UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL

STUDY GUIDE

MUNTR 2013

I

Letter from the Secretary-General

Dear Delegates,

With great honour and joy, I welcome you all to the ninth annual session of Model United

Nations Turkey Conference (MUNTR). I am Okyanus Akn, the Secretary-General of MUNTR 2013

and a senior student majoring in International Relations at Middle East Technical University.

MUNTR, with each and every annual session, has thus far resulted in a set of significant

milestones, realising and defining standards of utmost academic quality and success in its region, as

one of the largest Model United Nations conferences in Europe.

Guided by the vision and cumulative success of the Model United Nations Association

(MUNA) and the MUNTR Family, we have thoroughly committed to the goal of realising another

unprecedented experience with MUNTR 2013 in this traditionally successful history. Whilst

proceeding towards the accomplishment of this goal, the Secretariat has exerted vigorous endeavour

and put incredible energy in the meticulous preparation for the making of this years MUNTR. In this

consideration, I would particularly like to thank Mr. ar Ylmaz, the Deputy Secretary-General, Mr.

Gkberk Ekinci, one of my Under Secretaries-General, and Mr. Yunus Can Ayba, our academic team

assistant for their tremendous efforts in producing this fully comprehensive study guide and for their

devotion to our commitment of realising a very remarkable MUNTR experience.

The United Nations Security Council, in itself, is of utmost importance in considering the

entire academic setting of MUNTR 2013, as, similar to the reality, it will be dealing with a myriad of

global political developments at the same time. Particular to this understanding, constituting a core

among the other security-themed committees of MUNTR 2013, the UNSC will do so through leading

debates therein according to any political emergency that could take place during the continuous

committee sessions. Accordingly, even though the present study guide provides a sufficient overview

on both the UNSC and recent developments in the civil war-torn Syria and in Mali, delegates of the

Council will be required to set forth their own priorities in proceeding with different agenda items. To

this end, I firmly recommend that delegates of the UNSC take use of the content of this study guide as

a stepping stone towards further research on recent global political issues, so as to give a shape to

mostly complicated debates in the Security Council, with intricate points as to dynamics and structure

of global political relations.

Should you have any questions as to the content of this study guide or the academic setting of

MUNTR 2013, please do not hesitate to contact me via akin@muntr.org, the responsible academic

team members or your committee directors.

I am confident that, in its entirety, MUNTR 2013 will be of a splendid experience with a week

of challenging academic debates and wonderful social interaction.

Best regards,

Okyanus AKIN

Secretary-General

MUNTR 2013

II

Letter from the Under Secretary-General

Dear delegates,

The academic structuring of this very committee has been formed in cooperation with many

valuable members of the Secretariat of MUNTR 2013; by Mr. ar Ylmaz, the Deputy Secretary-

General and a senior student at the Faculty of Law, Ankara University and me, Gkberk Ekinci, one of

the Under Secretaries-General and a sophomore student at the same university, together with

invaluable support by Mr. Yunus Can Ayba, the academic team assistant, and a student at Nesibe

Aydn Schools.

We have set out this present study guide of the UN Security Council of MUNTR 2013 under

three main topics. Within a framework of a recent time span, the world has been full of political

actions beyond any measurable criterion, bringing a series of incidents into such continuum that the

participants of our Conference would not be able to cover in a full-scale consideration. It is thus

needless to say that the main structure of the UN Security Council and its principals of producing

resolutions are among essentials within the simulation. As will be noticed, the delegates of the UNSC

will thoroughly examine the structure of the Council, its duties, responsibilities and competencies, and

their place in an international law framework, whilst going through the sections of the present study

guide. Expectedly, being the most topical issue and the most popular one so to say; the aftermath of

the Arab Spring, particularly on the Syrian Civil War, has taken priority as we outlined focal points for

this committee. Another important question which we decided to address is as to the recent situation in

Mali, since the clashes have escalated quite recently to a certain extent, and the agenda of the actual

UNSC has been set as the resolution proposals concerning the activities of global terrorism infiltrating

into North Africa.

Differing from the general perception of considering such issues superficially and

concentrating on heroic arguments or accusatory discourses, the general understanding which

orientated the content of this study guide was mostly an aim to encourage delegates to take global

political developments, and, actually, political insights into firm consideration while asserting their

ideas and arguments.

As is known by all, during MUNTR conferences, the UN Security Council has been set as a

crisis committee which is consistently fed with intelligences and updates, making the sessions quite

challenging for even an experienced delegate. Since the members of the academic team has a purpose

of setting the committees up as concrete as possible that it could reach to the level of reality and actual

political developments, the topics that may be adopted during debates could be full of probabilities

beyond expectations. To this end, this document has been prepared only to help delegates get a grip on

the content of ongoing disputes and a rather general overview of them.

Resolutions or solution proposals we may have in this committee may comprise the real

background behind disputes and conflicts experienced nowadays in the world. In addition to this, we

sincerely believe that this very committee of MUNTR 2013 will be a particular experience for all of its

participants, as they would experience how to struggle for and defend their ideas, improve their

diplomatic personalities, and meet life-long acquaintances.

Best regards, Gkberk Ekinci

Under Secretary-General

Crisis Team UNSC ekinci@muntr.or

III

I. History of the UN Security Council

he term of the United Nations was

firstly mentioned by Franklin

Roosevelt in order to refer to the

World War II-time alliance consisting of the

United States, the United Kingdom and the

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, fighting

against Italy, Japan and more importantly

Germany.i Accordingly, the establishment of

the United Nations system had its origins

stemming from this situation during the World

War II.

Such an umbrella organization which would be

able to prevent global security threats by using

legal and pre-accepted force or by means of

peaceful settlement with the memberships of

all states and full accession intentions of their

citizens was a dream for the mankind. The

League of Nations, established in 1919, could

not fulfill these duties and its apparent

ineffective performance led to the eruption of

the World War II and thus, the idea of re-

establishment of a new organization, namely

the United Nations, emerged.

Within this line, series of meetings were held

in various places consisting of the

representatives of the abovementioned alliance.

Most notably, Washington Conversations on

International Peace and Security Organization,

also known as Dumbarton Oaks Conference,

took place from 21 August 1944 through 7

October 1944. A final document was released

on the very last day of the Conference, stating

that [t]here should be established an

international organization under the title of

The United Nations. Furthermore, principles,

purposes and the general structure of the

organization were also decided upon under this

document as proposals. Maintenance of

international peace and security; and, to this

end, taking effective collective measures for

the prevention and removal of threats to the

peace and the suppression of acts of aggression

or other breaches of the peace, and bringing

about by peaceful means adjustment or

settlement of international disputes which may

lead to a breach of the peace; development of

friendly relations among nations and to take

other appropriate measures to strengthen

universal peace; achievement of international

cooperation in the solution of international

economic, social and other humanitarian

problems; and affordance of a center for

harmonizing the actions of nations in the

achievement of these common ends were

proposed as the primary purposes of the United

Nations. A general assembly, a security

council and an international court of justice

were also offered to be established to serve in

accordance with these purposes.

In that respect, the security council was

suggested to be consisting of eleven members

including the contemporary permanent five

members. The council,

should be empowered to investigate

any dispute, or any situation which

may lead to international friction or

give rise to a dispute, in order to

determine whether its continuance is

likely to endanger the maintenance of

international peace and securityii

and in that respect, the principle for pacific

settlement of disputes was set forth in the

following form:

The parties to any dispute the

continuance of which is likely to

endanger the maintenance of

international peace and security

should obligate themselves, first of all,

to seek a solution by negotiation,

meditation, conciliation, arbitration

or judicial settlement, or other

T

IV

peaceful means of their own choice.

