A US Letter to UN Lays Out Its Case for Bombing Syria

choi

Somini Sengupta and Charlie Savage, US Invokes Defense of Iraq in Legal justification of Syria Strikes; A letter to the UN secretary general states America’s case. New York Times, Sept 24, 2014
www.nytimes.com/2014/09/24/us/po ... yria-are-legal.html

Quote:

(a) "The United States said on Tuesday [Sept 23] that the American-led airstrikes against the Islamic State — carried out in Syria without seeking the permission of the Syrian government or the United Nations Security Council — were legal because they were done in defense of Iraq.

The letter "assert[ed] that the airstrikes had been carried out under a fundamental principle in the United Nations Charter. That principle gives countries the right to defend themselves, including using force on another country’s territory when that country is unwilling or unable to address it.

"International law generally prohibits using force on the sovereign territory of another country without its permission or authorization from the United Nations, except as a matter of self-defense.

(b) "Yet the letter asserted that Iraq had a valid right of self-defense against the Islamic State — also known as ISIS or ISIL — because the militant group was attacking Iraq from its havens in Syria, and the Syrian government had failed to suppress that threat. Because Iraq asked the United States for assistance in defending itself, the letter asserted, the strikes were legal.

My comment;:
(a) Putin had warned US against airstrikes within Syria without the latter's approval, claiming the strikes would violate international law. So I was eager to find out how White House avert the legal issue.
(b) Chiang Kai-shek had the same problem: in Manchuria right after World War II, his troops would chase communists to Korea border but had to stop there.
(c) There is no need to read the rest of the report.