The Use of Force in International Law

This paper examines the rationale for the attacks by evaluating both the justifications and criticisms of the attack based on international law. The U.S. carried out air and missile attacks on Syria, with the support of UK and France, in retaliation of the country’s suspected chemical weapons attack. The military bombardment of key installations in Syria is considered in some quarters a violation of the sovereignty of the country. The paper evaluates the legality of the attack based on international law.

Surname 1
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
The Use of Force in International Law
The action by the U.S. to carry out air and missile attacks on Syria, with the support of UK and
France has been met with mixed reaction in the international circles. Although the attacks were
in retaliation of the country’s suspected chemical weapons attack, the military bombardment of
key installations in Syria is considered in some quarters a violation of the sovereignity of the
country. In the attack that took place on April, 14, 2018, a research facility at Damascus and
other points of storage were attacked without authorization of the UN Security Council as
required in international law1. This paper examines the rationale for the attacks by evaluating
both the justifications and criticisms of the attack based on international law.
The use of force has been prohibited by UN member countries of which the U.S.is a key
member. The provisions against force are enshrined in the United Nations Charter that proposes
in article 2(4) that members shall refrain from the use of force when dealing with independent
countries2
The exception to the requirement of countries to execute force against another country is in self
defense. In this regard, countries are expected to take the action deemed fit until the Security
1 Weil, Prosper. "Towards relative normativity in international law?." Sources of International Law. Routledge, 2017. 123-152.
2 Anon, (1945). Charter of the United Nations. [online] Available at: http://United Nations, Charter of the United Nations, 1945, 1
UNTS XVI (Retrieved October 1, 2018)

Surname 2
Council intervenes. Nonetheless, a formal report must be submitted to the Security Council when
such an action is anticipated. The law allowing the forceful engagement is contained in the
international customary law but its interpretation gives room for different perspectives3. The
International Criminal Justice system is, for instance, silent about the use of force as a preventive
measure4. The case of the U.S. attack on Syria could be based on the ambiguity of interpretation
of this law. In this regard, the country could raise genuine concerns that Syria was anticipating
launching a chemical attack on its territory and as a result, the attack was a counteractive
measure in self defense. This action can be justified on the basis that the international law is
against the use of chemical weapons.
Several International treaties have outlawed the use of chemical weapons including the Geneva
Gas protocol and the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) among others. In addition,
the use of chemical weapons violates the International Humanitarian Law as contained in the
Geneva Conventions5. Furthermore, the UK has specific guidelines regarding engagement with
independent regimes6. In this regard, Syria has continuously declined to comply with this
international convention several years prior to the U.S. attack in April 20187.
There has been no doubt that Syria has been involved in the manufacture and use of chemical
weapons and the failure of the UN to sanction military action against the country was threatening
3 Matheson, Michael J. "The United States position on the relation of customary international law to the 1977
protocols additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions." The Development and Principles of International
Humanitarian Law. Routledge, 2017. 233-245..
4 Morgenthau, Hans J. "Positivism, functionalism, and international law." The Nature of International Law.
Routledge, 2017. 159-184.
5 Clapham, Andrew, et al., eds. The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary. Oxford University Press, USA,
2015.
6 UK government Guidance, Chemical weapon use by Syrian regime: UK government legal position, 29 August
2013, paragraph 4. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chemicalweapon-use-by-syrian-regime-uk-
government-legal-position/
7 Ford, Robert. "What is Trump’s Real Policy in Syria?." (2018).

