Killing and torture in Syria: why the German Federal Public Prosecutor charges Syrian officials with crimes against humanity rather than war crimes

Published: 13 November 2019  Authors: Stefan Talmon and Mary Lobo  DOI: 10.17176/20220122-161354-0

On 22 October 2019, the German Federal Public Prosecutor filed an indictment for crimes against humanity against two former members of Syria’s General Intelligence Directorate before the State Security Senate of the Higher Regional Court in Koblenz. This was the first time Syrian State officials were indicted before German courts for international crimes committed during the recent conflict in Syria. Previously, only members of the Islamic State and the Free Syrian Army had been indicted and were sentenced for committing or aiding the commission of war crimes. (more…)

Killing and torture in Syria: why the German Federal Public Prosecutor charges Syrian officials with crimes against humanity rather than war crimes Read More

Germany sides with India in Kashmir conflict

Published: 11 November 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220122-155946-0

The conflict over Kashmir dates back to August 1947 when the predominantly Hindu State of India and the Muslim State of Pakistan were created out of colonial British India. At the same time, the paramountcy of the British Crown over the princely states of the Indian subcontinent and its treaty relations with them came to an end. The princely states were free to decide their own future. In October 1947, the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir with a majority Muslim population, but ruled by a Hindu maharajah, decided to accede to the Hindu-dominated Indian Union. In the run-up to the accession decision parts of the Muslim population of the state had revolted against the maharajah and a large force of Pakistani tribesmen had invaded Jammu and Kashmir and was moving on the state capital of Srinagar. It was at that moment that the maharajah decided to accede and appealed to India for assistance. On 27 October 1947, Indian troops landed in Srinagar and the first Indo-Pakistani war over Jammu and Kashmir ensued which ended only 27 July 1949 with the signing of a cease-fire agreement between the two States. The cease-fire line, which is also referred to as the “line of control” is supervised to the present day by the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP). India and Pakistan fought three more wars over Jammu and Kashmir in 1965, 1971 and 1999. In addition, since 1989 the state has witnessed an armed revolt against Indian rule which left tens of thousands dead and forced India to deploy hundreds of thousands of troops to the territory to quell it, making it one of the most militarized areas in the world.

(more…)

Germany sides with India in Kashmir conflict Read More

German-Syrian diplomatic relations in times of civil war: the realities of diplomacy

Published: 29 October 2019  Authors: Stefan Talmon and Julian Craven  DOI: 10.17176/20220122-160710-0

In March 2011, the Syrian civil war started with major unrest in Damascus and Aleppo. With the continuation and intensification of the conflict and the increasing violations by the Syrian Government under President Bashar al-Assad of international humanitarian law and human rights law, the relations between Germany and the Syrian Government deteriorated. On 7 February 2012, Germany expelled four employees of the Syrian embassy in Berlin for taking action in Germany against members of the Syrian opposition. In response to the massacre in the village of Houla on 25 May 2012, where 108 people, including 34 women and 49 children, were killed by Syrian troops and pro-government militias, Germany, together with Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States expelled the heads of the Syrian diplomatic mission in their country.

(more…)

German-Syrian diplomatic relations in times of civil war: the realities of diplomacy Read More

A roundabout way to say that the Turkish invasion of north-eastern Syria is illegal under international law

Published: 21 October 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-165616-0

In its ninth year, the armed conflict in Syria saw a new development. On 9 October 2019, Turkey launched a military incursion into north-eastern Syria, code-named “Operation Peace Spring”. The aim of the operation was to “counter the imminent terrorist threat” caused by the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) and its military wing, the People’s Protection Units (YPG), which Turkey considered to be the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). The PKK had been fighting for an independent Kurdish State since the 1980s and was listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States and the European Union. The “PKK/PYD/YPG” occupied large parts of Syrian territory along the border with Turkey and regularly carried out cross-border attacks on Turkish military posts and civilians. Turkey intended to establish a so-called “safe zone” extending some 32 kilometres into Syria along the 444 kilometre-long boundary between the two States in order to ensure Turkey’s border security and to liberate Syrians from the tyranny of terrorist organizations. Turkey which hosted some 3.6 million Syrian refugees also planned to re-settle up to 2 million of these refugees in that zone. (more…)

