CYIL 2012

ARMED INTERVENTION IN CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LAW the UN. The change in the legal opinions of states (opinion juris sive necessitatis) must be backed by establishedand substantial practice (usus longaevus). Defending humanity and international security has become the main imperative of mankind in our world. The solution of the humanitarian crisis in Syria may indicate further development towards “legalisation” of military (humanitarian) intervention. President Obama in his 2009 Nobel lecture noted that new challenges inquire “to think on new ways about the notion of just war and imperatives of a just peace”. He repeatedly added that “force may sometimes be necessary” as “a recognition of history, the imperfection of man and the limits of reason”. He said that “force can be justified on humanitarian grounds” and “all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace…” In his view the same should be applied to those “who violate international laws by brutalizing their own people” and therefore “there must be consequences…” 71 The speech clearly stressed the necessity to use military force whenever it is necessary for humanitarian reasons. In the future we can surely expect new “humanitarian interventions”. We also must be aware that unauthorised intervention also poses dilemmas for the UNSC, the UNGA and the UN Secretariat. The unilateral decisions to employ military force without SC authorisation may undermine the prohibition of the use of force and lower the role of the UNSC and the whole UN. Not every military intervention in the past was proclaimed a success. Genocide, large-scale crimes against humanity and large-scale war crimes, should be considered as a threat to international peace and security pursuant to Art. 39 of the UN Charter. The discussion on lawfulness of military actions, which have not been authorized by the UNSC, will certainly continue. It is worth mentioning the resolution of Institut de Droit International of Sept. 2011. Art. 7 of this resolution stipulates: “In circumstances in which the Security Council is unable to act in the exercise of its primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security due to the lack of unanimity of the permanent members, the General Asembly should exercise its competence under the ‘Uniting for Peace’ Resolution to recommend such measures as it deems appropriate.” Art. 8 then provides: “In all circumstances, the use of force should only be authorized as a last resort.” 72

71 Obama Nobel Lecture Address Use of Force in Global Affairs, AJIL 2010, No 1, pp. 127-9. 72 Institut de Droit International, Resolution, Authorization of the Use of Force by the United Nations, 9. Sept. 2011.

83