مقاله پژوهشی: تحلیل حقوقی اقدام‌های نظامی دولت ج.ا.ایران در مقابله با تروریسم در سوریه و عراق

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه حقوق دانشگاه شاهد

چکیده

اقدام­‌های گروه­‌های تروریستی مانند داعش در سوریه و عراق به تهدیدی جدی علیه کشورهای منطقه تبدیل شده است. بنابراین دولت‌های عراق و سوریه به­‌عنوان قربانیان این اقدام‌­ها از ایران جهت مقابله با انجام عملیات نظامی علیه گروه‌های تروریستی درخواست کمک نموده‌اند. اگرچه کنوانسیون‌های ضدتروریسم راهکارهای حقوقی مناسبی جهت مقابله با اقدام­‌های تروریستی از طریق دستگیری و مجازات متهمان و یا استرداد آن‌ها را فراهم نموده، اما فعالیت­‌های گروه‌هایی مانند داعش در عراق و سوریه از آن دسته اقدام­‌های تروریستی موردی و پراکنده نیست که بتوان با آن از طریق روش‌های مسالمت­‌آمیز و راهکارهای قضایی مندرج در معاهده­‌های ضدتروریسم مقابله نمود. بنابراین دولت‌های قربانی تروریسم تحت شرایطی می‌توانند بر اساس ماده 51 منشور ملل متحد در مقابل این­‌گونه حملات مسلحانه با توسل به زور از خود دفاع نمایند. اقدام­‌های نظامی ایران در سوریه و عراق که بنا به دعوت و با هماهنگی دولت‌های یادشده انجام گرفته، با حق دفاع مشروع جمعی مندرج در ماده 51 منشور منطبق است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Legal Analysis of Iran,s Military Actions to Oppose Terrorism in Syria and Iraq

نویسنده [English]

  • Siamak Karamzadeh
Assistant Professor of Law Department, Shahed University
چکیده [English]

The actions of terrorist groups such as ISIS in Syria and Iraq have become a serious threat to the countries in the region. Therefore, the Iraqi and Syrian governments as sufferers of these actions have demanded assistance from Iran to launch military operations against terrorist groups. Although anti-terrorism conventions have provided appropriate legal approaches to counteract terrorist actions through arresting and punishing the culprits or their extradition, the actions of groups such as ISIS in Iraq and Syria are not case-based and dispersed terrorist actions that could be contended through the peaceful methods and judicial solutions contained in the anti-terrorism treaties. Consequently, the victim governments of terrorism under the conditions of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter can defend themselves against such armed attacks by use of force. Iran's military actions in Syria and Iraq, which performed due to the invitation of and in harmony with the above-mentioned governments, are in accordance with the right of collective defense contained in Article 51 of the mentioned Charter.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Terrorism
  • resort to force
  • legitimate defense
  • anti-terrorism treaties

مراجع

  1.  الف. منابع فارسی

    1. کرم­‌زاده سیامک، (1382)، تروریزم و دفاع مشروع در حقوق بین­‌الملل، نشریه مدرس، دوره 7، شماره 1.

    2. کرم­‌زاده، سیامک، (1381)، کنوانسیون‌های ضدتروریزم و مسئله صلاحیت دولت‌ها در تعقیب و مجازات متهمان به ارتکاب اعمال تروریستی، نامه مفید، سال هشتم، شماره 33.

    3. بابایی، غلامرضا، (1377)، فرهنگ روابط بین­الملل، چاپ دوم، وزارت امور خارجه، تهران.

     

