The missile strikes launched on 14 April 2018 by the United States, the United Kingdom and France against three chemical weapons-related sites in Syria raise some questions concerning their lawfullness. The military action was not authorized by the Security Council, nor it may be regarded as a legitimate exercise of self-defence. Nontheless, a large and significant majority of States did not condemn the illegality of the initiative. A legal basis for missiles strikes cannot be found in the humanitarian intervention doctrine nor in the a countermeasure against the use of chemical weapons. Rather, taking account of the overall circumstances, it is worth considering if the action could be regarded as justifiable in the light of the principle concerning responsibility to protect. In the same perpsective, in order to give civil popilations protection against atrocity crimes when necessary and avoid the temptation for unilateral actions, it would be appropriate to investigate the role of the General Assembly as an alternative to the action of the Security Council.
|Titolo:||Responsabilità di proteggere in Siria e uso unilaterale della forza|
SCISO, ELENA (Corresponding)
|Data di pubblicazione:||2018|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||01.1 - Articolo su rivista (Article)|
File in questo prodotto:
|Responsabilità di proteggere in Siria e uso unilaterale della forza.pdf||Versione dell'editore||DRM non definito||Administrator|