CoE Report opposes Collective Action to Protect People and Unilateral Military Invasion/Occupation

While killings, arrests and censorship of dissidents are reportedly going on, after Libya, now also on Syria, shortly before next week's G-8 Heads of States/Governments meet at Deauville's Summit, organized by the French G8/G20 2011 Presidency (26-27 May), a strategic and topical CoE resolution setting for the 1st time crystal-clear guiding principles to distinguish between legitimate Multilateral International Action to protect People threatened by brutal, deadly violence/torture in certain states, (as f.ex. Libya, etc), and, on the contrary, illegal Unilateral or bilateral mlitary invasions/occupations against independent, sovereign countries often resultig even in war crimes including f.ex. "ethnic cleansing" with systematic replacement of its lawful, ancestral inhavitants, obliged to flee, by massive imports of immigrants transferred from an occypying foreign power, (as, f.ex. in Cyprus), will be soon debated in public and definitively adopted by the PanEuropean Organization's Parliamentary Assembly (PACE), probably on Autumn 2011, unless PACE's Bureau (which convenes next week in Kiev, Ukraine) decides to bring it earlier on the Agenda of the next Plenary in Strasbourg on June, the Director of PACE competent Legal/Human Rights Committee, Andrew Drzemczewski, told "EuroFora".

The landmark Report, drafted by German Liberal Marina Schuster, (from the Governing coalition of ChristianDemocrats/Liberals) and adopted "Unanimously" by PACE's Legal/Human Rights Committee, earlier in Strasbourg, as his President, the experienced EPP MEP Christos Pourgourides from Cyprus, told "EuroFora", stresses from the outset that :  - "a Multilateral approach to the Responsibility to Protect" innocent People must "replace .. Arbitrary Interventions and Unilateral guarantees" by only 1 or 2 Foreign States alone.  

- "If a State is Unwilling or Unable to halt or avert Serious Harm to the Population, the principle of non-intervention yields to the International Responsibiliy to  Protect" seriously threatened People, the 2011 Strasbourg's CoE Assembly Report topically underlines now, observing that "the International Community as a whole" has a "Responsibility to Protect" , giving "priority" to "Prevention", by "the least obtrusive and coercive Measures", but including an adequate kind of "Military Intervention for Human Protection purposes", in "exceptional" cases of "Serious and Irreparable Harm" occuring to Human beings or "imminently likely to occur", in the form of a Large scale Loss of Life"," and/or "large scale "Ethnic Cleansing", as UNO's General Assembly at New York had reportedly proclamed already in a 2005 Resolution.

But, CoE's New Report strongly Criticizes arbitrary "Military Interventions such as those of Turkey to Cyprus in 1974", f.ex., which "have themselves  led to numerous Human Rights Violations, and have Not produced lasting Solutions for the underlying problems", obviously abusing of controversial "Bilateral Guarantees; such as those in the context of the independence of Cyprus", which "have not prevented Conflicts", but, "on the contrary, ...were used as an Excuse for an Unilateral Military Intervention, conflicting wih ... UN Charter and a preremptory Norm of International Law Prohibiting the use of Force".

On the contrary, CoE's 2011 Report calls to "Strengthen Multilateralism, as opposed to "Unilateral Military Intervention by Turkey in 1974", and welcomes the "development of the notion of a Collective "Responsibility to Protect", ... taking the place of Bi-lateral ... "Guarantees", that are becoming ...Osbolete", and "No longer in line with a Modern understanding of Public International Law", which "requires" a "Multilateral Mandate, preferably based on a UN Security Council Resolution... in order to justiify a Humanitarian Intervention", (f.ex. as in the landmark case of UN SC 2011 Resolution which authorized the use selective Military action in Libya in order to protect dissident People from imminent threats to be attacked, wounded, and/or killed and submitted,  in "only a matter of 2 Days" to "finish" with them, as Colonel Guaddafi reportedly had boasted.

