فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق عمومی دانشگاه تهران
دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

حقوق بین‌الملل و اعمال معیار دولت «بی‌میل یا ناتوان» در جنگ سـوریه

نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی

نویسندگان

علیرضا نوروزی 1
ایرج رضایی نژاد 2
کارن روحانی 3

1 دانشجوی دکتری رشتۀ حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی، گروه حقوق عمومی و بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، واحد قائم‌شهر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قائم‌شهر، ایران

2 استادیار گروه حقوق عمومی و بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، واحد چالوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، چالوس، ایران

3 استادیار گروه حقوق عمومی و بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، واحد قائم‌شهر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قائم‌شهر، ایران

https://doi.org/10.22059/jplsq.2021.312495.2607
چکیده
مفهوم «دولت بی‌میل یا ناتوان» به‌تازگی در گفتمان حقوق بین‌الملل و روابط بین‌الملل مطرح شده است. در واقع احیای این مفهوم به‌دلیل افزایش حملات و تهدیدات بازیگران غیردولتی در قلمرو حاکمیتی دولت‌هاست، حال آنکه در مقابل برخی از این دولت‌ها از پیشگیری یا جلوگیری از فعالیت‌های گروه‌های تروریستی ناتوان و عاجزند. در حوزۀ کارکرد این معیار کمبودها و ابهاماتی وجود دارد که به نوبۀ خود می‌تواند هزینه‌های زیادی را بر صلح و امنیت بین‌المللی تحمیل کند. این مقاله قصد دارد معیار بی‌میلی یا ناتوانی را با ارائۀ چارچوبی دقیق تعریف کند و در ادامه از منظر انتقادی موانع پذیرش این معیار و به‌ویژه نحوۀ تفسیر آمریکا از توسل به زور در مخاصمات سوریه را بررسی می‌کند. استدلال می‌شود که این معیار در قضیۀ سوریه اعمال‌شدنی نیست، چراکه حقوق بین‌الملل موجود، دفاع مشروع خارج از قلمرو داخلی را یعنی در جایی که دولت میزبان در مقابل بازیگران غیردولتی، بی‌میل یا ناتوان است، مجاز نمی‌شمارد، مگر اینکه به‌صراحت توسط شورای امنیت مجاز اعلام شده باشد یا مورد رضایت دولت میزبان باشد. همچنین هنوز یک هنجار عرفی در این خصوص ایجاد نشده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

بازیگران غیردولتی
توسل به زور
حقوق بین‌الملل
مخاصمات سوریه
معیار بی‌میلی یا ناتوانی

عنوان مقاله English

International Law and the Application of the "Unwilling or Unable State" Test in the Syrian Conflict

نویسندگان English

Alireza Norouzi 1
Irajr Rezaeenezhad 2
karren rohani 3
1 Ph.D. Student in International Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Azad Islamic University of Qaemshahr, Qaemshahr, Iran
2 Assistant Prof., Department of International Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Azad Islamic University of Chalus, Chalus, Iran
3 Assistant Prof., Department of International Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Azad Islamic University of Qaemshahr, Qaemshahr, Iran
چکیده English

The concept of "unwilling or unable state" was recently introduced in the discourse of international law and international relations. In fact, the revival of this concept is due to the increasing attacks and threats of non-governmental actors in the sovereign realm of governments, and in contrast, some of these governments are incapable of preventing or deterring the activities of terrorist groups. There are shortcomings and ambiguities in the scope of this criterion, which in turn can impose great costs on international peace and security. This paper intends to define the criterion of reluctance or inability by providing a precise framework, and then critically examines the obstacles to the acceptance of this criterion, and in particular the US interpretation of the use of force in the Syrian conflict. It is argued that this criterion does not apply in the case of Syria because existing international law does not allow for legitimate defense outside the domestic territory, where the host government is reluctant or incapable of dealing with non-state actors Unless expressly authorized by the Security Council or approved by the host Government. Nor has a customary norm been established in this regard.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

international law
non-state actors
Syria conflict
unwilling or unable test
use of force