The Security Council should call

upon the parties to settle their dispute

by such means.iii

In case of any failure to settlement of a peace,

the council should take any measures

necessary for the maintenance of international

peace and security in accordance with the

purposes and principles of the

Organization.iv

Proposal of the Dumbarton Oaks Conference

was reshaped in the United Nations

Conference on International Organization

which took place in San Francisco on 25 April

1945. Governments and a number of non-

governmental organizations attended the

Conference in order to assist in the drafting of

a charter, in the light of the aforementioned

proposals.

Charter preparation process lasted for two

months and the fifty nations represented at the

Conference signed the Charter of the United

Nations on 26 June 1945. The United Nations

Charter describes its purposes under Article 1;

and, the first paragraph of this Article reads as:

To maintain international peace and

security, and to that end, to take

effective collective measures for the

prevention and removal of threats to

the peace, and for the suppression of

acts of aggression or other breaches of

the peace, and to bring about by

peaceful means, and in conformity with

the principles of justice and

international law, adjustment or

settlement of international disputes or

situations which might lead to a breach

of the peace.

This very Article sets out one of the most

fundamental purposes of the United Nations

system. Settlement of disputes is taken into

hand in light of this principal and purpose with

convening states.

As mentioned above, the purposes of the

United Nations system are regulated under

Article 1 and the principles other than the one

explained above, are set forth under the

following paragraphs of the Article. Equality,

self-determination, international co-operation

in promoting and encouraging respect for

human rights and for fundamental freedoms for

all without any discrimination are the concepts

that are specifically envisaged under the

second paragraph. Therefore, the united

organization enshrines on the security and

collective defense directed to reach global

peace and stands out the international co-

operation in solving co-operation and takes

note of respect for human rights and for

fundamental rights without any distinction.

This shows the intention of the civilization

forming the United Nations during the post-

World War II era which comprehends the

common heritage of humankind on democratic,

social and economic development. Thus, to

be a centre for harmonizing the actions of

nations in the attainment of these common

ends is finally aimed by the United Nations as

it is mentioned under the fourth paragraph of

the first Article.

The Charter is not only a multilateral treaty but

also the constitution of the United Nations

which maintained the organization and pointed

out the rights and obligations of state-parties to

the Charter.

Article 2 envisages the principles that both the

UN and the member states shall act in

conformity with. These include the principles

of the sovereign equality, good faith,

prevention of the use of force. Furthermore,

third paragraph which reads as all Members

shall settle their international disputes by

peaceful means in such a manner that

V

international peace and security, and justice,

are not endangered supplements the UNs

peaceful purposes and principle for prohibition

of use of force. In this line, under the seventh

paragraph the United Nations accepted not to

intervene in matters which are essentially

within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or

shall require the Members to submit such

matters to settlement under the present

Charter.

The Charter consists of nineteen chapters. The

Statute of the International Court of Justice is

an integral part of the Charter. In the course of

time, several amendments made over the

Charter. Most notable one is the amendment

that changed the Councils seats from eleven to

fifteen on 31 August 1965.

There are six substantial organs of the UN

system: a General Assembly, a Security

Council, an Economic and Social Council, a

Trusteeship Council, an International Court of

Justice and a Secretariat. Further subsidiary

organs could be established in accordance with

the present Charter if member-states would

deem necessary.

II. Structure of the Council

A. The General Context

he Security Council is founded upon

the intention to have an efficient

executive organ that takes care of

international security problems in accordance

with the UN Charter. It is stipulated that the

Council would be to function continuously and

given primary responsibility for the

maintenance of international peace and

security.

Matters relating to the Council are set forth

under the Fifth Chapter of the UN Charter.

Article 24 states that

in order to ensure prompt and

effective action by the United Nations,

its Members confer on the Security

Council primary responsibility for the

maintenance of international peace

and security, and agree that in

carrying out its duties under this

responsibility the Security Council

acts on their behalf. In discharging

these duties the Security Council

shall act in accordance with the

Purposes and Principles of the

United Nations. The specific powers

granted to the Security Council for

the discharge of these duties are laid

down in Chapters VI, VII, VIII, and

XII.v

Therefore, competences of the Security

Council take their sources from the UN

Charter which also proves to be such an

effective and unique treaty; and this maintains

the legal basis and merit of the responsibilities

and duties of the Security Council.vi

The Security Council consists of fifteen

Members of the United Nations. Each member

of the Security Council has one representative.

The Republic of China, France, Russian

Federation (formerly the Union of Soviet

Socialist Republics), the United Kingdom of

Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the

United States of America are permanent

members of the Security Council. In other

words, these five states have permanent seats

and remain as the members of the Council

without any election. These permanent

members, stood out on the basis of the then-

situation pertaining to power politic in 1945,

have the veto right. Therefore, any draft

resolution voted with even one against vote by

these permanent members does not pass.vii

The General Assembly of the United Nations

elects the remaining ten Members of the

T

VI

United Nations to be non-permanent members

of the Security Council. These members hold

their seats for a two-year-term, and one group

of five is rotated every year. A retiring member

is not eligible for immediate re-election.viii

Decisions of the Security Council on

procedural matters are made by an affirmative

vote of nine members. However, decisions of

the Security Council on substantial matters are

made by an affirmative vote of nine members

including the concurring votes of the

permanent members. The Security Council

generally holds its meeting at the United

Nations Headquarters in New York, but it also

may hold meetings at such places other than

the seat of the Organization as in its judgment

will best facilitate its work.ix

B. Duties and Competency of the Council

1. A General Framework

ompetences of the Security Council

are set forth under the Chapter VI and

VII or the United Nations Charter.

These two chapters draw the legal limitations

of the Councils work.

Chapter VI, named as Pacific Settlement of

Disputes shapes the general principle of the

United Nations dispute settlement process. Its

name suggests and encourages peaceful and

pacific methods to be used during any kind of

dispute in the international political arena.

Pacific settlement of disputes system takes

precedence when a dispute arises; Article 33

sets forth that any dispute which may endanger

the maintenance of international peace and

security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by

negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation,

arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to

regional agencies or arrangements, or other

peaceful means of their own choice.x Article

37 states that if the parties to a dispute,

considering Article 33, fail to settle it by the

means in that article, they have to refer this

dispute to the Security Council. Furthermore,

before such reference, the Security Council

may call upon the parties to settle their dispute

by such means, if it deems necessary. In that

line, the Council holds the right to investigate

any dispute or situation if the continuance of

the dispute or situation is likely to threaten

international peace and security, under the

provisions of Article 34. Article 35 stipulates

that any member of the United Nations may

bring any dispute or any situation to the

attention of the Security Council or the

General Assembly to be discussed. At any

stage of a dispute, the Security Council may

submit recommendations crucial for the

settlement thereof.xi

Chapter VII, named as Action with Respect to

Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace,

and Acts of Aggression refers to the sanctions

to be implemented against any breaches of

international law, as a second stage system of

measures after recommendations given under

the previous Chapter. Its logic is controversial

since the establishment of the United Nations

due to the fact that under Chapter VII the

Council is given primary power, as a reaction

to the failure of the League of Nations. Many

criticisms made over these given powers

limits, reasoning that powers granted to the

Security Council could render it a rather

executive organ as to the international

community.

