Abstract
This essay describes tensions that arise between two types of public goods enshrined in the United Nations Charter—the right to self-determination of people(s) within a territorial state and peace and security—in situations in which recognized governments in conflict-torn countries request military assistance from third states against opposition groups. It illuminates legal challenges in reconciling these public goods in practice, at a time when collective peacekeeping mechanisms appear unable to prevent or terminate civil conflicts and their destabilizing regional impact.
Highlights
This essay describes tensions that arise between two types of public goods enshrined in the United Nations Charter—the right to self-determination of people(s) within a territorial state and peace and security—in situations in which recognized governments in conflict-torn countries request military assistance from third states against opposition groups
The controversy surrounding the legality of military intervention by invitation in situations that have escalated into a “civil war” has gained new momentum since the airstrikes of the United States-led coalition in Iraq against the Islamic State (IS) since 2014, the Saudiled intervention against the Houthi rebels in Yemen since 2015, and the Russian intervention against IS and other opposition groups in Syria since 2015
While international attention has focussed on the military interventions by invitation in NIACs in the Middle East, similar interventions have been occurring in Africa
Summary
This essay describes tensions that arise between two types of public goods enshrined in the United Nations Charter—the right to self-determination of people(s) within a territorial state and peace and security—in situations in which recognized governments in conflict-torn countries request military assistance from third states against opposition groups. There is support in doctrine for the position that military intervention by invitation can be reconcilable with Article 2(4) of the Charter, as long as it does not amount to force “against the territorial integrity or political independence” of the requesting state.[6] Forcible intervention by invitation might violate a state’s political independence if it violated the right to self-determination recognized in Articles 1(2) and 55 of the Charter.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.