A roundabout way to say that the Turkish invasion of north-eastern Syria is illegal under international law Read More

The distinction in international law between “bearing responsibility” and “being responsible”

Published: 21 October 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-164144-0 

On 14 September 2019, a combined drone and cruise missile attack was carried out on Saudi Arabia’s Khurais oil field and Abquiq oil-processing plant. The attack briefly interrupted the supply of an estimated 5.7 million barrels of crude oil per day – around five per cent of global supply. The Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen which are engaged in an armed conflict with Saudi Arabia claimed responsibility for the attack on the facilities, but Saudi Arabia and the United States blamed the attack on Iraq which denied any involvement. In a letter to the United Nations, Saudi Arabia stated: “All preliminary signs and indicators reveal that this attack did not emanate from Yemeni lands as claimed by the terrorist Houthi militia, and that the weapons used were Iranian-made.” Saudi Arabia launched an investigation into who was responsible for the attack and invited United Nations and international experts to view the situation on the ground and to participate in the investigations. On 19 September 2019, a team of experts from the United Nations Sanctions Committees on Yemen arrived in Saudi Arabia to join the investigation. (more…)

The distinction in international law between “bearing responsibility” and “being responsible” Read More

Germany opposes Facebook’s Libra currency on grounds of State sovereignty

Published: 16 October 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-153522-0

On 18 June 2019, U.S. social media company Facebook announced plans for offering to its 2.4 billion users a new blockchain-based global digital currency called Libra in 2020. As a stabelcoin cryptocurrency, Libra is to be backed by traditional assets such a money deposits, short-term government securities or gold. (more…)

Germany opposes Facebook’s Libra currency on grounds of State sovereignty Read More

German Constitutional Court considers self-defence against non-State actors a tenable interpretation of Article 51 of the UN Charter

Published: 10 October 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-152926-0

In an Order, dated 17 September 2019, the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court dismissed as inadmissible an application brought by a parliamentary opposition group in the German Bundestag seeking a declaration that, by approving the deployment of German armed forces to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed by the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIL), the Federal Government and the Bundestag had violated the German Constitution. In its decision the Federal Constitutional Court also addressed the question of self-defence against non-State actors. (more…)

German Constitutional Court considers self-defence against non-State actors a tenable interpretation of Article 51 of the UN Charter Read More

Principles underpinning Germany’s delivery of humanitarian assistance

Published: 03 August 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-152124-0

Humanitarian assistance in case of crisis, conflict or disaster is an integral and defining part of German foreign policy. In 2012, the Federal Foreign Office published its first Strategy for Humanitarian Assistance Abroad (the “2012 Strategy”). Since then, the way humanitarian assistance is delivered has changed and developed further – not the least following the World Humanitarian Summit (WHS) held in Istanbul in May 2016. In June 2019, a new Strategy for Humanitarian Assistance Abroad 2019-2023 (the “2019 Strategy”) was issued which sets out the principles guiding Germany’s provision of humanitarian assistance as follows: (more…)

Principles underpinning Germany’s delivery of humanitarian assistance Read More

Germany becomes 13th party to Hong Kong Convention

Published: 02 August 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-151252-0

On 16 July 2019, Germany deposited its instrument of accession of the Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships with the IMO Secretary-General at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Headquarters in London, thus becoming the 13th party to the Convention. (more…)

Germany becomes 13th party to Hong Kong Convention Read More

Candidates nominated by Germany elected to serve on human rights bodies

Published: 29 June 2019  Author: Stefan Talmon  DOI: 10.17176/20220113-145237-0

In the second half of June 2019, several candidates nominated by Germany were elected to serve on various international human rights bodies.

United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

On 21 June 2019, the twenty-eighth meeting of the States Parties to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination elected Professor Mehrdad Payandeh, together with eight other candidates to serve on the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). Sixteen candidates had initially been nominated, and 14 finally stood for election for nine vacant positions. The Committee is a body of 18 “experts of high moral standing and acknowledged impartiality” that monitors implementation of the Convention. Germany has been a party to the Convention since 15 June 1969. There are currently 181 parties to the Convention. CERD members are elected for four-year terms, with half the members elected every two years. The new members will begin their terms of office on 19 January 2020. (more…)

Candidates nominated by Germany elected to serve on human rights bodies Read More