The International Operation of March 2011 in Libya, due to protect Libyan People without any Foreign Occupation of any territory, was launched on the base of UN SC Resolution No 1973 and after a Multilateral EU-USA/Canada-Arab Ligue-UNO Summit in Paris with the manifold participation of many Countries, (See "EuroFora"s NewsReport from the spot). On the contrary, the Turkish 1974 Military Invasion and Occupation of Cyprus' northern Territories (still Occupied by more than 40.000 Solders of Ankara's Army until today) was launched Unilaterally by Turkey alone, arguying of a controversial interpretation of a dubious 1960 "Treaty of Guarantees", that CoE's 2011 Report denounces as "obsolete" (See infra), while UNO adopted several Resolutions denouncing the move and asking the withdrawal of Turkish troops, the free and safe return of Refugees/IDPs, etc., which were rejected by Ankara.

- According to the CoE's Official, "this Report will probably be debated and voted by PACE's  Standing Committee next November in Edinburg", i.e. under the forthcoming,  CoE Chairmanship (November 2011 - May 2012), as he said to "EuroFora". But, replying to our questions, Drzemczewski didn't exclude that this might also be done a little bit earlier, end September - beginning of October, during the Strasbourg's PACE Plenary full session, i.e. under the current Ukranian CoE Chairmanship, if PACE's Bureau decides so during the Summer.

However, theoretically (as well as legally) speaking, if a Political usefulness and will exists,  this could be done even much more Earlier : at PACE's June plenary session in Strasbourg, if next Friday's PACE Bureau and Standing Committee, who will meet in Kiev (Ukraine) practically the Same Days with the Deaville (France) G-8 Heads of State/Government Summit : 26-27 May, decides to update accordingly June's Agenda. Even if such a move seems not impossible, but improbable according to Drzemczewski.
------------------------------------
Turkish MEPs were reportedly absent when the German MEP's Report was adopted by PACE's competent Committee, (apparently due to a visit at the CoE in Strasbourg by Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, followed by receptions, gatherings, etc), so that they are expected to react, later-on, and attempt to oppose or alter its original text, which, however, was supported by almost all other Countries' MEPS.

Because, contrary to Ankara Military's unilateral intervention and persisting Occupation of the Northern part of Cyprus for  more than 37 Years (1974-2011), CoE's Report reminds "the Primary Responsibility of the UN Security Council (UNSC), whose Authorization should be sought Prior to any Military Intervention". It doesn't remind the "appeal" of a 2001 "International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignity" (ICISS) towards "the Permanent Members of the UNSC Not to apply ther Veto powers to Obstruct ... Resolutionw authorizing Mlitary Interventons  for Humanitarian Protection purposes", but only when "there is otherwise a Strong Majority Support", warning the UNSC that, "if it fails to discharge its Responsibility to Protect in Consience-Sgocking Situations crying out for action, ... the Stature and Credibility of the UN may suffer thereby".

But, while the ICISS' conclusions, in sich cases, apparently "left the door open to Regional or sub-Regional Organisations, (as CoE or EU, etc), under Chapter VII of the UN Charter to take (Collective) Action" by a Large Majority of States (See supra), subject to their seeking subsequent Authorisation from the Council", on the contrary, the UN General Assembly's 2006 Resolution (See supra) while "confirming the Principle of the "Responsibility to Protect" ... of the International Community as a whole", f.ex. in "situations" of "War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing, Genocide, and Crimes against Humanity", nevertheless, "it does not answer the Question what shall be done in the absence of a Common position of the UNSC, and Rejects any right to Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention", Schuster's 2011 Report observes.

A clear Disctinction between lawful and legitimate Collective Action, on the base of an International Mandate, really focused into trying to Save People from Serious Threats against their Lifes and Liberty, (as, f.ex. at the beginning of the Libyan 2011 International Operation, which has avoided any Territorial Occupation, unlike Turkey in Cyprus, etc), is today of great Topicalimportance, both because of the Dramatic Developments in several 3rd Mediterranean Countries, from Libya to Syria, etc., but also  in order to create a real Hope for a sustainable and just Solution of the Cyprus' issue, for which UNO's Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has just convoked a new Top Political meeting in Geneva on July :

- The point is, indeed, one of the most Crucial for Cyprus' ReUnification (in addition also to the Refugees and "Missing" persons' Human Rights' rescpet), because Turkey traditionally insists to claim a Unilateral power to Invade with its Army Cyprus whenever Ankara's authorities alone might deem necessary for their interests to do so, (f.ex. exploiting a provoked conflict, etc), while, on the contrary, Cyprus' President Demetres Christofias, (as he had already explained in Reply to "EuroFora" co-founder's Question in a Press Conference at the CoE back on 2008), as well as all the other Political Leaders among the Majority Population of Greek Cypriots, refuse to allow again a Risk for more Turkish Military Invasions/Occupations even in the Future, considering the way Ankara abused of such Controversial "Guarantee" clauses in the Past...

