Syria and US Foreign Policy: The Constitutionalism of International Law in the Hermeneutics

Abstract

The fundamental principles of Customary International Constitutional Law are the bedrock of modern international law which has been adequately adumbrated in the schematization of the United Nations Charter that forms the constitutionalism of international geo-political order and law whereunder sovereign equality is a pervading paradigm of negotiating, mediating and conciliating international disputes and use of force is prohibited by one country against another country unless and until it is duly authorized by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) that too in the legitimate cases of self-defense. Ambition of few powerful nations cannot violate ambit of international law. In the present circumstances in Syria, the first option available to Obama administration is to secure the mandate of UN Security Council to intervene in Syrian crisis as UNSC mandated military intervention in Libya in 2011 against the then Qaddafi dictatorship but it was made possible by the mass human rights violations that evolved a world consensus for use of force in Libya. Nevertheless, Obama administration has been seriously calibrating its response under international law and beyond it to Syria’s chemical attack on civilian population that has really pandered to military action in the current situation. Moreover, the Syrian forces have not spared even the UN Inspectors who are currently in Syria to have the stock of the situation of gas attack on civilians.