Meşruiyet, Yasallık Ve Hukuka Uygunluk: Değişen Uluslararası Politik Ortamda İnsancıl Askeri Müdahalenin Sorgulanması

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1, 9 - 30, 01.06.2013

Pınar Gözen Ercan

Öz

Her ne kadar insancıl sebeplerle güç kullanımı (diğer bir deyişle insancıl askeri müdahale) üzerine tartışmalar yeni olmasa da, bunlar Soğuk Savaş döneminden bu yana insan haklarının uluslararası boyutta korunmasına verilen önemin artmasıyla zenginleşmiştir. 1990larda yaşanan büyük ölçekli insan hakları ihlalleri karşısında yapılan müdahaleler ve zaman zaman tepkisiz kalınması sonucunda uluslararası hukuk ve politika literatürlerinde önemli bir yer edinen insancıl müdahale tartışmaları koruma sorumluluğu kavramının ortaya çıkmasıyla yeni bir yön kazanmıştır. Halihazırda koruma sorumluluğu çerçevesinde Güvenlik Konseyi yetkilendirmesiyle ve son çare olarak uygulanacak bir yöntem olarak nitelendirilen insancıl müdahale hala devletlerce bireysel ya da kolektif olarak uluslararası platformda bir araç olarak kullanılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda gerek akademik gerekse de siyasi platformda tek taraflı olarak ya da Güvenlik Konseyi yetkilendirmesi olmaksızın gerçekleştirilen insancıl müdahaleler ikilik yaratmaya devam etmektedir. İlk olarak Bosna-Herseke ve Kosovaya, yakın zamanda da Libyaya yapılan müdahaleler sonucunda insancıl müdahale doktrininin meşruiyeti, yasallığı ve hukuka uygunluğuna dair tartışmalar hız kazanmıştır. Tüm bu gelişmeler ışığında, bu makalede insancıl müdahale doktrini uluslararası hukuk çerçevesinde, hukuka uygunluk ile yasallık yönünden analiz etmektedir. Bu amaçla ilk olarak insancıl sebeplerle askeri müdahale yapma fikrinin normatif kökenleri sorgulanmakta, daha sonra da mevcut uluslararası hukuki düzen incelenmektedir. Son olarak Birleşmiş Milletler Sözleşmesi sonrasındaki dönem esas alınarak ortaya çıkan olayların genel bir resmi çerçevesinde devlet uygulamalarının ve mevcut hukuki anlayış ve tartışmaların koruma sorumluluğunun inşasına nasıl yön verdiği ortaya konmaya çalışılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Meşruiyet, yasallık, hukuka uygunluk, insancıl müdahale, koruma sorumluluğu

Legitimacy, Legality and Lawfulness: Questioning Humanitarian Military Intervention in a Changing International Political Milieu

Öz

A lbeit the debate on the use of force for humanitarian purposes (i.e. humanitarian military intervention) is not new, it has been flourishing since the early years of the Cold War as a result of the increasing importance placed on the international protection of human rights. After gaining a prominent place in the international law and politics literatures, with cases of action and inaction/indifference in the 1990s, the question of (and the need for) undertaking intervention to stop mass atrocities took a new turn with the introduction of the “responsibility to protect” (RtoP) understanding. Now also enlisted as a measure within the RtoP framework but only as a last resort and to be undertaken with Security Council authorisation, humanitarian (military) intervention continues to be adopted individually or collectively by states in their international conduct. In this vein, its unilateral or unauthorised practices continue to create controversy in the political and academic platforms. Primarily with the military interventions in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo, then most recently with the intervention in Libya, the debates on the legitimacy, legality and lawfulness of the controversial doctrine of humanitarian intervention once again gained momentum. In the light of these developments, this article analyses the doctrine of humanitarian intervention in relation to international law with a specific focus on the questions of lawfulness and legality. To this end, it first traces the normative roots of the idea of undertaking military intervention on humanitarian grounds, and then, analyses the current legal framework. Finally, through an overview of cases in the post-Charter era, it tries to reveal how state practice alongside the legal understandings and debates led to the construction of the RtoP norm

Anahtar Kelimeler

Legitimacy, legality, lawfulness, humanitarian intervention, responsibility to protect