Surname 3
the vulnerability of both the Syrians and other countries. The International Criminal Court
categorizes the development of chemical weapons as a cross border crime8. Under this provision,
the use of the weapons against citizens is prohibited. It is obvious that Syria has flagrantly
violated this law9. However, the ICC cannot initiate prosecutions against the perpetrators of
chemical weapons attacks in Syria because the country is not a signatory to the ICC10. However,
since Syria is a member of the United Nations, the international body can give authorization to
the ICC to investigate and consequently prosecute individual that bear the responsibility of using
chemical weapons11. Despite several appeals to the UN to intervene and stop Syria in its
chemical weapons expedition, there has been insignificant response12. The Unites States is a
critical member of the UN Security Council and its action against Syria must have been informed
by the failure by the UN to act speedily.
The U.S. is a global superpower with the military wherewithal to promote democracy and the use
of amicable means to solve international conflicts. However, the continual failure of Syria to
comply with international conventions and its persistent pursuit to manufacture these dangerous
weapons was a sign that the country could extend its attacks on countries it deemed unfriendly.
The relationship between the U.S and Syria began to deteriorate following the international
efforts to combat terror13. The suspected terror attack of the U.S. Embassy in Damascus in 2006
further worsened diplomatic relations where the Syrian government blamed the U.S foreign
policy for the attack. Although the Syrian authorities succeeded in confronting the attackers and
8 Tan, Teck Boon. "A World Free of Chemical Weapons: Why It Is So Difficult." (2018).
9 Horner, Daniel. "Probe of Chemical Arms Use in Syria Set." Arms Control Today 45.8 (2015): 5.
10 Adams, Simon. "Failure to Protect: Syria and the UN Security Council." Global Centre for the Responsibility to
protect 13 (2015).
11 http://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/
12 Brooks, Julia, et al. "Responding to chemical weapons violations in Syria: legal, health, and humanitarian
recommendations." Conflict and health 12.1 (2018): 12.
13 Atran, Scott, et al. "Challenges in researching terrorism from the field." Science 355.6323 (2017): 352-354.

Surname 4
managed to kill four of them, no official report about the intentions of the attack has been
submitted to the U.S Government. In the years following the attack, the U.S. government
imposed a series of sanctions against the Syrian government further plunging the diplomatic
relations between the two countries into disarray14. Consequently, there have been suspicions
about the intentions of Syria by the Unites States which has suspected that the country is
involved in the sponsorship of terrorism15.
The politics of the UN Security Council have hindered the military intervention in Syria. In
2011, president Barrack Obama appealed to the United Nations to adopt a raft of sanctions
against the Middle East country but this action was stopped by China and Russia who wielded
their veto power against the proposal16. The U.S was outraged by the result of the process that
was witnessed by Ambassador Susan Rice. The wider crisis in the Middle East contributed to the
United States decision to attack suspected chemical weapons’ bases in Syria17. The U.S. openly
supports the legitimacy of Israel as a nation and has failed to recognize the existence of
Palestine. Syria, on the other hand is a close ally of Palestine and its conflict with the U.S. has
stemmed from its claim to the Golan Heights18. Both Israel and Syria lay claim to the Golan
14 Humud, Carla E., Christopher M. Blanchard, and Mary Beth D. Nikitin. Armed conflict in Syria: Overview and
US response. Congressional Research Service Washington United States, 2017.
15 Clarke, Richard A., and Emilian Papadopoulos. "Terrorism in Perspective: A Review for the Next American
President." The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 668.1 (2016): 8-18.
16 Hogan, Nathan. "Five Sides of Justice: The Dangerous and Disproportionate Influence of the Permanent Five
Members of the UN Security Council on the International Criminal Court." Brigham Young University Prelaw
Review 32.1 (2018): 18.
17 Griffin, Abigail E. Cooperation between Adversaries: The US and Russia’s Joint Effort against the Islamic State
in Syria. Diss. 2018.
18 Mason, Michael, and Muna Dajani. "A political ontology of land: rooting Syrian identity in the occupied Golan
Heights." Antipode (2018).