Detection or determination on existence of any

threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act

of aggression is undertaken by the Security

Council. The Council, upon its determination,

may again deliver recommendations or give

legally binding decisions on measures to be

taken in order to maintain or restore

international peace and security.xii

C

VII

According to Article 41, the aforementioned

legally binding decision may be in form of

economic sanctions or interruption of rail, sea,

air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means

of communication, and the severance of

diplomatic relations.xiii

Article 42 shows the furtherance of the

sanctions implementation in case a serious

threat to the international peace and security

occurs

Should the Security Council

considers that measures provided for

in Article 41 would be inadequate or

have proved to be inadequate, it may

take such action by air, sea, or land

forces as may be necessary to

maintain or restore international

peace and security. Such action may

include demonstrations, blockade,

and other operations by air, sea, or

land forces of Members of the United

Nations.

Any Member State could partake in these

actions, and martial details of these actions

may be decided under the resolution that

includes the decision for the use of military

action with the assistance of the Military Staff

Committee (hereinafter referred to as

UNMSC) which is established again under the

Chapter VII.xiv

Chapter VII takes its binding feature under

Article 48 which reads as:

The action required carrying out the

decisions of the Security Council for

the maintenance of international peace

and security shall be taken by all the

Members of the United Nations or by

some of them, as the Security Council

may determine.

Such decisions shall be carried out by

the Members of the United Nations

directly and through their action in the

appropriate international agencies of

which they are members.

Another significant concept with regard to the

United Nations system is the self-defense right

set out under the Article 51.1

Competencies given to the Council are often

criticized in considering international law.

According to Daniel H. Joyner, the Professor

of Law from Alabama University School of

Law,

the Security Council currently sees

itself at the apex of authority in

international security law, with

essentially unlimited power to

address situations that its controlling

permanent members determine to be

a threat to international peace and

security, and to fashion whatever

compulsory remedy it deems

appropriate to this end.xv

Moreover, Joyder takes attention to Security

Councils practical overflow of its authorities

by stating that

this more recent understanding by the

Security Council of the scope of its

authority is that the Council is

empowered not only to act as an

executive body, but rather also to act

as a legislative body crafting

proactive and permanent legal edicts

covering important areas of

international relations including

terrorism ( ) and even further to act

as a judicial body determining the

legal rights and obligations of UN

members. This more recent

1 see 2. Use of Force

VIII

understanding can be seen in

embryonic form in the activity of the

Security Council through the 1990s,

for example in the creation of two ad

hoc international criminal

tribunals.xvi

2. Use of Force

nited Nations system is driven by the

aim of reaching the goal of global

peace and security. In order to fulfill

that goal and responsibility, the UN Charter

envisages several measures to eliminate any

kind of threat to global security,

aforementioned legal ways to use force by

states consisting a general way of

comprehension in order to legalize the taken

actions.

The most significant measure which could be

taken in line with the UN Charter is set out

under its paragraph 4, Article 2 which

constitutes that

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.

This provision is accepted as a principle of

customary international law. In other words, it

is thus binding upon all states in the world

community.xvii

The threat or use of force refers to a variety

of forces rather than the term of war. Thus,

the United Nations General Assembly

understands and comprehends force in a

wider form of concept which makes it possible

to enlarge the content of the prohibition; thus

this term covers situations in which violence is

employed which fall short of the technical

requirement of the state of war as it is stated

under the 1970 Declaration on Principles of

International Law. xviii

According to Malcolm N. Shaw, scope of this

provision refers to

[f]irst, wars of aggression constitute

a crime against peace for which there

is responsibility under international

law. Secondly, states must not

threaten or use force to violate

existing international frontiers

(including demarcation or armistice

lines) or to solve international

disputes. Thirdly, states are under a

duty to refrain from acts of reprisal

involving the use of force. Fourthly,

states must not use force to deprive

peoples of their right to self-

determination and independence. And

fthly, states must refrain from

organising, instigating, assisting or

participating in acts of civil strife or

terrorist acts in another state and

must not encourage the formation of

armed bands for incursion into

another states territory. Many of

these items are crucial, but

ambiguous.xix

One discussion over the term force is made

whether the use of economic force such as

boycott or embargo is considered in context of

the Article 2(4). Although modification of this

provision does not refer for any interpretation

in such way, Article 51 refers to armed

forces.xx

The 1970 Declaration on Principles of

International Law stated the duty of states to

refrain ...from military, political, economic or

any other form of coercion aimed against the

political independence or territorial integrity

of any state and other pieces of legislations

U

IX

drawn attention not only to the martial forces

but also to the economic, social and cultural

forces. Therefore, although the discussion

keeps its controversial features, those who

support that threat use of economic power by

states in terms of international relations is

again something illegal pursuant to the United

Nations Charter.xxi

Article 2(4) of the Charter apparently sets forth

such prohibition against the territorial

integrity or political independence of any state,

or in any other manner inconsistent with the

purposes of the United Nations. Accordingly,

there is a debate as to whether these words

should be interpreted restrictively, so as to

permit force that would not contravene the

clause, or as reinforcing the primary

prohibition, says Shaw and adds as; but the

weight of opinion probably suggests the latter

position.xxii

Article 2(4) includes a significant rule in

regard to the organism of the Chapter.

However it does have some exceptions. First

exception is with regards to acts considered as

self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter.xxiii

This Article prescribes a self-defense system in

case that a Member States faces an armed

attack against its national sovereignty; it shall

use its inherent right of individual or collective

self-defense until the Security Council has

taken measures necessary to maintain

international peace and security in condition

that measures taken by Members. Exercise of

this right of self-defense shall be immediately

reported to the Security Council and shall not

in any way affect the authority and

responsibility of the Security Council under

the United Nations Charter to take at any time

such action as it deems necessary in order to

maintain or restore international peace and

security. This report to the Council yields the

issue to the international community; however,

it does not vitiate a states inherent right of

self-defense.

In order to comprehend the real scope of the

concept of self-defense, the questions that are

with regard to armed attack and the legal

response to such an act must firstly be

answered.xxiv

As to the origination of the self-defense right,

there must be an armed attack, and thus an

exception to the prohibition of the use of force

shall take place. According to the International

Court of Justice, an armed conflict

must be understood as including not

merely action by regular armed

forces across an international border,

but also the sending by or on behalf

of a State of armed bands, groups,

irregulars or mercenaries, which

carry out acts of armed forces

against another State of such gravity

as to amount to (inter alia) an actual

armed attack conducted by regular

forces, or its substantial involvement

therein [.]

as it indicated in Nicaragua case.2 xxv

The ICJ

further expressed that there is a specific rule

whereby self-defence would warrant only

measures which are proportional to the armed

attack and necessary to respond to it, a rule

well established in customary international

law. xxvi Therefore, a lawful self-defense is

limited to its responsive feature, and must not

entail excessive actions.

Self-defense right may also be exercised in the

form of collective self-defense. This is only

possible should a state requests assistance.

2 It was a 1984 case brought before the International Court of

Justice.

X

Second exception is called Security Council

Mandate set forth under Article 42 of the UN

Charter. Article 39 which reads as

the Security Council shall determine

the existence of any threat to the

peace, breach of the peace, or act of

aggression and shall make

recommendations, or decide what

measures shall be taken in

accordance with Articles 41 and 42,

to maintain or restore international

peace and security

gives authority to Article 42, which reads as:

Should the Security Council

consider that measures provided for

in Article 41 would be inadequate

or have proved to be inadequate, it

may take such action by air, sea, or

land forces as may be necessary to

maintain or restore international

peace and security. Such action may

include demonstrations, blockade,

and other operations by air, sea, or

land forces of Members of the

United Nations,

so as to set forth the scope of the sanctions that

can be taken.xxvii

Article 43 made available to the United

Nations armed forces and other items

necessary to maintain the peace to be convened.