Kaynakça

• AQUINAS, Thomas. Summa Theologica, II-II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.
• AUGUSTINE, Saint. “City of God”, Vol. VI, Book xix, translated by W. C. Greene. William Heinemann Ltd., Great Britain, 1969.
• BERNHARDT, Rudolf (ed.). Encyclopaedia of Public International Law, vols. II-III, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1992.
• BROWNLIE, Ian. “Humanitarian Intervention,” Law and Civil War in the Modern World, John Moore (ed.), The Johns Hopkins University Press, Maryland, 1974, pp. 217-228.
• Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict. Preventing Deadly Conflict – Final Report; Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Actions of the United Nations during the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda, UN Document S/1999/1257, December 15, 1999.
• CASSESE, Antonio. “Ex iniuria ius oritur: Are We Moving towards International Legitimation of Forcible Humanitarian Countermeasures in the World Community?” European Journal of International Law, 10 (1999): pp. 23-30.
• CASSESE, Antonio. International Law, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005.
• CHESTERMAN, Simon. Just War or Just Peace: Humanitarian Intervention and International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001.
• CORTEN, Olivier. The Law Against War: The Prohibition of Use of Force in Contemporary International Law, Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2010.
• DUKE, Simon. “The State and Human Rights: Sovereignty versus Humanitarian Intervention,” International Relations, 12 (1994): pp. 25-48.
• FABRI, Hélène Ruiz. “Human Rights and State Sovereignty,” Human Rights, Intervention, and the Use of Force. Philip Alston and Euan MacDonald (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008, pp. 33-42.
• FONTEYNE, Jean-Pierre L. “The Customary International Law Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention: Its Current Validity under the U.N. Charter,” California Western International Law Journal, 4 (1973-1974): pp. 203-270.
• GARRETT, Stephen A. Doing Good and Doing Well: an examination of humanitarian intervention, Praeger Publishers, Westport, 1999.
• General Assembly, Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, 6th Committee, 25th session, 2625 (XXV), 24 October 1970, pp. 122- 3. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/documents/ga/ res/25/ares25.htm, accessed September 12, 2011.
• General Assembly. A/RES/2131 (XX), Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty, 21 December 1965, http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/ NR0/218/94/IMG/NR021894.pdf?OpenElement, accessed February 08, 2013.
• GRIFFITHS, Martin, and Terry O’Callaghan. International Relations: The Key Concepts, Routledge, NewYork, 2002, pp. 145-8.
• GROTIUS, Hugo. Savaş ve Barış Hukuku (De Iure Belli Ac Pacis): Seçmeler, translated by Seha L. Meray. Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, Ankara, 1967.
• House of Commons, Foreign Affairs Committee, Fourth Report, Session 1999-2000, http://www. publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/ cmfaff/28/2802.htm, accessed August 20, 2011.
• International Commission on Intervention and State
• PROCTER, Paul (ed.). Cambridge International Dictionary of English, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
• Sovereignty. The Responsibility to Protect: The Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, International Development Research Center, Ottawa, 2001.
• International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. The Responsibility to Protect: Research, Bibliography, Background, International Development Research Center, Ottawa, 2001.
• ROBERTSON, David. A Dictionary of Human Rights, Second Edition, Europa Publications, London, 2004.
• SCHMITT, Carl. The Concept of the Political, The International Court of Justice. “Case Concerning the Military and Paramilitary Activates in and Against Nicaragua” (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Summary of the Judgement of the Court, 27 June 1986, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/70/6505. pdf, accessed January 29, 2009.
• KNUDSEN, Tonny Brems.  “The History of Humanitarian Intervention. The  Rule or the Exception?” Paper for the 50th ISA Annual Convention, New York, February 15-18, 2009.
• KUSANO, Hiroki. “Humanitarian Intervention: the interplay of norms and politics,” International Intervention in the Post-Cold War World: moral responsibility and power politics, Michael C. Davis, Wolfgang Dietrich, and Bettina Scholdan (eds.), 2003.
• LAUTERPACHT, Hersch. “The Grotian Tradition in International Law,” British Yearbook of International Law, 23 (1946): pp. 1-53.
• LILLICH, Richard B. “Humanitarian Intervention: A Reply to Ian Brownlie and Plea for Constructive Alternatives,” Law and Civil War in the Modern World. John Moore (ed.), The Johns Hopkins University Press, Maryland, 1974), pp. 229-251.
• MERON, Theodor. “Common Rights of Mankind in Gentili, Grotius and Suarez,” American Journal of International Law, 85(1) (January 1991): pp. 110-116.
• MILL, John Stuart. “A Few Words on Non-Intervention,” Foreign Policy Perspectives, 8 (1859): pp. 1-6.
• MURPHY, Sean D. Humanitarian Intervention: The United Nations in an Evolving World Order, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1996.
• NARDIN, Terry, Melissa S. Williams (eds.). Humanitarian Intervention, New York University Press, New York, 2006.
• OPPENHEIM, L.F. Lawrence. International Law: a treatise, Vol. 1 Peace, Lauterpacht (ed.), Longmans, Great Britain, 1955.
• OPPENHEIM, L.F. Lawrence. Oppenheim’s International Law, vol. 1 Peace, Sir Robert Jennings, and Sir Arthur Watts (eds.), Longman, Harlow, 1992.
• RAMSBOTHAM, Oliver, and Tom Woodhouse. Humanitarian Intervention in Contemporary Conflict: A Reconceptualization, Polity Press, Oxford, 1996.
• REISS, H.S. (ed.) “Perpetual Peace,” Kant: Political Writings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 93-130. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2007.
• SHAW, Malcolm N. International Law, Fifth Edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
• SIMMA, Bruno. “NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects”, The European Journal of International Law, 10(1) (1999): pp. 1-22.
• WHEELER, Nicholas J. Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society, Oxford University Press, Great Britain, 2000.