Surname 5
heights and this portion of land has resulted in numerous conflict including the six-day war that
broke out in 1967 leading to the death of 115 Israelis and 2500 Syrians19. The U.S. is cognizant
of the threat posed by the regional conflict including military attacks on its allies20. In this regard,
the country was justified in initiating military attack against China.
In the wake of the conflict, China and Russian have joined their support for Palestine and
consequently, a friend to Syria21. In this regard, the two countries, which hold the power in the
United Nations Organization, are a hindrance to the council’s power to initiate military
interventions against the Arab country22. The U.S. has severally accused Syria of funding
terrorist activities targeted against its allies in the region. The thriving of the chemical weapon
enterprise in the country under the helpless help of the UN Security Council was a disadvantage
to the U.S. and her friends in the region and across the world23. In this regard, the country was
justified in initiating military actions against Syria in self defense.
The morality aspect of the attack also justifies the military action by the U.S. Against Syria that
recorded no casualties. The continuous atrocities of governments against hapless citizens cannot
be condoned in modern times. The U.S. is a symbol of freedom and liberty and is therefore
obligated to protect humanity from the senseless acts of authoritarian regimes24. Political factors
stood in the way of legal means to handle the crisis. However, Syria had continuously violated
provisions and the U.S. was justified to use minimal force to stop the country from further
19 Laron, Guy. The Six-day War: The Breaking of the Middle East. Yale University Press, 2017.
20 Manukyan, Avag. The threat of international terrorism and the new trends in the USA foreign policy. Diss. 2014.
21 Averre, Derek, and Lance Davies. "Russia, humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: the case of
Syria." International Affairs 91.4 (2015): 813-834.
22 Evron, Yoram. "China’s diplomatic initiatives in the Middle East: the quest for a great-power role in the
region." International Relations 31.2 (2017): 125-144.
23 Chomsky, Noam, Gilbert Achcar, and Stephan R. Shalom. Perilous Power: The Middle East and US Foreign
Policy Dialogues on Terror, Democracy, War, and Justice. Routledge, 2015.
24 Jeong, Ho-Won. Peace and conflict studies: An introduction. Routledge, 2017.

Surname 6
aggression25. The retaliatory attacks resulted in only the destruction to the facilities for
manufacture and storage of chemical weapons while ensuring that no life was lost in the attack.
Bureaucratic processes should never stand in the way of the defense of human rights and the U.S.
action demonstrated that the protection of human lives must stand supreme in human relations.
Criticism
Regardless of the justification of the U.S. attack on Syria, it is clear that the U.S. defied
international laws regarding forceful engagement in a sovereign country. Article 2(4) contained
in the charter for the United Nations clearly outlines the circumstances under which a country
can use force against another one26. The application of force must be sanctioned by the United
Nations unless a country is acting in self defense27. The provisions for self defense are also
clearly outlined and this should be a reaction an actual attack28. However, some scholars interpret
the clause to mean that a retaliatory attack can be justified by an eminent attack. The U.S. sought
opportunity to launch an attack on Syria due to historical differences29. Nonetheless, there was no
evidence that an attack on the U.S. by Syria was evident30. The U.S. had sought the invasion of
Syria by the UN previously but failed because of the opposition by China and Russia who have
25 Footer, Katherine HA, et al. "Qualitative accounts from Syrian health professionals regarding violations of the
right to health, including the use of chemical weapons, in opposition-held Syria." BMJ open 8.8 (2018): e021096.
26 Webb, Philippa. "Deadlock or Restraint? The Security Council Veto and the Use of Force in Syria." Journal of
Conflict and Security Law 19.3 (2014): 471-488.
27 Schmitt, Michael N., and Christopher M. Ford. "Assessing US Justifications for Using Force in Response to
Syria's Chemical Attacks: An International Law Perspective." J. Nat'l Sec. L. & Pol'y 9 (2017): 283.
28 Henriksen, Anders. "Trump’s Missile Strike on Syria and the Legality of Using Force to Deter Chemical
Warfare." Journal of Conflict and Security Law 23.1 (2018): 33-48.
29 Turner, John. "Strategic differences: Al Qaeda's Split with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham." Small Wars &
Insurgencies26.2 (2015): 208-225.
30 Harvey, Frank P., and John Mitton. "Fighting for Credibility: US Reputation Building in Asymmetric Conflicts
from the Gulf War to Syria (1991–2013)." Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science
politique 48.3 (2015): 503-530.