However, these forces were never made

available to the Council on a permanent basis.

Rather than that provision

the practice () has developed

within the Security Council is for

states to provide fighting forces on an

ad hoc basis, thus making the Council

dependent on the will of individual

Member States to act by way of

Article 42.xxviii

It is argued that the Council has large

discretion with regard to the interpretation of

the term threat to the peace. The non-

military sources of instability in the economic,

social, humanitarian and ecological fields may

become threats to peace and security; and

therefore, the absence of war and military

conflicts amongst States does not in itself

ensure international peace and security.xxix In

other words, the Council augments the

definition of what it would consider as a threat

to international peace and security.

To sum up, the use of force by states, as a rule,

is prohibited. However, there are several

exceptions to it: Self-defense and Chapter VII

powers (the Councils mandate under Article

42). Moreover, there are significant questions

whether it is legal to interfere with the states

sovereignty, in case of a situation in which the

state in question abuses human rights.

International law envisaged several approaches

so as to further analyze these questions.

Accordingly, the concepts of humanitarian

intervention, responsibility to protect,

peacekeeping mission of the UN and the

Security Councils role on promoting the rule

of law will be further examined in relation to

the legitimate substance of the Councils role.

3. Humanitarian Intervention

ntervention is defined as one nation's

interference by force, or threat of force, in

another nation's internal affairs or in

questions arising between other nations by the

Blacks Law Dictionary.xxx According to Philip

C. Jessup

intervention may or may not involve

the use of force. It is frequently

possible for a powerful state to

impair the political independence of

another weaker state without actually

utilizing its armed forces. This result

I

XI

may be accomplished by lending open

approval, as by the relaxation of an

arms embargo, to a revolutionary

group headed by individuals ready to

accept the political or economic

dominance of the intervening state. It

may be accomplished by the

withholding of recognition of a new

government, combined with various

forms of economic and financial

pressure until the will of the stronger

state prevails through the resignation

or overthrow of the government

disapproved.xxxi

Intervention per se is considered as an act

against customary international law; however,

humanitarian intervention, an exception to the

general rule, is often contemplated as within

the lines of international law. It also can be

defined as an intervention by the

international community to curb abuses of

human rights within a country, even if the

intervention infringes the country's

sovereignty. xxxii Although a series of

discussions are set forth over the definition and

scope of humanitarian intervention, it is

generally accepted that it essentially involves

the threat and use of military force (apart from

the non-forcible interventions) and interference

of the concerned states sovereignty through

sending military forces therein with

humanitarian purposes.

Although most of the decisions relating to

interventions are duly taken with the

authorization of the Security Council, it

remains uncertain that in case of a situation

that would necessitate a humanitarian

intervention, whether a decision by the UN

Security Council would be required or not. In

practice, there are incidents that took place

with and without the UN involvement. It is

also a quite contemporary question to ask

whether unauthorized interventions are in

accordance with the international law. Thus,

this uncertainty procreates the legitimacy

problem of the humanitarian interventions.

Legitimacy of humanitarian interventions has

always been controversial.

Legal positivists argue that there is a

moral duty to obey the law. ()

According to Article 38(I) of the

Statute of the International Court of

Justice, international norms are

legally binding if they are

incorporated in a. international

conventions, whether general or

particular, establishing rules

expressly recognized by the

contesting states; b. international

custom, as evidence of a general

practice accepted as law Although

this Statute is technically only

binding on the International Court of

Justice, it is widely accepted as the

authoritative statement of the sources

of international law.xxxiii

The Charter of the United Nations notes under

Article 2(7) that [n]othing in the present

Charter shall authorize the United Nations to

intervene in matters which are essentially

within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.

For most of the international lawyers, it puts an

end the discussion with accepting all kinds of

interventions; however, a number of legal

scholars diverge as to this consideration.xxxiv

They support three arguments so as to defend

the legitimacy of the humanitarian

interventions.xxxv

First, Article 2(4) of the UN

Charter only forbids the cases when the use of

force directed against the territorial integrity or

political independence of any State; therefore,

a humanitarian intervention leading to a

consequence in contrary with Article 2(4)

would be out the scope of the Charter, and,

hence, international law. Second, the phrase

XII

that reads as or in any other manner

inconsistent with the purposes of the United

Nations set forth under the Article 2(4)

permits unauthorized humanitarian

intervention where the Security Council fails to

realize one of its chief purposes the

protection of human rights. xxxvi Third

argument is concerning the expanded

interpretation of Article 39 of the UN Charter

which states

the Security Council shall determine

the existence of any threat to the

peace, breach of the peace, or act of

aggression and shall make

recommendations, or decide what

measures shall be taken in

accordance with Articles 41 and 42,

to maintain or restore international

peace and security.xxxvii

Legal realists argue that this provision allows

intervening in order to end human right

violations that lack trans-boundary effects by

giving the Council jurisdiction over any threat

to the peace, rather than any threat to the

international peace.xxxviii Considering the fact

that the Council tends not to recognize

unauthorized humanitarian intervention,

several arguments lack the ability to be

supported and accepted in practice,

humanitarian interventions per se is accepted

within the terms and scope of the United

Nations system.xxxix

The concept of humanitarian intervention led

to further discussions and to the emergence of

many other concepts, such as responsibility to

protect, peacekeeping operations and so forth.

4. Responsibility to Protect

oncept of the responsibility to protect

was established by the United Nations

with adopting the 2005 World

Summit Outcome, submitted by the

Millennium Summit. It envisages a set of

principles taken with regard to the

understanding that sovereignty is a

responsibility falling under the competence of

governments. State sovereignty implies that

governments bear huge responsibility for the

protection of their peoples. In case of a

situation where a group of people suffering

from serious harm, as a result of (a) internal

war, (b) insurgency, (c) repression or (d) state

failure, generally emerges as ethnic cleansing;

and the state in question is reluctant or unable

to overcome it, the principle of non-

intervention [yields] to the international

responsibility to protect.xl

Legal substance of the responsibility to protect

(hereinafter referred to as R2P) stems from

obligations inherent in the concept of

sovereignty; the responsibility of the Security

Council, under Article 24 of the UN Charter,

for the maintenance of international peace and

security; specific legal obligations under

human rights and declarations relating to their

protection, covenants and treaties, international

humanitarian law and national law; the

developing practice of states, regional

organizations and the Security Council itself.xli

The Council is the competent body to decide

whether a responsibility to protect mission for

the international community exists. This

authorization is the primarily legal merit for

such an action. If such an intervention is

deemed necessary, it should be formally

requested, or the Council takes this issue on its

own initiative, or the Secretary-General raises

it under Article 99 of the UN Charter within

the agenda. An intervention can only be

decided by a resolution passed under Chapter

VII of the Security Council.xlii

If the Council denies handling the dispute in a

reasonable time, the General Assembly may

take the issue under its consideration or

regional and sub-regional organizations may

C

XIII

seek the required authorization from the

Security Council.xliii

However it is important to

note that if the Security Council fails to take

initiative to solve the problem, the stature and

credibility of the United Nations may suffer

accordingly.xliv

Three pillars of the R2P doctrine are declared

by the Summit Report and further described

under the Report of the International

Commission on Intervention and State

Sovereignty (hereinafter referred to as

ICSS).xlv

Firstly, a state holds an important and

non-assignable responsibility to protect its

population from mass atrocities, specifically

mentioned above as internal war, insurgency,

repression ethnic cleansing, since they are

accepted by conventional and customary

international law as to be prevented and

punished. Secondly, as a response to the states

failure to react and unwillingness to deal with

such atrocities, the international community

has a responsibility to assist the state to fulfill

its primary responsibility; and thirdly, should

this assistance would not be enough to handle

the situation, the international community has

the responsibility to directly intervene with

respect to the principles suggested. Of course,

this intervention should be in accordance with

the UN Charter, on a case-by-case basis, and in

cooperation with appropriate regional

organizations.xlvi

While military intervention is

recommended to be the last resort, economic

sanctions are proposed to be implemented at

first.