  1. - انگلیسی

    1. A) Articles
    2. Corten, Olivier (2016), “The Unwilling or Unable’ test: Has it been, and Could it be, Accepted?”, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 29, pp. 777–799.
    3. Couzigou, Irene (2017), “The Right to Self-defence Against Non-state Actors: Criteria of the Unwilling or Unable Test”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, pp. 1-3.
    4. Dawood i. Ahmed (2017), “Defending Weak States against the Unwilling or Unable Doctrine of Self-Defense”, journal of international law and international relations, (toronto), University of Chicago, pp. 1-46.
    5. Deeks, Ashley S (2012), “Unwilling or Unable: Toward a Normative Framework for Extraterritorial Self-Defense”, Virginia Journal of International Law , Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 483-550.
    6. Dorsey, Jessica & Paulussen, Christophe (2015), “Towards a European Position on Armed Drones and Targeted Killings: Surveying EU Counterterrorism Perspectives”, ICCT (International Centre for Counter-Terrorism – The Hague),pp. 1-103.
    7. Gareth D. Williams (2013), “Piercing the Shield of Sovereignty: an Assessment of the Legal Status of the Unwilling or Unable test”, UNSW Law Journal ,Vol. 36, No.2, pp. 619-641.
    8. Qureshi ,Waseem (2018), “The use of force against perpetrators of international terrorism”, Santa Clara Journal of International Law, Vol. 16, No.1, pp. 1-36.
    9. Nielsen, René Vendel (2018),”The illegality of Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-state Actors or New Customary law?” , International Security and Law Faculty of Business and Social Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, pp. 1-88.
    10. S. Krishnan (2017), “The Alleged use of Chemical Weapons against the Syrian People: does it justify Forceful intervention?”, Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, Vol 21, pp. 138-159.
    11. Startski, Paulina (2015), “Right to Self-defense, Attribution and the Non-state actor-Birth of the Unable or Unwilling Standard”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, pp. 455-501.
    12. Tibori-Szabó, Kinga (2016), “The ‘Unwilling or Unable’ test and the Law of Self-defence”, Fundamental Rights in International and European Law: public and private law perspectives, The Hague: Asser Press, Amsterdam Center for International Law (ACIL), pp. 73-97.

     

    1. B) ICJ Decision-Opinions and resolutions SC
    2. Armed Activities on Territory of Congo (Dem. Rep. Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, I.C.J. Rep.(Dec. 19-2005).
    3. Military and Paramilitary Activities in andAgainst Nicaragua (Nicar. v.U.S.),Judgment, I.C.J. Rep. (June 27-1986).
    4. Oil Platforms (Iran v. U.S.), Preliminary Objection, I.C.J. Rep. (Dec. 12-1996).
    5. U.N. SCOR, 70th Sess, U.N. Doc. S/PV.7527 (Sept. 30-2015)
    6. UN General Assembly Resolution 2625, October 24, 1970.
    7. UN Security Council, 7271th meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.7271, 19 September 2014.
    8. UN Security Council, 7387th meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.7387, 18 February 2015.
    9. UN Security Council, 7589th meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.7589, 18 December 2015.

     

