Translation from Russian
To: The Honorable Barack Obama,
President of the United States of America
CC: The Honorable Ban Ki-moon,
Secretary General of the United Nations
Re: On the Prevention of a Precedent ViolatingInternational Law
September 6, 2013
Mr. President,
Today, it is within Your powers to prevent or initiate amilitary strike on Syria without the UN Security Council sanction, i.e. in violation of the UN Charter. Whatever will be the U.S. Congress opinion thereon, You, as the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. armed forces, still bear the responsibility for the final decision.It is within Your willwhether or not a precedent is established which has grave consequences around the world – that is an obvious violation by the U.S. of the fundamental norms of the UN Charter regulating the use of armed force in state-to-state relations. Syria has not committed an armed attack on the USA; hence the USA has no right to use armed force in self-defense. The UN Security Council has made no ruling on the use of armed force against Syria; because of this the USA is legally deprived of the opportunity to act on the basis of a UN Security Council sanction.
Expressing the will of the Chairs of International Law of our Universities we are personally appealing to You to prevent a precedentviolation of the UN Charter undermining the foundations of the contemporary international legal order.
Weagree that the circumstances concerning the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria must be investigated in order to ascertain whether it was undertaken by forces opposed to the Syrian government, or on the order of a Syrian government officer tearing awards,or by a third party interested in creating further chaos in Syria. Those guilty must bare responsibility under the applicable law. The use of chemical weapons is unlawful. However, aggravating this wrongful act by another, even more wrongful, i.e. by a militarystrike on a sovereign state, in violation of the UN Charter, cannot restore the rule of law! One can’t build a lawful action on the basis of an unlawful one – EX INJURIA IUSNON ORITUR! This is one of general principles of law and the role of such principles is emphasized in the UN Charter.
We also share Your repeatedly expressed concern,one shared also by our American colleagues in the legal profession, regarding those violations of rights of the population which take place in Syria. In fact, the civil war is going on there, people loose their lives, children and women suffer... Both the U.S.from 1861 till 1865, and Russia from 1917 till 1922, have fully experienced the hardship and deprivation of civil wars, coupled with the particularly severe arbitrariness and violence. Civil war is always a tragedy for any country and its population.
However, as a rule, the armed intervention by a foreign state leads to further aggravation of the domesticissues in contention, not to their solution. The Russian Empire did not interfere in the Civil War in the U.S. in the XIX century, though it had a powerful army at that time and was fully aware of what party of the conflict to uphold.
In this case, we are appealing to You not to use an armed attack on Syria to influence the internal conflict in this country. International law provides a wide array of peaceful means to influence the policy of states, including those confronted by internal calamities.
On the contrary, an armed attack on an Arab state by the U.S. and some of its allies would inevitably have a negative impact on international legal consciousness: if the United States allows itself to violate the UN Charter, then why would another state refrain, since it has,similar to the U.S.,the same rights as a subject of international law? But in the era of unpredictable qualitative growth of military technologies such a logic is undermining international security.
Mr. President, will you make the «war party» advocates in your Administration question their beliefs, while it is not too late.Paraphrasing the words of Winston Churchill about democracy as a form of government, we should remind that internal conflicts are bad; but an external military strike even for the sake of their solving is even worse. In the contemporary world there is no alternative to patient, reserved, responsible international policy based on the supremacy of international law. This is especially true for the Middle East.
Professor A. N. Vylegzhanin, doctor of juridical sciences,
Head of International Law Department of MGIMO-University, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Professor S. A.Egorov, doctor of juridical sciences,
Head of International Law Department of the Diplomatic Academy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Professor S. Kh. Abashidze, doctor of juridical sciences,
Head of International Law Department of the Russian Peoples’ Friendship University, Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
Acting - Professor A. S. Ispolinov, candidate of juridical sciences,
Head of International Law Department of the Lomonosov Moscow State University
Professor G. S. Starodubtsev, doctor of juridical sciences,
Head of International Law Department of the Russian Legal Academy, Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation
1