“Talep üzerine askeri yardım, kuvvet kullanımına rıza” olarak da ifade edilen “davetle müdahale” kavramı, esas olarak bir devletin kendi yetki alanı dahilinde iç çatışma ve benzeri bir durumu bastırmak için bir başka devletin kuvvet kullanımına rıza gösterebileceği fikrine dayanmaktadır. İlk bakışta uluslararası hukukta “müdahale etmeme ilkesi”nin ya da Birleşmiş Milletler Şartı’nın 2/4. maddesinde yer verilen uluslararası ilişkilerde “kuvvet kullanma yasağı”nın ihlali olarak görülebilecek bu doktrinin hiçbir bağlayıcı uluslararası belgede yer almamasına rağmen uluslararası toplumda genel kabulü ve yaygın uygulaması karşısında hangi hukuki dayanakla meşrulaştırılabileceğinin ele alınması önemlidir. Bu çalışmada, devletlerin kendi yetki sınırları dahilinde kuvvet kullanılmasına verdikleri rızanın kuvvet kullanmayı hukuka uygun hale getirme üzerindeki etkisi ve uluslararası hukukta kuvvet kullanma yasağının jus cogens statüsü ile rıza üzerine kuvvet kullanılmasının nasıl bağdaştırılacağı sorunu irdelenmektedir.
The Article 2/4 of the UN Charter obliges all UN members to refrain from resorting to the threat or use of force in their international relations, either against the territorial integrity or political independence of any other state or in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the UN. This means that an armed intervention with these characteristics is prohibited. Intervention by invitation is also a form of using military force by a state on the territory of another state, even though it is based on the permission of the host state. However, although the doctrine of intervention by invitation is a form of use of force, it is generally accepted internationally in state practices and in the decisions of UN bodies. In this case, the question arises of what the legal basis of the doctrine of intervention by invitation is and whether it is contrary to the prohibition of the use of force, which is accepted as a jus cogens norm.The aim of this study is to reveal whether the doctrine of intervention by invitation conflicts with the prohibition of the use of force which is described as a jus cogens norm in generally, and with Article 2/4 of the UN Charter in particular.In this study, decisions of UN bodies (General Assembly, Security Council, International Court Of Justice Decisions) and opinions of lawyers are used, indicating that intervention by invitation is generally accepted. In the study, first of all, the concept of intervention by invitation is tried to be explained in the context of basic international law concepts and principles such as the concept of intervention, the prohibition of intervention in internal affairs and the prohibition of the use of force. In particular, By examining the content of the regulation on the prohibition of the use of force in the Article 2/4 of the UN Charter, it is tried to reveal whether intervention by invitation is a form of use of force within the scope of this article and, in this context, to determine the extent of the jus cogens norm nature of the prohibition on the use of force. In addition, the different views put forward as the basis for why intervention by invitation, which is accepted both in the actions and opinions of sovereign states and in the decisions taken by the most important UN bodies, does not constitute a violation of international law are discussed. Among the approaches discussed in this context, first of all, the idea that intervention by invitation is outside the scope of the Article 2/4 of the UN Charter because it does not meet the qualifications in the article, in other words, the idea that it does not have an international character and is not against the territorial integrity or political independence of the inviting state, is discussed, and then the opinion of the intervention by invitation doctrine can be considered lawful since it is not clearly considered unlawful in the UN Charter is being examined. Finally, the approach that looks at the issue from the perspective of the rules regarding the responsibility of the state is discussed, and in this context, “Draft Articles On Responsibility Of States For Internationally Wrongful Acts” adopted by the UN International Law Commission in 2001, which contains the conditions that prevents an act of a state that will not comply with the international obligations of the state from being unlawful. is referenced. This study focuses on whether the “consent” element, which is one of these conditions, can be applied as a reason that eliminates unlawfulness in the case of the use of force. In addition, a conclusion is reached as to on what legal grounds this type of use of force, which is used upon consent, can be reconciled with the prohibition of the use of force, as opposed to the general acceptance of intervention by invitation.As a result of the study, It is concluded that peremptory aspect of the prohibition of the use of force is only limited to the qualifications listed in the Article 2/4 of the UN Charter, in other words, there will be a violation of the peremptory aspect of the prohibition on the use of force only if the use of force aims at aggressive actions targeting the territorial integrity and political independence of a state. Although the doctrine of intervention by invitation is a form of use of force, it is concluded that the prohibition on the use of force is not violated because it does not meet the qualifications in this article, therefore there is no violation of the article in question and the doctrine of intervention by invitation should be accepted as a category in itself.