THE GERMAN PARLIAMENT SHOCKED ALL THE WORLD: The presence of the United States Army in Syria is internationally illegal

Members of parliament in Germany have concluded that the presence of the United States Army in Syria is illegal

#Alexander Neu, a member of the Left Party's parliamentary party in Germany, asked for an opinion on the legality of military presence and operations in the US, Russia and Israel in Syria. The Moonofalabama.org portal reports: - Russia has been asked to help a recognized Syrian government. Her presence in Syria is undoubtedly legal under international law.

- American activities in Syria can be seen as two phases:

Changing the regime

The provision of weapons by rebels in Syria by the United States (and others) has been and is illegal. This is a violation of the prohibition of the use of force in international law, in particular in Article 2 of the UN Charter: "All members refrain from international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each state or in any other way that is not in consistent with the goals of the United Nations. "

They fight against ISIS

The United States claims that their presence in Syria (collective) is self-defense based on Article 51 of the UN Charter because the Islamic State in Syria has threatened to attack the United States. This is in itself insufficient because Syria is a sovereign state. The United States, therefore, further claims that the Syrian state "refused or incapable of fighting" against the Islamic state. Scientific services claim that the claim of "unwillingness or incapacity" was already questioned when the US operation began. That's for two reasons:

- Not a legal or internationally accepted legal doctrine. (120 members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and others strongly opposed.) - The Syrian government fought ISIS, but could not conduct operations in large parts of its territory where the Islamic State took control. Some argue that this justified the argument of "incompetence". But ISIS is largely defeated and no longer has significant territorial control.

The already dubious legal case of the presence of US (and other "coalition troops in Syria") can no longer be implemented. The US presence in Syria is unlawful. - Israeli attack on Hezbollah and Iranian units and installations in Syria as well as against Syria, which Israel claims to be "anticipatory self-defense" in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Treaty. But "anticipatory self-defense" could only be claimed when the attack on Israel was inevitable. Such a case was not achieved. Israeli attacks on "preventive self-defense" thus did not accept the doctrine of international law.

The service was not requested even from Turkey that entered Syria, but the claims of "self-defense", as Turkey cites in its fight against Kurdish subjects in Syria, are highlighted and often abused for geo-strategic interests. These legal arguments are not new. Others thought about the same line for a long time and reached the same result. But Germany is a partner of the US coalition ready to fight ISIS.

The German parliament is unlikely to renew its mandate to combat the ISIS. Other countries are likely to follow and end their involvement in an illegal US coalition. While this will not change the situation on the ground in Syria, it changes the international political atmosphere. It also 'rehabilitates' the Syrian government in a European public eye because it can no longer be shown as an 'enemy'.

• 15 Jul, 2018
• 1951 views