Post by payaumsanatkar on Sept 15, 2013 20:02:55 GMT -5
Albert Einstein once stated, "Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced." In recent weeks, with the situation in Syria and the declaration by the United States to take action against Bashar al-Assad, international law and it's role in international diplomacy has been questioned. Many have begun to criticize international law and the International Court of Justice after the United States essentially ignored UN doctrine when announcing the possibility of sending strikes on Syria. Under current international law, force is allowed only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. The United States in stating it's impending use of force essentially ignored this fact (the U.S. did site Self-Defense as justification but the world community does not fully accept this). Furthemore, Russian President Vladimir Putin wrote to the United States in response to this, stating in his letter, "We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law...The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not".
As a result of this current situation, I pose a couple questions to the IYC Global Issues Department to discuss:
1. When, if ever, can nations ignore international law if said nation's actions are politically and morally legitimate? (As in the case of the United States in this situation)
2. How can the relationship between the UN Security Council, ICJ, and member states be reformed so that international law can be enforced more effectively?
With the situation in Syria, I personally find that the United States decision to possibly strike Syria and ignore international law to be acceptable due to the massive humanitarian atrocities being committed in the nation.
*Note: With the current deal on the table for the Syrian government to hand over all chemical weapons to the international community, U.S. strikes against the nation will most likely not occur, nonetheless, I still believe we should discuss the topic.
As a result of this current situation, I pose a couple questions to the IYC Global Issues Department to discuss:
1. When, if ever, can nations ignore international law if said nation's actions are politically and morally legitimate? (As in the case of the United States in this situation)
2. How can the relationship between the UN Security Council, ICJ, and member states be reformed so that international law can be enforced more effectively?
With the situation in Syria, I personally find that the United States decision to possibly strike Syria and ignore international law to be acceptable due to the massive humanitarian atrocities being committed in the nation.
*Note: With the current deal on the table for the Syrian government to hand over all chemical weapons to the international community, U.S. strikes against the nation will most likely not occur, nonetheless, I still believe we should discuss the topic.