    1. C) letters and Comments
    2. Babb Mattis, Carla, “Self-Defense” Attack Doesn’t Mean US Getting into Syrian Civil War , VOANEWS(Feb.9,2018), https://www.voanews.com/a/us-coalition-airstrikes-in syria/4244233.html.
    3. Canada, Parliament, House of Commons Debates, 41st Parl, 2nd Sess, Vol 147, No. 123 (Oct. 6, 2014).
    4. Chunying, Hua, Spokesperson, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, Remarks (Apr. 14,2018), https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_ 665401/t1551073.html ; Leff, Alex, Brazil and Ecuador Come Out Against Airstrikes in Syria, PUBLIC RADIO INT’L (Sept. 24, 2014), https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-09-24/brazil-and-ecuador-come-out-against-airstrikes-syria).
    5. Corten, Olivier, A Plea Against the Abusive Invocation of Self-Defence as a Response to Terrorism, EJILTALK!(July 14,2016) https://www.ejiltalk.org/a-plea-against-the-abusive-invocation-of-self-defence-as-a-response-to-terrorism/
    6. Kimmorley, Sarah, Australia’s Military Involvement in Syria Is a War of Self-Defence Not a Plan to Topple the Assad Regime, BUS. INSIDER AUSTL. (Sept. 10, 2015) https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australias-military-involvement-in-syria-is-a-war-of-self-defence-not-a-plan-to-topple-the-assad-regime-2015-9
    7. Letter dated 10 December 2015 from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Germany to the United Nations addressed to the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2015/946, 10 December 2015.
    8. Letter dated 11 January 2016 from the Permanent Representative of Denmark to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2016/34, 13 January 2016.
    9. Letter dated 23 September 2014 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/2014/695. 23 September 2014.
    10. Letter dated 24 July 2015 from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Turkey to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2015/563, 24 July 2015.
    11. Letter dated 31 March 2015 from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Canada to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2015/221, 31 March 2015.
    12. Letter dated 7 June 2016 from the Permanent Representative of Belgium to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2016/523, 9 June 2016.
    13. Letter dated June 25, 2014 from the Permanent Rep. of Iraq to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc S/2014/440 (June 25, 2014).
    14. Letter from Donald J. Trump, President of the United States (Apr. 8,2017) https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/letter-president-speaker-house-representatives-president-pro-tempore-senate/.
    15. Boeglin, Nicolás, Against the Abusive Invocation of Self-Defence to Face Terrorism, GERM (July 22, 2016), http://www.mondialisations.org/php/public/art.php?id=40125&Ian=EN.
    16. O’Neil, Matt, Syria Incursion Still on the Table, Says Prime Minister Tony Abbott, RN(Sept. 16, 2014) https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ breakfast/tony-abbott/5746376
    17. Permanent Rep. of Australia to the U.N., Letter from the Permanent Rep. of Australia to the United Nations, U.N. Doc. S/2015/693 (2015)
    18. Permanent Rep. of the Syrian Arab Republic to the U.N, Identical letters from the Permanent Rep. of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations, U.N. Doc. A/70/385-S/2015/727 (Sept. 21, 2015).
    19. Permanent Rep. of the Syrian Arab Republic to the U.N., Identical letters from Permanent Rep. of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations, U.N. Doc. A/70/673-S/2015/1048 (Jan. 4, 2016).
    20. Permanent Rep. of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the U.N., Identical letters from the Permanent Rep. of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Nations, U.N. Doc. S/2014/851 (Nov. 26, 2014).
    21. REUTERS, Russia Says Air Strikes in Syria Would Be Act of Aggression Without UN Vote, (Sept. 11, 2014) https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-u-s-syria-airstrikes/russia-says-air-strikes-in-syria-would-be-act-of-aggression-without-u-n-vote-idUKKBN0H61BF20140911.
    22. Sendut, Jefferi, The Unwilling and Unable Doctrine and Syria, CAMBRIDGE U. L. SOC’Y: PER INCURIAM (Feb. 21, 2018), https://culs.org.uk/per-incuriam/legal-updates/unwilling-unable-doctrine-syria/.
    23. Statement of the Foreign Ministry of Ecuador regarding the US Offensive on Syrian Territory, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Movilidad Humana, 24th of September, 2014.
    24. AL JAZEERA,Syria’s Civil War Explained from the Beginning, (Apr. 14, 2018), https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/05/syria-civil-war-explained-160505084119966.html.
فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق عمومی دانشگاه تهران
دوره 53، شماره 4
زمستان 1402
زمستان 1402
صفحه 2135-2157

  • تاریخ دریافت 12 آبان 1399
  • تاریخ بازنگری 22 دی 1399
  • تاریخ پذیرش 30 فروردین 1400

صفحه اصلی

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

فرایند ارزیابی و پذیرش مقالات

ارسال مقاله

بانک‌ها و نمایه‌نامه‌ها

تماس با ما