In the wake of the downfall of
Syria’s Assad in December, 2024, that he had used chemical weapons against
civilians in rebel areas against international law not only means that the victors
of the coup would have ready access to chemical stockpiles, but also justifies other
governments in breaking Syria’s national sovereignty by bombing the locations at
which the noxious chemicals were being stored. This does not justify, however,
governments hostile to Syria invading the country and destroying its military.
Otherwise, the norm could be established, as valid, that any time there is a coup
in a country, it is “open season” (a hunting expression) for any government in
the world to snatch up territory and destroy the military. Although absolute
sovereignty, which ignores international law, is too much, presuming a country with
a new government to be valid prey goes too far in the other direction. I
contend that both absolutist and nullified national sovereignty are contrary to
the interests of the whole—the global order—wherein the protection of human
rights (and thus international law) is in the interest of humanity especially
given the horrendous destructiveness that a government can have against its own
people and other countries in the nuclear age.
The full essay is at "Israel Invades Syria Preemptively."
