On The Tension Between Humanitarian Law And International Law:The Case Of Syria War

The joint Russian-US deal to eliminate Syria’s chemical stockpile in order to avoid a US military strike on Syria and its concomitant drift and shift of focus coupled with the statement made by Syria’s Deputy Prime Minister and the Peoples Will Party leader Qadri Jamil on September 20th denying the reports that Bashir al –Assad led government would propose a cease-fire at planned peace talks in Geneva unveil the underlying complications to end the war in Syria.

 However, the US secretary of state John Kerry has also called on the United Nations Security Council to act concertedly and quickly to ensure the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons in a press briefing in Washington on 20th September. In any case, it has been acknowledged by Damascus that chemical weapons were used but the yet to be answered question is who used chemical weapons? The Bashir a-Assad led government or the rebel.

Be that as it may, Bashir al-Assad   denies the use of chemical weapons by his forces and accuses the opposition; Moscow is also pointing accusing fingers at the opposition. At the moment, tension of international moral outrage has subsided, impasse looks as the prevailing scenario in Syria as earlier identified by Seth Kaplan, rebels tend to disunite the more, over hundred thousand of people mostly civilians have been killed and killings continue unabated; over two million people have fled for refuge and hundreds of thousands are still fleeing Syria; refugee camps are increasingly becoming overstretched .The question is, what does this situations portend for the success and the future of International Humanitarian Law with respect to Article2 Paras. 1 and 7 of the United Nations Charter? Could International Law and International Humanitarian Law be applied side by side in Syria and even beyond Syria without one undermining the other to the peril of Humanity taking cognizance of the former as traditionally clinging on to Sovereignty and finding fortress in the conspicuous inherent draw backs of International Law and the latter embracing the Responsibility to Protect as find expression in International Humanitarian Law?

Tags: Ethics, Humanitarian, International, Law

Views: 161

Reply to This

Carnegie Council

A Case for Giving Climate Migrants Protected Legal Status

With climate change already affecting vast regions of the planet, Bard College's Brian Mateo makes the case for expanding legal protections for refugees to include people displaced due to environmental issues. Whether by updating the 1951 Convention or working on a new global agreement, Mateo writes that this an urgent human rights issue for vulnerable populations today and future generations.

Need for a New Consensus

Foreign policy experts are having diffuclty linking the negative implications of a shift towards trasactionalism for U.S. foreign aid to voters. This begs the question: Should there be a clear quid pro quo for U.S. assistance?

The End of the U.S.-Taliban Talks? with Jonathan Cristol

Despite progress over the last year, Donald Trump effectively ended the latest round of U.S.-Taliban negotiations with a tweet earlier this month. Will talks continue in a more understated way? Does this change anything on the ground in Afghanistan? And what is the Taliban doing in Moscow? Jonathan Cristol, author of "The United States and the Taliban before and after 9/11," discusses all this and more.





© 2019   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.