“Operation Peace Spring”: How lawful? - Understanding Turkey’s Military Operation Through Restrictive and Expansive Interpretations of Article 51
(2019) LAGF03 20192Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Turkiets senaste militära operation i norra Syrien, Operation Peace Spring, har gett upphov till en pågående debatt om innehållet i FN-stadgans artikel 51 och rätten till självförsvar. Med denna militära operation kan ännu ett fall läggas till på listan över stater som utvidgar tolkningen av artikel 51. Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka om de argument Turkiet framfört i sitt brev till säkerhetsrådet uppfyller kriterierna för självförsvar enligt artikel 51.
I strävan efter att uppnå uppsatsen syfte tillämpas Martti Koskenniemis strukturella förståelse av den internationella rätten. Som en konsekvens används en diskursanalytisk metodologi som implementeras i tre iterativa steg. Steg ett granskar Turkiets brev till säkerhetsrådet.... (More) - Turkiets senaste militära operation i norra Syrien, Operation Peace Spring, har gett upphov till en pågående debatt om innehållet i FN-stadgans artikel 51 och rätten till självförsvar. Med denna militära operation kan ännu ett fall läggas till på listan över stater som utvidgar tolkningen av artikel 51. Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka om de argument Turkiet framfört i sitt brev till säkerhetsrådet uppfyller kriterierna för självförsvar enligt artikel 51.
I strävan efter att uppnå uppsatsen syfte tillämpas Martti Koskenniemis strukturella förståelse av den internationella rätten. Som en konsekvens används en diskursanalytisk metodologi som implementeras i tre iterativa steg. Steg ett granskar Turkiets brev till säkerhetsrådet. Steg två identifierar de juridiska diskussionerna kring de fyra argumenten för självförsvar som framförts i Turkiets brev. Tolkningsmöjligheten av innehållet i artikel 51 är många, allt från ”juridisk formalism” till ”juridisk realism”, för tydlighetens skull har den nuvarande uppsatsen valt att gruppera de olika ståndpunkterna gentemot artikel 51 i två breda kategorier; nämligen expansiv och restriktivt synsätt. Steg tre tillämpar de rättsliga ståndpunkterna som identifieras i steg två på Turkiets fyra självförsvarsargument, identifierat i steg ett.
Svaret på frågan huruvida Turkiets argument kan anses uppfylla kriterierna för självförsvar enligt artikel 51, är långt ifrån enkel och beror på vilken ståndpunkt man tar. En restriktiv tolkning av artikel 51 leder till att operationen kan anses vara olaglig. Baserat på en expansiv tolkning är det dock möjligt att argumentera för det motsatta. Uppsatsen visar att detta motstridiga svar främst beror på den komplicerade och ofta spända relationen mellan internationella relationer och internationell rätt. (Less) - Abstract
- Turkey’s recent military operation in northern Syria, Operation Peace Spring, has fuelled an ongoing debate with regards to the content of Article 51 of the UN Charter and the right to self-defence. Adding yet another case to the list of states expanding the Interpretation of Article 51. This thesis aims to examine if the arguments put forth by Turkey, in their letter to the Security Council, meet the criteria of self-defence under Article 51.
In the quest to fulfil the aim, Martti Koskenniemi's structural understanding of international law is applied. As a consequence, a discourse methodological approach is used and performed in three iterative steps. Step one examines Turkey's letter to the Security Council. Step two identifies the... (More) - Turkey’s recent military operation in northern Syria, Operation Peace Spring, has fuelled an ongoing debate with regards to the content of Article 51 of the UN Charter and the right to self-defence. Adding yet another case to the list of states expanding the Interpretation of Article 51. This thesis aims to examine if the arguments put forth by Turkey, in their letter to the Security Council, meet the criteria of self-defence under Article 51.
In the quest to fulfil the aim, Martti Koskenniemi's structural understanding of international law is applied. As a consequence, a discourse methodological approach is used and performed in three iterative steps. Step one examines Turkey's letter to the Security Council. Step two identifies the legal discussions surrounding the four self-defence arguments put forward in Turkey's letter. Even though the interpretations of the content of Article 51 vary, from 'legal formalism' to 'legal realism', for the sake of clarity, the present study has chosen to group these different positions vis-à-vis Article 51 into two broad categories; namely, expansive and restrictive approaches. Step three applies the legal positions identified in step two to Turkey’s self-defence arguments, identified in step one.
The study concludes that the answer to the question, whether Turkey's arguments can be considered satisfying the criteria for self-defence under Article 51, is far from straightforward and depends on what approach one subscribes to. A restrictive interpretation of Article 51 leads to deeming the operation as unlawful. However, based on an expansive interpretation, it is possible to argue for the opposite. The present study demonstrates that this contradictory answer is mainly due to the complicated and often tensioned relations between international relations and international law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8999646
- author
- Alkan Olsson, Elsa LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20192
- year
- 2019
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Public international law, Use of Force, Self-Defence, Operation Peace Spring
- language
- English
- id
- 8999646
- date added to LUP
- 2020-04-04 17:01:35
- date last changed
- 2020-04-04 17:01:35
@misc{8999646,
abstract = {{Turkey’s recent military operation in northern Syria, Operation Peace Spring, has fuelled an ongoing debate with regards to the content of Article 51 of the UN Charter and the right to self-defence. Adding yet another case to the list of states expanding the Interpretation of Article 51. This thesis aims to examine if the arguments put forth by Turkey, in their letter to the Security Council, meet the criteria of self-defence under Article 51.
In the quest to fulfil the aim, Martti Koskenniemi's structural understanding of international law is applied. As a consequence, a discourse methodological approach is used and performed in three iterative steps. Step one examines Turkey's letter to the Security Council. Step two identifies the legal discussions surrounding the four self-defence arguments put forward in Turkey's letter. Even though the interpretations of the content of Article 51 vary, from 'legal formalism' to 'legal realism', for the sake of clarity, the present study has chosen to group these different positions vis-à-vis Article 51 into two broad categories; namely, expansive and restrictive approaches. Step three applies the legal positions identified in step two to Turkey’s self-defence arguments, identified in step one.
The study concludes that the answer to the question, whether Turkey's arguments can be considered satisfying the criteria for self-defence under Article 51, is far from straightforward and depends on what approach one subscribes to. A restrictive interpretation of Article 51 leads to deeming the operation as unlawful. However, based on an expansive interpretation, it is possible to argue for the opposite. The present study demonstrates that this contradictory answer is mainly due to the complicated and often tensioned relations between international relations and international law.}},
author = {{Alkan Olsson, Elsa}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{“Operation Peace Spring”: How lawful? - Understanding Turkey’s Military Operation Through Restrictive and Expansive Interpretations of Article 51}},
year = {{2019}},
}