    ب. منابع انگلیسی

    1. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (DRC v Uganda), [2005] 6. ICJ Rep 16
    2. Asli Bali, (2002), Stretching the Limits of International Law: The Challenge of Terrorism”, ILSA J. Int`l & Comp L. Vol.8
    3. Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activations in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. USA) (Merits), [1986] ICJ Reports 14
    4. Cassese A., (2001), Terrorism is Also Disputing Some Crucial Legal – Categories of International Law” EJIL, Vol.12, No. 5
    5. Chalk P, (1996), Western European Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism: The Evolving Dynamic, McMillan Press Ltd.
    6. Charter of the United Nations, 1945, 9 International Legislation 327, 332 (M.o.Hudson (ed.).
    7. Corfu Channel (UK v Albania) (Merits) [1949] ICJ Rep 4
    8. Dinstein Y, (2001), War, Aggression and Self-Defense, 3rd edition.
    9. Emanuel Gross, (2001), Legal Aspects of Tackling Terrorism: The Balance Between the Right of a Democracy to Defend Itself and the Protection of Human Rights, UCLA J. Int. L & Foreign Aff. Vol. 6
    10. Eric Rosand, (2003), Security Council Resolution 1373, Counter-Terrorism Committee and the Fight against Terrorism, Am.J.Int`l L. Vol. 97
    11. G.A.Res.42/159; 17 UN. Doc. A/RES/42/159 (Dec.7, 1987)
    12. GA.Res.3034 (XXVII), UN. GAOR, 27th Sess., UN. Doc. A/RES/3034(XXVII) (Dec.18, 1972).
    13. Gill, Terry D, (2003), The Eleventh of September and the Right of Self-Defense, in “Terrorism and the Military International; Legal Implications”, edited by Wybo P. Heere.
    14. Gray, Christine, (2003), International Law, First Edition, Malcolm D. Evans, Oxford University Press
    15. Green, Richard and Nick Thompson, ISIS: Everything you need to know about the group, 16 August, 2016, available at: www.edition.cnn.com
    16. Greenwood G, (2002), International Law and the War against Terrorism”, International Affairs, Vol. 78.
    17. Holzgrefe J. L, & Keohane R. O, (2003), Humanitarian Intervention; Ethical, Legal and Political Dilemmas, Edited Cambridge University Press
    18. International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, (1998), 37 ILM 249.
    19. International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, 2000, 39 ILM 270.
    20. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Advisory Opinion) [2004] ICJ Rep 136
    21. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) [1996] ICJ Rep 226
    22. Letter from Daniel Webster, U.S. Secretary of State, to Lord Ashburton, (Aug. 6, 1842), in 4 Treaties and other International Acts of the United States of America at 454,455, (Hunter Miller ed. 1934).
    23. Lietzau William K, (2002), Combating Terrorism: Law Enforcement or War?, in Terrorism and International Law: Challenges and Responses, edited by Michael N. Schmitt.
    24. McLien I. and McMillan, A., (2009), Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics,
    25. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, (Nicaragua v USA) (Merits) [1986] ICJ Rep 14.
    26. Oil Platform (Iran v USA), [2003] ICJ Rep 161
    27. Paust J.J, (1986), Responding Lawfully to International Terrorism: the Use of Force Abroad”, Whittier Law Review, Vol. 8
    28. S. C. Res. 1378 (Nov. 14, 2001)
    29. S. C. Res. 1390(Jan. 20, 2002)
    30. S.C. Res. 1383(Dec. 6, 2001)
    31. S.C. Res. 1386(Dec. 20, 2001)
    32. S.C.Res.1566, UN. Doc. S/RES/ Oct. 8, 2004
    33. Schijver N, (2001), Responding to International Terrorism: Moving the Frontiers of International Law for Infinite Justice, NILR, Vol. 48, No. 3; www.asil.org, Attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon”, Comments by Kirgis et al.
    34. Schmid Alex P, (1997), The Problem of Defining Terrorism, in Encyclopedia of World Terrorism 12, 12 (Martha Crenshaw 7 John Pinlott eds,)
    35. Schmitt, Michael, (2002), Deconstructing October 7th: A Case Study in the Lawfulness of Counterterrorist Military Operations, in “Terrorism and International Law: Challenges and Responses”, edited by Michael N. Schmitt
    36. Security Council Resolution 1368, 40 ILM 1277(2001)
    37. Stilets H. L, (1987), Something Special in the Air and on the Ground: the Potential for Unlimited Liability of International Air Carriers for Terrorist attacks under the Warsaw Convention and its Revisions,” JALC Vol. 53
    38. The 1937 Geneva Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism, League of Nations. Off. J. 23, (1938).
    39. UN Security Council Resolution 1373, 40 ILM 1278, (2001).
    40. What ISIS really wants, 20 March, (2015), available at: www.theatlantic.com

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار