Geoffrey Bindman searches for a legal justification for the recent attack by the US, Britain & France on Syria
Maintaining the authority of international law has often seemed a vain hope in a world riven by conflict between the most powerful nation states. The worldwide agreement after the Second World War to settle disputes peacefully and through legal processes was a remarkable achievement but the Syrian catastrophe is only the latest of its many failures. Yet the need to uphold the rule of law remains as great as ever and we can be grateful that our politicians for the most part still feel the need to seek legal backing for their actions. Is there a legal justification for the recent attack by the US, Britain and France on Syria?
The United Nations Charter is a founding document of modern international law and its provisions are binding on all nation states. It prohibits the use of force by states except when authorised by the UN Security Council or in self-defence. Self-defence legitimises an armed response to a current or imminent attack. It does