According to the doctrinaires, R2P is a norm

which uses different tools existing within the

context of international law, such as provisions

outlined in Chapters VI and VII of the UN

Charter. As can be understood, R2P doctrine

gives the unique role to the Security Council to

carry out the process of preventing the

concerned country from acting against its own

peoples benefit.

The R2P doctrine implies three particular

responsibilities according to the Report

released by the ICISS:

A- The responsibility to prevent: to

address both the root causes and

direct causes of internal conflict and

other man-made crises putting

populations at risk.

B- The responsibility to react: to

respond to situations of compelling

human need with appropriate

measures, which may include coercive

measures like sanctions and

international prosecution, and in

extreme cases military intervention.

C- The responsibility to rebuild: to

provide, particularly after a military

intervention, full assistance with

recovery, reconstruction and

reconciliation, addressing the causes

of the harm the intervention was

designed to halt or avert.xlvii

R2P doctrine has certain priorities while it is

being used in practice. While prevention is

accepted to be the most important part of the

R2P, prevention options should always be

exhausted before intervention is contemplated,

and more commitment and resources must be

devoted to it.xlviii Moreover, the exercise of

the responsibility to both prevent and react

should always involve less intrusive and

coercive measures being considered before

more coercive and intrusive ones are

applied.xlix To this end; military intervention,

as it is of exceptional and extraordinary feature,

should always be the last measure. It can only

be seem legitimate in cases where all non-

military options are exhausted and no solutions

are reached. As to the reasons of the military

intervention, the doctrine suggests several

instances, as of the following kind:

XIV

(1) large scale loss of life, actual or

apprehended, with genocidal intent

or not, which is the product either of

deliberate state action, or state

neglect or inability to act, or a failed

state situation; or (2) large scale

ethnic cleansing, actual or

apprehended, whether carried out by

killing, forced expulsion, acts of

terror or rape.l

It is important to move towards the right

intention which implies that the sole aim of the

intervention should be to halt or avert human

suffering and the organization of the

operation should be the minimum necessary

to secure the defined human protection

objectionli in terms of the scale, duration and

intensity.lii

It is always significant to take

actions in accordance with reasonable

prospects: There must be a reasonable chance

of success in halting or averting the suffering

which has justified the intervention, with the

consequences of action not likely to be worse

than the consequences of inaction.liii

In the

case of an intervention, rules of engagement

which fit the operational concept; are precise;

reflect the principle of proportionality; and

involve total adherence to international

humanitarian law and maximum possible

coordination with humanitarian organizations

should be implemented in their best courses.liv

R2P doctrine stands for the United Nations

accepted values and overlaps with the main

purposes of the United Nations.lv

Hence, it

can provide an overarching rationale for the

work of the organization in specific crisis

situations. lvi Furthermore, R2P provides

responsibilities for individual rights; it is to

protect and safeguard the fundamental human

rights by implementing human rights law and

international humanitarian law.lvii

The doctrine

specifies duties at the national, regional and

international level to act together and

collectively. Accordingly, as previously

mentioned, sovereignty of states does not only

involve rights but also responsibilities.lviii

In a

contemporary consideration, the doctrine

enjoys near-universal acceptance.lix

Although the concept of R2P is generally

accepted in theory, there are some fears and

criticisms over its implementation in actual

instances. Furthermore, it is suggested that

RtoP could be abused by powerful

states as justification for

interventions that serve their political

interests. This suspicion clearly

indicates the need to root RtoP in the

framework of the UN Charter, which

bars unilateral military action except

in self-defense. Proponents of the

RtoP argue that the existence and

implementation of a multilateral

framework for preventing and

responding to mass atrocities

unmasks the procedural illegitimacy

of unilateral humanitarian

interventions. Thereby it may raise

the political costs of unilateral use of

force for alleged protection

purposes.lx

It is also feared that the R2P is and will be

applied selectively in practice. Countries

with veto powers in the Council and with great

international political influence may reject any

intervention should they fail to protect their

own populations.lxi

XV

The Council should play a key role in

implementation of the R2P. As it is the most

important political and one of the most

important legislative organs of the

international community, authorizations of and

decisions for the R2P should be examined

carefully by the member states since it may

cause irrevocable damages.

As it can be observed, R2P differs from

humanitarian intervention as it necessitates

Security Council authorization and permission

for its implementation so as to reach peaceful

settlement of disputes and economic sanctions.

Both doctrines stem from the interpretation of

the UN Charter; and it is important to note that

none of them took the privilege of being a

general principle of international law and of

course become a source of international law. In

other words, these legally controversial

doctrines are not globally accepted in the

context of the practice by the legal persons and

by the International Court of Justice.

5. Rule of Law

ule of law, also known as the

supremacy of law, sets out that all

governmental and individual acts

should be in accordance with the well-

established and clearly written rules,

regulations, and legal principles.lxii

In the

context of international law, the rule of law

addresses legal persons to act in conformity

with the sources of international law.

The United Nations Charter takes this

substance from the binding effect of the

international treaties between the states. Within

this line, the Charter of the United Nationsas a

treaty binds signatory states within the line of

the principle of pacta sund servanda regulated

under the Article 26 of the Vienna Convention

on the Law of Treaties: Every treaty in force

is binding upon the parties to it and must be

performed by them in good faith. Thus, the

Councils actual authority depends on the

Charter and the legitimacy accorded to the

Council by the member-states of the United

Nations.lxiii

The Council, itself, with

considering its decisions in a rather practical

aspect, is a political organ with primary

responsibility for maintaining international

peace and security with the authority to

produce binding decisions on all UN member-

states.lxiv

In this consideration, the Council is

interpreted as the most powerful and important

international organism.lxv

Effectiveness of the Council escalated during

the 1990s, despite its inefficiency lasted for

throughout the Cold War era. In accordance

with this observation, Chesterman

contemplates upon the statics regarding the

frequency of the passage of resolutions by the

UNSC: Between 1946 and 1989 it met 2,903

times and adopted 646 resolutions, averaging

fewer than 15 a year; in the following decade

it met 1,183 times and adopted 638 resolutions,

an average of about 64 per year. lxvi This

effectiveness shows itself not only in a

consideration of frequency, but also in a more

substantial manner

R

- Peacekeeping

Peacekeeping, initiated with the

United Nations role, can be defined as has proven to be one of the most effective tools available to the UN to

assist host countries navigate the

difficult path from conflict to

peace. 1 Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect

differ from peacekeeping operations.

Basically, the Charter gives the UN

Security Council the primary

responsibility and the competency

for the maintenance of international

peace and security under Article 24.

Accordingly, the Charter accepts

that the Council may adopt a range

of measures, including the

establishment of a United Nations

peacekeeping operation in order to

fulfill this responsibility. The legal

basis for such action is found in

Chapters VI, VII and VIII of the

Charter. The most important feature

of the peacekeeping is that it

requires the consent of the parties

(the state in question and the United

Nations).

