any evidence whatsoever, any country may claim that a terrorist organization exists in another country and as such: 

• claim a legal right to invade such other country;

• create a “safe zone” along the border; 

• amend borders and re-populate this zone with millions of refugees from other areas thus completely altering the demographic composition of an occupied territory. 

The above are not permitted under international law. Turkish invasion of Syria is illegal, and the international community must immediately act to stop it.

By Vasilios Giavris - Lawyer & Political Scientist

Friday, 11 October 2019

ISIS at Kobane: Do you remember Rwanda, Vukovar and Srebrenica?

by Vasilis Giavris - Lawyer & Political Scientist

The Syrian town of Kobane on the Turkish border is under siege by the forces of ISIS. Its population is predominantly Syrian Kurdish and more than 200,000 of the city’s inhabitants have fled to escape the imminent massacre. Remaining behind are a small number of ill equipped Kurdish fighters, a high percentage of which are heroic female fighters, determined to resist oppression and defend the city and the last of its remaining inhabitants.

Approximately 700 elderly and ill remain in the town and 10,000 to 13,000 people are reportedly trapped within the wider area. Despite such heroic efforts the fall of the town to ISIS now seems more likely as the latest reports have ISIS controlling more than 40% of the town. The fall will most certainly result in more than 10,000 people being massacred and such abhorrent action paraded on YouTube and replayed in other media outlets.   

Yet the international community continues to watch, in real time and from the comfort of its lounge rooms and mega sized TV’s, the tragedy unfold. Whilst the US has intensified its military air strikes this not enough. Boots are required on the ground but these are not likely to come. 

Only a few days ago the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, suggested that preventing the fall of Kobane was not a strategic US objective. “As horrific as it is to watch in real time what is happening in Kobane, you have to step back and understand the strategic objective,” he said and in one sentence the value of human life was summed up – it is not a strategic US objective to prevent a massacre..! 

Literally only few hundred metres away on a hill Turkish entrepreneurs are selling food to hungry Turkish citizens that have packed their picnic rugs and are watching the drama unfold from prime position.

The U.N special envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura has specifically appealed to Turkey to intervene or at the very least to allow weapons and Turkish Kurds to cross into the Kurdish-populated town. Despite having more than 15 million citizens of Kurdish decent pleading with the Turkish government to permit Turkish Kurds to go to Kobane and help their compatriots Turkey insists to remain passive and to prevent Turkish Kurds from crossing the border.

It seems that Turkey’s chief priority is to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria. In doing so it seems to favour ISIS and has been accused of turning a blind eye to their smuggling of arms, recruits and supplies from Turkey into Syria.

Staffan de Mistura has appealed for the international community to immediately intervene and prevent a massacre reminding them of the massacres in Rwanda, Srebrenica and Vukovar. “You remember Srebrenica? We do. . . . And probably we never forgave ourselves for that,” he said. “You remember Vukovar? You remember Rwanda?” he aked, recalling other recent genocides where the international community chose not to intervene preferring to watch idle as these massacres unfolded.

The answer to such questions is simple - most people and governments wish to conveniently not remember. After all it is not deemed a “strategic objective” to prevent genocide. We have more serious issues to concerns ourselves with – Miley Cyrus is in town..