Military intervention, as regrettable and complicated as it may be, is the only way to stop Assad’s killing machine. This is what most Syrians are demanding from the international community. If we truly believe in the right to self-determination, then we are morally obligated to listen to them.
Oponerse a la intervención militar en Siria no es apoyar al brutal régimen de Assad. Los países del grupo BRICS pueden contar con fuertes razones jurídicas y políticas contra dicha intervención; el lenguaje humanitario de la responsabilidad de proteger (responsibility to protect, R2P) se puede man
El fracaso de la comunidad mundial para responder de manera eficaz a las atrocidades cometidas en Siria, puede representar un golpe para la Responsabilidad de proteger (Responsibility to Protect, R2P), pero la doctrina aún sigue con vida. La R2P sigue ofreciendo un enfoque con base en principios p
El caso de Siria muestra la dificultad de llevar a la práctica la responsabilidad de proteger (responsibility to protect, R2P), pero es necesario hacerlo si queremos que R2P sea algo más que un acrónimo extravagante. Sin embargo, cualquier intervención militar debe estar vinculada con el diálogo p
The unexpected Washington-Moscow diplomacy - made possible by London's parliament - creates space for progress in ending Syria's "double proxy war".
Sovereignty matters, but so does preventing mass atrocity. A doctrine like the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) permits us to override inertia and inaction to alleviate mass suffering, although in Syria we haven’t yet seen an effective plan for doing so. A response to the openGlobalRights debate on
Arab Awakening's columnists offer their weekly perspective on what is happening on the ground in the Middle East. Leading the week, Doha debate reveals gulf between locals, its elite and expatriates
The manner in which the Syrian crisis has been addressed by western polities signals a shift, at least for now, in how acts of war are deliberated by those governments considering military intervention. But how significant is this? There is both some good and bad news in this regard.
The use of chemical weapons in Damascus should, at the very least, give us pause to reflect on the principles guiding our nuclear weapons policies.
Though postponed, the US still threatens to attack Syria to punish the Assad government for the use of chemical weapons. But it would be illegal, and ineffective - helping neither the people of Syria, nor the principles of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). A contribution to the openGlobalRights deb
Grasping at vague notions of Kosovo as a ‘good war’ may be expedient - any precedent will do in a pinch. But this comparison is inaccurate and dangerously misleading.