Surname 7
veto powers31. In this regard, the U.S. should have continued to influence the members of the
Security Council to initiate an attack on Syria. However, the decline of the UN to initiate a
military force on Syria is an indication that such a move was not needed. Consequently, some
critics opine that political factors that stem from the long-term relationship between the U.S. and
Syria led to the attack32.
The conventions guiding humanitarian engagement are contained in the customary cross border
law which is yet to be ratified33. In this regard, those who refer to this provision have no solid
legal point of reference. The provision was based on the Right to Protect doctrine that proposes
that a country cedes some of its sovereignty when it fails to protect its people34. Consequently,
the international community takes the responsibility of shielding the people from the excesses of
its own government. Legal professionals have mixed opinions regarding the framework under
which the humanitarian intervention will operate once established in law35. Some scholars have
opined that there will be no reason for the law on humanitarian intervention to be anchored under
the UN and propose that the provision could just be a justification for the UN intervention36.
31 Stark, Catherine. The legality of the use of force against terrorists: an examination of the United air strikes
against the Islamic State in Syria. Diss. University of Cape Town, 2017.
32 Wiseman, Geoffrey, ed. Isolate or engage: Adversarial states, US foreign policy, and public diplomacy. Stanford
University Press, 2015.
33 UNGA ‘Report of the Special Committee on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and
Cooperation Among States’ UN GAOR 25th Session Supp No 18 UN Doc A/8018 (1970)
34 Evans, Gareth. "The responsibility to protect." The APPSMO Advantage: Strategic Opportunities: Evolving
Defence Diplomacy with the Asia Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers. 2016. 89-99.
35 Wagner, Markus. "The dehumanization of international humanitarian law: legal, ethical, and political implications
of autonomous weapon systems." Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 47 (2014): 1371.
36 Heraclides, Alexis, and Ada Dialla. "International law and humanitarian intervention." Humanitarian intervention
in the long nineteenth century. Manchester University Press, 2017.

Surname 8
Nevertheless, the ongoing interventions do not form the basis for the U.S. Syria attack because it
is based on conflicting motives37.
The U.S. has failed to learn lessons from its previous military attacks on sovereign countries38.
There is need to adopt peaceful means to conflict resolution in the world today. The world is
composed of people with different political and religious persuasions and the U.S. should lead in
spreading tolerance39. The U.S. government failed to live to its ethos that defines its existence.
The arguments that the U.S. used the provision of self defense as a basis for the attack do not
have a legal basis. The attack that prompted a military expedition in Syria was executed within
its borders and there was no observable threat to the U.S. or its allies40. The proposition that the
U.S was under an imminent attack from Syria is therefore based on conjecture41. The U.S. should
have communicated to the UN Security Council incase such there was such a fear before
proceeding on with the attack42. However, there was no evidence of such communication. In
addition, the premise that the U.S. was carrying out the attack on humanitarian grounds lacks
evidence because there was no attempt to protect the citizens after the attack43. Consequently, it
is vivid that the United States was determined to attack Syria regardless of whether the action
37? Howard, Lise Morjé, and Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal. "The Use of Force in UN Peacekeeping." International
Organization 72.1 (2018): 71-103.
38 Meernik, James David. The political use of military force in US foreign policy. Routledge, 2018.
39 Helms, Wesley S., and Christine Oliver. "Radical settlements to conflict: Conflict management and its
implications for institutional change." Journal of Management & Organization21.4 (2015): 471-494.
40 Cordesman, Anthony H. Perilous Prospects: The Peace Process and the Arab-Israeli Military Balance.
Routledge, 2018.
41 Reading Humanitarian Intervention : Human Rights and the Use of Force in International Law, Orford, Anne (E-
book 2003)
42 Kelsen, Hans. "Collective security and collective self-defense under the Charter of the United Nations." The Use
of Force in International Law. Routledge, 2017. 97-110.
43 Butler, Declan. "Attacks in UK and Syria highlight growing need for chemical-forensics
expertise." Nature 556.7701 (2018): 285.