XVI

In its first 44 years, 24 Security

Council resolutions cited or used the

enforcement powers contained in

Chapter VII of the UN Charter; by

1993 the Council was adopting that

many such resolutions every year.

The Council has also expanded the

range of its activities, including the

establishment of international

criminal tribunals, the maintenance

of complex sanctions regimes, the

protection of civilians, and the

temporary administration of territory.

Following the September 11, 2001,

attacks in the United States, the

Council assumed even greater

importance in combating terrorism

and the proliferation of weapons of

mass destruction.lxvii

Thus, the Security Council turned into a

political forum and serves significant legal

functions including binding rules of general

application, making determinations of law or

fact, and overseeing and supervising the

implementation of its decisions.lxviii

Within this line

these new functions of the Council

as legislator, judge, and executive

have made possible swift and decisive

action in response to perceived

threats to international peace and

security on the basis of international

law. At the same time, however, they

have raised questions about the legal

parameters that determine how the

Councils new functions are

exercised.lxix

It is declared in the 1970 Declaration on

Friendly Relations and the United Nations

World Summit of September 2005 that there is

a need for universal adherence to and

implementation of the rule of law at both the

national and international levels, and an

international order based on the rule of law and

international law should be encouraged.lxx

The Council, as a political and important

legislative organ of the UN platform, is highly

dependent on the provisions and customary

rules of the international law. Therefore, the

Council is primarily responsible to act in

accordance with the rule of law, and

furthermore, encourages this principle.

Therefore, establishment and promotion of the

rule of law can be enhanced with the acts of

the Security Council, by acting firstly in

accordance with rules of current (in force and

effective) international law.

The Council, itself

does not operate free of legal

constraint. In strict legal terms, this

means that the Councils powers are

exercised subject to the Charter and

norms of jus cogens. More

importantly, however, the Councils

authority derives from the rule of law

respect for its decisions depends

on respect for the Charter and

international law more generally. The

most important limitation on the

Councils powers is therefore self-

restraint. In the absence of a

constitutional court to sit in judgment

of how that restraint is exercised,

accountability, such as it is, tends to

be exercised only through the

possibility of extreme reactions:

cutting off funding or disregarding

Council resolutions. Without Member

State support, Council decisions are

mere wishful thinking.lxxi

Legitimacy of the Council and its effectiveness

are highly interrelated to each other. Member

XVII

States look for the responsibility and the

accountability of the Councils decision; this

leads to the challenge of the Council on

providing credibility when it uses its

extraordinary powers. For a rather undoubted

consideration, all actors of the United Nations

system have an interest in enhancing the rule

of law and strengthening a rules-based

international system.

General Overview vis--vis the Middle

East and North Africa

he Arab realm which is dominantly

settled in the Middle East and North

Africa (MENA) region has been

subject to significant attention of the

international community for almost the entire

recent past, due to its energy resources,

geographic positioning, political potential and

intricacy of social structure it connotes. As the

fact indicates, it evidently unveils considerable

importance in analysing political, social and

economic developments in the region taking

the aforementioned into consideration.

A brief review of the recent past over the

subject matter would point out the series of

events which have resulted in the present

situation pertaining to MENA. Dissolution of

the Ottoman Empire, the colonization and the

eventual mandate eras, foundation of the

Israeli State, international interventions,

internal conflicts, military coups, escalation

and recession of the Soviet influence therein,

the post-Cold War turbulence and lastly the

Arab Spring seem to play a set of crucial roles

in designating the features of the mentioned

realm. The ongoing incompatibility between

Israel and its neighbouring Arab countries,

terrorism, aggressive stance of the Islamic

Republic of Iran, and the presence of radical

Islamist movement in the Middle East and

North Africa attracts the attention of the

international community, as the

aforementioned subject matter is considered to

be leading to novel sources of threats against

international peace and stability. In fact, all

these could be regarded as factor escalating the

process leading to tremendous instability

through the Middle East and North Africa

region.

Before the series of incidents, termed generally

as the Arab Spring and also the Arab

Awakening or the Arab Revolution, most of

the Middle Eastern countries had been

governed by protracted structures of leadership,

relatively promoting a nationalist approach vis-

-vis the Arab world, and making the said idea

a more important priority for the fundamentals

within a general perception of politics.

This tendency escalated in a more accurate

temper in countries like Libya, Egypt, Syria

and Iraq, consolidating the pan-Arabist, Arab

nationalist, comparatively secular and anti-

imperialist approaches, and bringing about the

idea of an isolated economy; while countries

like Qatar and Saudi Arabia outwitted the

effects of such a trend by the influence of a

rather Sunni domination over political matters.

Currently, it is an undoubted fact that

dynamics of the Arab world have evolved into

such structure that political Islam started to

become well-favoured in the recent years,

creating a shift in the understanding of the

socio-political set-up. This fact could be

considered as it is relating to a continuum,

which has begun with the collapse of the

Soviet Union in the 1990s. Therefore, the

process has made an evident progress in

accordance with the global political changes

within a specific framework. It is not only

political apparatus, but the general perception

what has been overthrown, and it is not only

the weariness of dictatorships but the

contemporary conjuncture what has been

changing the Arab world.lxxii

T

XVIII

The general political perception does not

appear at the individual level as a standard

posture throughout the Arab world, as the

countries therein perform their distinctive

diplomatic and political roles over issues

pertaining to the said region. In this given

specific framework, for instance, the presence

of Israel is not quite welcomed by almost all

Arab countries together; however, yet there are

also those which come to the forefront refusing

the idea of embracing a passive stance against

the political acts of Israel. Another instance,

apart from the Arab approach as to this matter,

pertains to other significant actors like Turkey

and Iran who have been apparently

consolidating their political stance asserted

towards the given region. Accordingly, the

international community has not thus far

adopted a collective stance as to the entire

spectrum involving Israel, its neighbours and

political disputes among them. In particular,

recently, the attacks of the Israeli Army across

the Gaza Striplxxiii

created a negative reaction

by the international community in a

predominant way as well; reminding the

uncertainty of changing tendencies of the

political actors involved therein. Such a

political manner of uncertainty and lack of

collective action could also be related to the

date, 29th November 2012, when the United

Nations General Assembly granted Palestine

non-member observer State status at the United

Nationslxxiv, as [the] resolution on the status

of Palestine in the UN was adopted by a vote

of 138 in favour to nine against with 41

abstentions by the 193-member Assembly.lxxv

Another issue which should be also analysed

with regards developments in the Middle East

and North Africa is the presence of actors and

elements which raise the tension therein. As a

matter of fact, one of the most problematic

matters concerning this particular issue is the

nuclear programme of Iran, creating

apprehension in the international

community.lxxvi

Further to this, in the recent

contemporary framework, as the general

perception of the United Nations on

international security per se and regional

disputes has been within dynamically changing

pattern, the presence of threats posed by

international terrorism and its ideological

bearings have started to appear in a much more

pressing way. One particular consideration in

this given situation mostly pertains to the

terrorist organisation al-Qaeda. Accordingly,

the ideological roots of the organization

emerged out of an understanding of radical

Islam, which has come to be a political

tendency favoured by wide scale public

support in the mentioned region. After being

suppressed to a certain extent in Afghanistan in

2000s, the organization started to become

further active in North and Central Africa, in

its attempts to render the new location a safe

haven.

Related to instability throughout North Africa,

another issue has manifested itself with the

involvement of the organization in the recent

crisis in Mali,lxxvii

being subject to an eventual

French-led military operation.lxxviii

Current situation in the Middle East and North

Africa proves uneasy to be resolved with short-

term contemplations. Evidently, the Arab

Spring seems to have created a misperception

throughout the world that the revolution would

result in drastic changes in the Arab realm.

