This essay argues that based on treaties of the EU and UN it is justified for the German state to use violence against ISIS. Since the appearance of the so called Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in 2014, the world has changed. ISIS is a terrorist group which is responsible for thousands of deaths in the Middle East and Europe and has become a serious threat for non-supporters of the Muslim values that ISIS wants to impose on every country that does not represent those beliefs. To reach their target, ISIS destroys historic buildings, for example in Palmyra, uses violence, and evokes fear throughout the world, as ISIS uses media to film and show their brutal acts to make millions of people becoming their witnesses. Consequently, whole countries are horrified because of the brutality of ISIS and fear to be the next target.
As time passed, increasing numbers of countries, even EU-countries, and individual groups started to fight against ISIS, trying to prevent more civilians to become victims of the terrorist group and to pursue their own security interests. As ISIS expanded their target group to European countries, killing hundreds of people in Paris in 2015 by bomb attacks, the German government decided to use violence against ISIS in Syria. However, as will be demonstrated below, that decision is a "hot-button" topic because the opinions about the use of force by a State to stop a terrorist group are diverse and not everyone agrees on that. The purpose of this essay is to show that the use of violence by the German State against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is justified, taking into consideration treaties by the UN and the EU.
Table of Contents
1. The use of violence by the German State against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is justified by treaties of the European Union and the United Nations
Objectives and Topics
The essay aims to demonstrate that the German government's decision to deploy military force against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is legally justified under international and European law. It analyzes whether the mandate for such operations is supported by the UN Charter and relevant European Union treaties, specifically addressing the counterarguments raised by legal experts regarding the formal basis of these interventions.
- The legal justification of the German military operation against ISIS.
- Application of Article 51 of the UN Charter regarding self-defense.
- Interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 2249.
- The role of Article 42, part 7 of the Lisbon Treaty of the EU.
- The debate between legal formalities and the necessity of combating terrorism.
Excerpts from the Book
The use of violence by the German State against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is justified by treaties of the European Union and the United Nations
On the 4th of December 2015, after the terror acts in Paris, the German Bundestag decided upon a motion by the German government to send up to 1200 soldiers of the German Bundeswehr to fight against ISIS in Syria. However, not all members of the German parliament shared the same opinion: 445 members supported that decision, 145 members denied it and 7 abstained from voting. The German government justified their motion with article 51 of the UN- Charter combined with part 7 of article 42 of the treaty of the EU and the resolutions 2170 (2014), 2199 (2015) and, as the most important one, 2249 (2015) of the UN Security Council. To understand the different positions concerning the justification of military force against ISIS it is necessary to know the juristic basis of these.
Article 51 of the UN- Charter, the first basis, says the following: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the UN, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
Summary of Chapters
1. The use of violence by the German State against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is justified by treaties of the European Union and the United Nations: This chapter outlines the historical and political context of the German parliamentary decision to intervene militarily against ISIS, providing the legal framework based on UN and EU provisions.
Keywords
ISIS, Germany, Bundeswehr, military force, UN Charter, Article 51, European Union, Lisbon Treaty, Article 42, self-defense, terrorism, international law, Resolution 2249, security, human rights
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines the legal justification for the German government's decision to deploy the Bundeswehr to combat ISIS in Syria following the 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris.
What are the core thematic areas discussed?
The themes include international law, the right to collective self-defense, the interpretation of UN Security Council resolutions, and the obligations of EU member states regarding mutual assistance.
What is the central research question?
The essay seeks to answer whether the use of military force by Germany against ISIS can be considered legally justified under the statutes of the UN Charter and the treaties of the European Union.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author uses a qualitative legal analysis, evaluating international treaties and UN resolutions against the arguments of legal scholars and political decision-makers.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The main body analyzes Article 51 of the UN Charter, UN Security Council Resolution 2249, and Article 42 of the Lisbon Treaty as the primary legitimizations for the German military intervention.
How would you characterize this work with keywords?
The work is characterized by terms such as International Law, Counter-Terrorism, Self-Defense, UN Charter, and European Security.
Does the author consider the opposition's perspective?
Yes, the author addresses the arguments of legal scholars who challenge the mission based on formalistic interpretations of UN mandates and the lack of explicit references to Chapter 7 of the UN Charter.
Why is the distinction between "freedom fighters" and "terrorists" important in this context?
The distinction is used to argue that ISIS members do not qualify for the protection of international laws of war, thus stripping them of a "legitimate basis" to invoke the UN Charter for their own defense.
What role does the Paris attack play in the argument?
The Paris attacks serve as the catalyst for the invocation of Article 42(7) of the Lisbon Treaty, highlighting the obligation of solidarity among EU member states.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Carolina Gerwin (Autor:in), 2016, The German State against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. How the use of force is justified by treaties of the European Union and the United Nations, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/510890