Surname 9
was backed by law or not44. The legality of the attack is therefore not in doubt based on
international law.
Other Avenues of Intervention
The formation of the UN in 1945 signified an end to military actions by world governments.
Countries are expected to find alternative means to conflict resolution other than the use of
force45. The U.S. was a major player in the formation of the United Nations Organization and it
is incumbent upon the country to abide by its provisions in the spirit of international cooperation.
Nevertheless, the law acknowledges the need for force as a last resort46. In the Syria case, it is
obvious that not all options were explored before the U.S. took the military action against Syria.
The U.S. has a chance to initiate conflict resolution through non-military means47. As such the
country can seek global support for the execution of economic sanctions against a county48. Such
actions will bring suffering to a country and provoke nations to reconsider their military actions
against their own countries49. However, these actions must lead to the welfare of countries and
not as a means to subject citizens to extreme suffering because of the excesses of their leaders.
Conclusion
44 The handbook of the international law of military operations / edited by Terry D. Gill and Dieter Fleck ; in
collaboration with Hans F. R. Boddens Hosang [and others] (E-Book, OUP 2015)
45 Bourantonis, Dimitris, and Jarrod Wiener, eds. The United Nations in the new world order: the world organization
at fifty. Springer, 2016.
46 Shaw, Timothy M. Twisting arms and flexing muscles: humanitarian intervention and peacebuilding in
perspective. Routledge, 2018.
47 Autesserre, Séverine. Peaceland: Conflict resolution and the everyday politics of international intervention.
Cambridge University Press, 2014.
48 Joyner, Christopher C. "Sanctions and International Law." Economic Sanctions. Routledge, 2018. 73-87.
49 Eland, Ivan. "Economic sanctions as tools of foreign policy." Economic Sanctions. Routledge, 2018. 29-42.

Surname 10
The U.S breached international protocols in its attack on Syria on April 14th 2018. The provisions
for the use of force are clearly outlined and several international conventions only allow the use
of force when all other mechanisms have been explored. However, the threat that Syria poses to
the international community because of its chemical weapons program cannot be ignored.
Although the U.S. was expected to seek permission from the UN Security Council before the
attack, the failure of this body to intervene in previous cases like Rwanda can justify the
unilateral action by the U.S50. It is clear that Syria has violated international conventions that
proscribe the use of chemical weapons51. In this regard, although the U.S. breached international
provisions on the use of force, the action was justified because of the potential threat that Syria’s
chemical program poses to the world.
50 Warren, Amy, et al. "4 Genocide in Rwanda: leadership, ethics and organizational'failure'in a post-colonial
context." The Dark Side. Routledge, 2017. 274-295.
51 Brooks, Julia, et al. "Responding to chemical weapons violations in Syria: legal, health, and humanitarian
recommendations." Conflict and health 12.1 (2018): 12.

Surname 11
Bibliography
Adams, Simon. "Failure to Protect: Syria and the UN Security Council." Global Centre for the
Responsibility to protect 13 (2015).
Anon, (1945). Charter of the United Nations. [online] Available at: http://United Nations,
Charter of the United Nations, 1945, 1 UNTS XVI (Retrieved October 1, 2018)

Surname 12
Arend, Anthony Clark, and Robert J. Beck. International law and the use of force: beyond the UN
Charter paradigm. Routledge, 2014.
Atran, Scott, et al. "Challenges in researching terrorism from the field." Science 355.6323 (2017):
352-354.
Autesserre, Séverine. Peaceland: Conflict resolution and the everyday politics of international
intervention. Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Averre, Derek, and Lance Davies. "Russia, humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to
Protect: the case of Syria." International Affairs 91.4 (2015): 813-834.
Bourantonis, Dimitris, and Jarrod Wiener, eds. The United Nations in the new world order: the
world organization at fifty. Springer, 2016.
Brooks, Julia, et al. "Responding to chemical weapons violations in Syria: legal, health, and
humanitarian recommendations." Conflict and health 12.1 (2018): 12.
Butler, Declan. "Attacks in UK and Syria highlight growing need for chemical-forensics
expertise." Nature 556.7701 (2018): 285.
Cha, Victor D., and David C. Kang. Nuclear North Korea: A debate on engagement strategies.
Columbia University Press, 2018.
Chomsky, Noam, Gilbert Achcar, and Stephan R. Shalom. Perilous Power: The Middle East and US
Foreign Policy Dialogues on Terror, Democracy, War, and Justice. Routledge, 2015.
Clapham, Andrew, et al., eds. The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary. Oxford University
Press, USA, 2015.
Clarke, Richard A., and Emilian Papadopoulos. "Terrorism in Perspective: A Review for the
Next American President." The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science 668.1 (2016): 8-18.