However, political changes and developments

in the affected countries and the ideological

positioning of the rebellion indicate that the

current progress in the mentioned region have

not been in complete accordance expectations

of the international community, and the

revolution does not seem to have come to an

end with a clear aftermath:

XIX

The events of the last few years

created possibilities in the Arab world,

but they will take at least a decade to

develop. The Arab Spring was

always too optimistic. The Arab

Decade remains a possibility.

Whether it proves to be a decade of

promise or one of missed

opportunities remains to be seen.lxxix

A. Syrian Civil War

1. A General Perspective on Arab Spring

and Introduction to the Syrian Civil War

he most significant series of events

which have drawn utmost global

attention since the collapse of the

Soviet Union have been termed Arab Spring.

It is not quite certain whether it comes as

lenient as the name suggests or is more like a

dark winter; but it is beyond any doubt that the

Arab Spring has manifested itself as a decisive

political event for the future of the Middle East.

The movement reportedly started when a

grocery vendor, Mohammed Bouazizi, who

was arrested on 16 December 2010 and had his

cart seized, set himself on fire in Tunisia the

next daylxxx

and spread over North Africa and

Middle East as an infection. It led to a series

of protests and demonstrations on mainly

political and socio-economic concerns

throughout the region, resulting in bloody

conflicts, the overthrow of governments, and

civil wars in some countries such as Libya and

Syria.

The uprising in Tunisia ended up with the

toppling-down of the former head of state,

Zina al Abidin Bin Ali on 14 June 2011 with a

death toll of 338. Bin Ali fled to Saudi Arabia

and sentenced to death in Tunisia.lxxxi

In Algeria, following the protests, the state of

emergency which had lasted for 19 years has

been repealed by the government.lxxxii

Protests in Jordan led to several governmental

changes with the promises of reforms. Yet, due

to the slow progress in advancement with the

reform plans, the public reaction continued at

an increasing level. King Abdullah II

dismissed the cabinet for two times and the

succeeding government resigned due to the

public pressure. At last, in October 2012, the

king dissolved the parliament for early

elections.lxxxiii

The appeasement of Abdullah

failed to find an adequate response among the

Islamist tendency as the Muslim Brotherhood

boycotted the early elections which were slated

23 January 2013.lxxxiv

After the protests, the king of Oman, Sultan

Qaboos Bin Sa'id dismissed the cabinet for

once and granted the legislative authority to

the councils of the country in March 2011,

surviving the unfavorable outcomes of a

probability of insurgency to a large extent in

May 2011.lxxxv

One of the most decisive repercussions of the

uprising emerged in Egypt. The place where

the protesters gather, Tahrir Square, has

become one of the symbols of the Arab

Awakening. Following the collective

movement, the former leader of Egypt, Hosni

Mobarak was overthrown, being imprisoned

for lifetime, after he has fled from the country.

The constitution was suspended and the

parliament was dismissed for a period of

time.lxxxvi

Democratic elections were held for

the first time, and, eventually, the Muslim

Brotherhood-supported Mohamad Morsi sworn

in as the president of Egypt on 30 June

2012.lxxxvii

Yet, the slow progress in freedom of

expression and reforms led to the continuation

of the protests in the country. Since the end of

2012 protests led by leftists, Christians,

T

XX

secularists and other constituents of the first

revolution started to take place against the

freshly authorized government of Islamist

Muslim Brotherhood and Hosni Mubarak,

being retaliated by the repression of the police

force.lxxxviii

The clashes between the protesters

and the state continuing with killings during

the demonstrations have even been criticized

by the comments from Navi Pillay, the UN

High Commissioner for Human Rights who

has led international condemnation of the

regime of President Bashar al-Assad of

Syria.lxxxix

In Yemen, by the growing reaction of the

people against the 33-year-presidency, the

tenure of Ali Abdullah Saleh ended, granting

him immunity of prosecution on 21 January

2012xc

after getting severely injured on 23 June

2011, when a bomb was planted inside his

palace.xci

Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Morocco, Kuwait,

Mauritania, Bahrain and Sudan outwitted the

harsh consequences of the uprising with the

promises of reforms in political, social and

economic spheres, as the governments and the

opposition acted in a comparatively laxer

manner. Yet, the protests of the opposition still

progress in some of these countries, aiming to

obtain more extended rightsxcii

as the

movement led to resignation of provincial

governors and local authorities in Iraqxciii

,

resignation of the prime ministerxciv

and

dissolution of the parliament along with the

elections in Kuwait on 1 December 2012xcv

and release of the political prisoners in

Bahrain.xcvi

Libya was the most sharp-edged case as the

way international actors and interests of other

nations partook therein became further clear.

The developments in Libya which had turned

into a stalemate within its internal dynamics

occurred as the bloody feature of a perceived

resolution. The insurgency in Libya was quite

severe that Muammar Gaddafi had become

quite determined to quell the rebellion any way

he could.xcvii

The conflict evolved into a civil

war and raised the tension at a rather global

level. By Resolution 1971 (2011) of the UN

Security Council, NATO involvement in the

situation has come into question.xcviii

By virtue

of NATO intervention therein, favoring the

opposition, Gaddafi was overthrown, lynched

by his citizens to death.xcix

The casualties of

the Libyan case have been quite momentous as

the forfeit of the revolution was 30.000 lives

approximately.c

ci After the civil war, it has

been the stability of the country what became

the priority of the National Transitional

Council, considering the facts like the armed

tribes and al-Qaeda presence in North Africa

which recently started to show up with actions

like the Benghazi attacks on 11 September

2012. On September 26, US Secretary of

State Hillary Rodham Clinton indicated for the

first time that there was an explicit link

between the Qaeda franchise in North Africa

and the attack at the American diplomatic

mission in Benghazi.cii

Spring has long been considered as the season

of renewal and birth. As is well seen, Arab

Spring could not manage to bring peace,

renewal and rebirth to every country it stopped

by. As the process is analyzed with every

aspect of the countries affected of the uprising,

it is not quite easy to tell that it results in

certain positive outcomes. The Libyan case,

current situation in Egypt and other reflections

in other countries throughout Middle East and

North Africa are full of elements proving the

fact. Yet, these are not the only proof of the

bloody aspect of this recent phenomenon.

The last and apparently the deadliest stop of

the Arab Spring wave was the Syrian Arab

Republic. The reflection of the rebellious

waves in Syria has started with unarmed

XXI

protests which were tried to be quelled by the

police forces. The protests were opposing the

so called tyrannical dictatorship of the Baath

regime and its current leader, Bashar al Assad

himself. The stronger the opposition acted, the

more solid the government retaliated. After a

time, even the promises of reforms proved to

be useless and insufficient enough to prevent

people from starting a rebellion with arms. The

armed insurgency is considered to have started

on 15 March 2011, and spread throughout the

country, creating several frontlines. The

conflict was so severe that it has topped in the

global political agenda of the international

community. Many other actors apart from the

Syrian people and internal dynamics therein

started to take part in this crisis, making it a lot

more difficult to be solved as an international

problem. The fight has been continuing

fiercely as the international community is still

seeking for a solution to save as many lives as

they could.