Indeed, CoE's 2011 New Report, as drafted by the mainstream German MEP and recently adopted by PACE's Legal/Human Rights Committee (See supra), strongly denounces the fact that, from teh start, in the Past, "Cyprus independence" (back in 1960) was "linked to an Outdated Trilateral (Turkey-UK-Greece) Guarantee arrangement", that Ankara abused in 1974 as an "Excuse" in order to Invade and Occupy part of Cyprus until Today, resulting to Massive and Serious Human Rights Violations (Thousands of "Missing" People, 20% of the Native Population Refugees/IDP, etc), chronic Tensions and Problems, both at the region and vis a vis the CoE, the EU itself and even to the detriment of EU - NATO cooperation (mainly because of Turkey's "Veto" against Cyprus and Malta, etc : Comp. supra).

Thus, today,  "we have already seen that a Multilateral Mandate, preferably based on a UNSC Resolution (as in the case of Libya, on March 2011), is required in order to justify a Humanitarian Intervention. The Cautious Exceptions advocated by the ICISS (see Supra) in case of Blockade in the UNSC would still require, at least, the Support of a Regional Organisation", (such as the CoE or the EU, the Arab Ligue, etc), so that "it may, therefore, be Safely argued that Unilateral Interventions, or ones based on Bi-, Tri-, or Quadri-lateral "Guarantee" Agreements could No longer be in line with a Modern understanding of Public International Law", concludes Schuster's Report.

- "The example of Cyprus s a case in point", she observes. "As Professor Herdegen noted, at a (CoE's) Hearing in December 2010, the continuation of the Validity of the 1960 "Treaty of Guarantees" for Cyprus is Doubtful", Today, "as it may have become Inoperative, according to the Principle of .. "Disappearance of the Substantive Circumstances on which a Treaty was based" ("Wegfall der GeschaftsGrundlage"), "or because os a material Breach, by one party to the agreement", because of "the Unilateral Military Intervention by Turkey" since 1974, the German MEP points out.

 - "In fact, the (old, 1960) Treaty of Guarantees" on Cyprus "could be considered as Void", CoE's Report points out, for several more reasons : Both "in line with the aboe arguments by Profeshesor Herdegen, (see Supra), and as it appears in Conflict with  Articles 2(4) and 103 of the UN Charter, and a preremptory Norm of Internatioal Law  Prohibiting the use of Force".  

- "All Members shall refrain in their International Relations from the Threat or use of Force against the Territorial  Integrity or Political Independence of any State", according to UN Charter's Article 2(4), observes the mainstream German MEP, concluding that " a Treaty which purported to authorize Military Action in such Broad terms, .. irrespective of whether the (affected State) party consented (or not) to such action at the time, would, quite likely, be held Contrary  to a Peremptory Norm of International Law ("Jus Cogens"), as the Prohibition to use Force contrary too Article 2(4) of the (UN) Charter", and, therefore, would "be Void under the Principle stated in Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties". "It would also be rendered Ineffective by Article 103 of the UN Charter, which stresses that "in the event of a Conflict between the Obligations of UN Members under its Charter, and their Obligations under any Other International Agreement", then, "their obligations under the (UN) Charter shall prevail", Schuster added. Moreover, "in any case, (simple) Treaty-based instruments such as the Treaty of Guarantees (on Cyprus : See supra), are Displaced by any Intervention of the UN Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter", she also pointed out, (as, f.ex., the currently on-going Peace-Keeping international operation by UNO's "Blue Helmets" in the Dividing line)...

=> Therefore, PACE Legal/Human Rights Committee's 2011 Report topically concludes that the 1960 controversial "Treaty of Guarantees" imposed on Cyprus' has become Today (in 2011) "Obsolete", thus, apparently, opening a  key-door to forthcoming Top Political UN-sponsored Talks after the May 22 and June 12 Parliamentary Elections in Cyprus and Turkey, respectively.

***