Surname 13
Cordesman, Anthony H. Perilous Prospects: The Peace Process and the Arab-Israeli Military
Balance. Routledge, 2018.
Eland, Ivan. "Economic sanctions as tools of foreign policy." Economic Sanctions. Routledge, 2018.
29-42.
Evans, Gareth. "The responsibility to protect." The APPSMO Advantage: Strategic Opportunities:
Evolving Defence Diplomacy with the Asia Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers.
2016. 89-99.
Evron, Yoram. "China’s diplomatic initiatives in the Middle East: the quest for a great-power role in
the region." International Relations 31.2 (2017): 125-144.
Feinstein, Andrew. "Through the Barrel of a Gun: Can Information from the Global Arms Trade
Contribute to Genocide Prevention?." Reconstructing Atrocity Prevention(2016): 196-206.
Footer, Katherine HA, et al. "Qualitative accounts from Syrian health professionals regarding
violations of the right to health, including the use of chemical weapons, in opposition-
held Syria." BMJ open 8.8 (2018): e021096.
Ford, Robert. "What is Trump’s Real Policy in Syria?." (2018).
Gregory, Robert H. Clean bombs and dirty wars: air power in Kosovo and Libya. U of Nebraska
Press, 2015.
Griffin, Abigail E. Cooperation between Adversaries: The US and Russia’s Joint Effort against
the Islamic State in Syria. Diss. 2018.
Harvey, Frank P., and John Mitton. "Fighting for Credibility: US Reputation Building in
Asymmetric Conflicts from the Gulf War to Syria (1991–2013)." Canadian Journal of
Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 48.3 (2015): 503-530.

Surname 14
Helms, Wesley S., and Christine Oliver. "Radical settlements to conflict: Conflict management and
its implications for institutional change." Journal of Management & Organization21.4
(2015): 471-494.
Henriksen, Anders. "Trump’s Missile Strike on Syria and the Legality of Using Force to Deter
Chemical Warfare." Journal of Conflict and Security Law 23.1 (2018): 33-48.
Heraclides, Alexis, and Ada Dialla. "International law and humanitarian
intervention." Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century. Manchester
University Press, 2017.
Hogan, Nathan. "Five Sides of Justice: The Dangerous and Disproportionate Influence of the
Permanent Five Members of the UN Security Council on the International Criminal
Court." Brigham Young University Prelaw Review 32.1 (2018): 18.
Horner, Daniel. "Probe of Chemical Arms Use in Syria Set." Arms Control Today 45.8 (2015): 5.
Howard, Lise Morjé, and Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal. "The Use of Force in UN
Peacekeeping." International Organization 72.1 (2018): 71-103.
Howard, Lise Morjé, and Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal. "The Use of Force in UN
Peacekeeping." International Organization 72.1 (2018): 71-103.
http://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/
Humud, Carla E., Christopher M. Blanchard, and Mary Beth D. Nikitin. Armed conflict in Syria:
Overview and US response. Congressional Research Service Washington United States,
2017.

Surname 15
ICRC. Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of
Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. Geneva, 17 June 1925.
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/280?OpenDocument [retrieved October 1, 2018]
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect,
2001
International Law and the Classification of Conflicts, Wilmshurst, Elizabeth (E-book 2012)
Jeong, Ho-Won. Peace and conflict studies: An introduction. Routledge, 2017.
Joyner, Christopher C. "Sanctions and International Law." Economic Sanctions. Routledge,
2018. 73-87.
Kahn, Paul W. "War and Sacrifice in Kosovo." Philosophy and Public Policy 19 (2017).
Kelsen, Hans. "Collective security and collective self-defense under the Charter of the United
Nations." The Use of Force in International Law. Routledge, 2017. 97-110.
Kelsen, Hans. "Collective security and collective self-defense under the Charter of the United
Nations." The Use of Force in International Law. Routledge, 2017. 97-110.
Laron, Guy. The Six-day War: The Breaking of the Middle East. Yale University Press, 2017.
Manukyan, Avag. The threat of international terrorism and the new trends in the USA foreign
policy. Diss. 2014.
Mason, Michael, and Muna Dajani. "A political ontology of land: rooting Syrian identity in the
occupied Golan Heights." Antipode (2018).
Matheson, Michael J. "The United States position on the relation of customary international law to
the 1977 protocols additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions." The Development and
Principles of International Humanitarian Law. Routledge, 2017. 233-245..