2. Historical Background

fter the collapse and dissolution of

the Ottoman Empire, in 1920,

Kingdom of Syria was established

bringing Emir Faisal of the Hashemite House

into power. Few months later, Syrian forces

fought against the French troops in the Battle

of Maysalun on 23 July 1920. The defeat

forced the King to flee and left Syria under

French occupation, forming up the mandate to

last for years, until 1946. The domain which

Faisal claimed before was divided into pieces

by the San Remo Conference which lasted

from 19 to 26 April 1920, leaving Palestine

under English mandate and Lebanese-Syrian

territory under French control.

The French domination lasted until 1946,

becoming laxer every year. During the

mandate, Syrian nationalists started a rebellion

under the leadership of Sultan al Atrash who

was sentenced to death by the French

governance later in 1927, being defeated after

a number of victories of the rebel troops. After

his escape to Transjordan, he was condoned by

the mandate government, becoming a public

hero. By the refusal of the French parliament,

the constitutional progress of the mandate

governance was hindered for a time. Following

the World War II, on 15 April 1946, Syria has

been recognized as an independent state.ciii

In 1948, the first Arab-Israeli war broke out,

including Syria. After the fierce fight of the

Arab and Israeli forces, Syria managed to

advance towards Northern Palestine on 15 May

1948. Yet, Syrian troops were repelled back to

Golan Heights in the end on 21 May.

Aftermath the ceasefire, a "supposed"

demilitarized zone under UN supervision was

established in the region with the armistice

signed by Israel and Syria on 20 July 1949.civ

Becoming an independent state, during the

preliminary years in politics of Syria, the

governing potential of the internal dynamics

manifested impotency with twenty different

cabinets elected, military coups and four draft

constitutions in only ten years until 1956.cv

On

29 March 1949 the first military coup against

the government detained the Syrian president

Shukri al Kuwatli, sending him to exile to

Egypt just after the coup. The second coup was

in 1951, bringing Colonel Adib Shishakli into

power and building up a military autocracy. In

1954, with another coup involving the

representatives of the left wing parties in the

country, such as the Syrian Communists and

the Baath Party, overthrew Shishakli who had

also been opposed by al Atrash.

It was again a military coup in 1963, what

brought the Baath Party into power in Syria.cvi

The Baath Party had been the representative of

Arab Socialism in Syrian politics. Differing

from the general understanding of socialism,

A

XXII

its main arguments were focused on pan-

Arabism, Arab nationalism along with anti-

imperialism and equalitarianism summarized

in the party slogan: Unity, Liberty,

Socialism.cvii

After an intra-party overthrow in 1966, it was

Hafez al Assad, the former defense Minister of

the Government, who declared his presidency

over Syria.cviii

Without multi-party elections,

Syrian Arab Republic was governed by this

very head of the state for almost 30 long years,

until 2000 when Hafez al Assad died.

During the governance of Hafez al Assad,

Syria fought against Israel for several times

with the support of the neighboring Arab states

in the region. After a series of reverses, Syria

lost control of the Golan Heights by the

invasion of Israeli Army during the Six-Day

War in 1967. In 1976, Muslim Brothers started

an armed rebellion centering on Hama, whose

arguments were highly concentrated in the

Alawite identity of the Baath regime. The

insurgency was countered with harsh measures,

involving the bombing of the city with artillery

fire, which led to the death of 10.000 25.000

people, and suppressing the rebellion for a

time.cix

After the death of father Assad, his son, Bashar

al Assad was elected for presidency without

any opposing rivals. His governance started

with a series of reforms, yet proved unable to

satisfy the will of the opposition which could

not express itself in a legitimate way of politics.

The harsh methods of the Baath regime against

the opposition had been criticized by the

international actors and non-governmental

organizations for many years. Other political

parties in Syria were banned from having a

free environment to exercise their own political

activities without interference. The rule of the

Baath regime created its own legitimacy,

concretizing its supremacy over different

political ideas.cx

Another fact about the Syrian Arab Republic is

the diversity the country maintains in its

demographic structure. Considering that the

religious sects are one of the most significant

elements for the political choices of the people

in the Middle Eastcxi

, this fact manifests to be

one of the key tips to analyze the situation in

Syria more accurately. Apart from the Sunni

domination, the population consists of

religious minorities with %10 of Christian

and %16 of Shia population, which is the very

sect the Baath regime bears. Besides, %9 of the

population is composed by Kurds therein.

Considering all of the facts which have

expressed an artificial equilibrium in the

country, it is clear that the reflection of the

Arab Spring in Syria was proved to be of a

repercussion out of the years long lack of a

democratic understanding in the political

structure which fed itself with unbalanced

reactions of the parties to the situation and

involvement of other actors like neighboring

countries and radical groups in the dispute.

3. Timeline of the Insurgency

he Arab Spring started in Tunisia by

the ignition of Mohamad Bouzizi who

had self-immolation in 2010cxii

,

leading off a vast movement, overthrowing

four governments, causing protests in the

entire Arab world and carrying the wind of

revolution to Syria, leading it into a civil war.

The very first reactions of the Arab Spring in

Syria showed up in late January 2011, with

minor protests continuing until March.cxiii

In

the first half of the month, some politicians and

went on a series of hunger strikes. March 15,

which is considered to be the beginning of the

insurgency, was the first time of collective

reaction against the regime and for this reason,

T

XXIII

it was called the Day of Ragecxiv. The vast

scale of protests blew out in several cities and

muhafazahs of the country. The state forces

took precautions to suppress the protests

expanding day by day by intervening with

police corps and detaining the protesters of the

opposition.

The harsher the repression became, the faster

the protests escalated, as th resistance spread

quickly throughout Syria. The government

started to intervene in the cities of the

protesters with tanks, snipers and helicopters,

while arresting the opposing people it

detects.cxv

Daraa and Douma were sieged by

the army in April.cxvi

Despite the crackdown,

the protests kept on. Syrian military was

accused of killing 62 protesters in Daraa

during the protest on 29 April and cutting off

the water and electricity in the town for several

dayscxvii

. On 5 May, Homs was also sieged

creating a reaction against the army and

resulted in killing of eleven soldiers by an

armed attack followed by the sieges of Baniyas

and Tafas.cxviii

The military operations

expanded to be executed in many towns and

districts in the following days.cxix

During the summer of 2011, clashes between

Assads regime and the opposition continued.

On 19 June, opposition activists declared the

foundation of a National Council.cxx

Particularly, Assads army blocked the

northern borders of Syria in order to prevent

the refugees from fleeing to Turkey.cxxi

On July

29, a colonel who defected from the regime

army declared that the Free Syrian Army was

formed up of the hundreds of other military

defectors.cxxii

Following the declaration, on

August 23, the Syrian National Council was

officially founded in Istanbul, Turkey and

started actively working.cxxiii

Despite the

crackdown, thousands of protesters

demonstrated that the regime has lost its

credibility, while the rest seem to defend the

presence of Assad as the leader of Syrian

Republic and demonstrate the contrary.

The situation worsened during the autumn of

2011cxxiv

as the opposition became more

organized, executing operations against the

army. In September, the SNC met in Istanbul

again so as to further its purposes. On October

4, UNSC could not to adopt a resolution for

imposing sanctions on the regime due to the

vetoes from Russian Federation and China,

reasoning that the conflict was a domestic

issue of Syrian government and should not be

interfered with.cxxv

In November, Syrias

membership in the Arab League was

suspended, causing the protests of hundreds of

thousands of Syrian regime supporters. In late

2011, Assad accepted the proposal made by the

Arab League on having monitors from the

organization observing the country.cxxvi

Until

the end of 2011, killings and military clashes

vigorously continued.cxxvii

2012 marked the bloodiest year of the Arab

Spring, with suicide bombings, air s