Surname 16
Meernik, James David. The political use of military force in US foreign policy. Routledge, 2018.
Morgenthau, Hans J. "Positivism, functionalism, and international law." The Nature of International
Law. Routledge, 2017. 159-184.
Reading Humanitarian Intervention : Human Rights and the Use of Force in International Law,
Orford, Anne (E-book 2003)
Ruys, Tom. "The Meaning of “Force” and the Boundaries of the Jus Ad Bellum: Are “Minimal”
Uses of Force Excluded from UN Charter Article 2 (4)?." American Journal of International
Law 108.2 (2014): 159-210.
Schimmel, Noam. "Dangerous diplomacy: bureaucracy, power politics, and the role of the UN
Secretariat in Rwanda." (2018): 459-461.
Schmitt, Michael N., and Christopher M. Ford. "Assessing US Justifications for Using Force in
Response to Syria's Chemical Attacks: An International Law Perspective." J. Nat'l Sec. L. &
Pol'y 9 (2017): 283.
Schuldenrein, Joseph, et al. "Geoarchaeology, Forensics, and the Prosecution of Saddam Hussein: A
Case Study from the Iraq War (2003–2011)." Geoarchaeology 32.1 (2017): 130-156.
Shaw, Timothy M. Twisting arms and flexing muscles: humanitarian intervention and peacebuilding
in perspective. Routledge, 2018.
Silander, Daniel, and Don Wallace, eds. International Organizations and the Implementation of the
Responsibility to Protect: The Humanitarian Crisis in Syria. Routledge, 2015.
Stark, Catherine. The legality of the use of force against terrorists: an examination of the United air
strikes against the Islamic State in Syria. Diss. University of Cape Town, 2017.
Suhrke, Astri. The path of a genocide: the Rwanda crisis from Uganda to Zaire. Routledge, 2017.
Tan, Teck Boon. "A World Free of Chemical Weapons: Why It Is So Difficult." (2018).

Surname 17
The handbook of the international law of military operations / edited by Terry D. Gill and Dieter Fleck ;
in collaboration with Hans F. R. Boddens Hosang [and others] (E-Book, OUP 2015)
Turner, John. "Strategic differences: Al Qaeda's Split with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-
Sham." Small Wars & Insurgencies26.2 (2015): 208-225.Boggs, Carl. "The Permanent
Warfare State." Fascism Old and New. Routledge, 2018. 129-157.
UK government Guidance, Chemical weapon use by Syrian regime: UK government legal position, 29
August 2013, paragraph 4. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chemicalweapon-use-
by-syrian-regime-uk-government-legal-position/
UN Charter http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/un-charter-full-text/ (retrieved October 1, 2018)
UNGA ‘Report of the Special Committee on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly
Relations and Cooperation Among States’ UN GAOR 25th Session Supp No 18 UN Doc A/8018
(1970)
Wagner, Markus. "The dehumanization of international humanitarian law: legal, ethical, and political
implications of autonomous weapon systems." Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 47 (2014): 1371.
Warren, Amy, et al. "4 Genocide in Rwanda: leadership, ethics and organizational'failure'in a post-
colonial context." The Dark Side. Routledge, 2017. 274-295.
Webb, Philippa. "Deadlock or Restraint? The Security Council Veto and the Use of Force in
Syria." Journal of Conflict and Security Law 19.3 (2014): 471-488.
Weil, Prosper. "Towards relative normativity in international law?." Sources of International Law.
Routledge, 2017. 123-152.

Surname 18
Wilmshurst, Elizabeth. 2005. Principles of International law on the use of force by states in self-
defence. Chatham House – The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/papers/view/108106
Wiseman, Geoffrey, ed. Isolate or engage: Adversarial states, US foreign policy, and public diplomacy.
Stanford University Press, 2015.
Zadeh, Suhair Saeed, and Esmail Shafiee. "The Study of Human Rights Situation in Iraq During
Saddam Hussein Era." J. Pol. & L. 10 (2017): 216.