The crime of aggression is a very serious crime because of its serious effects on the fundamental values and interests of peoples and States as a whole and of the aggressor in particular. These are the interests that the international community is trying to protect and which are not protected by international humanitarian law. This crime is one of the most important problems confronting the world, criminal and legal bodies, because there is no clear and explicit definition of it. Of the whole international community, which aspires to establish security and tranquility among the peoples of the world in a time free of murder, displacement and fear, and to deal with international crises and conflicts through dialogue and understanding by peaceful means, rather than resorting to wars.
The acts carried out by the Turkish armed forces and its terrorist groups against the Afrin region are a crime of aggression against the people and the Syrian State and a real threat to world peace. This aggression is a grave danger and a grave threat not only to the Afrin region but to the international community as a whole. Is an international crime and an illegal act in accordance with international conventions, resolutions and conventions, and the Charter of the United Nations
Article III of the United Nations General Assembly resolution referred to in its special section on the definition of aggression to be considered an act of aggression, any of the following acts:
- Invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or any military occupation, whether temporary or partial, whether by force, which is currently occurring in Afrin.
- Bombing by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State, whatever its size, type or strength, or the use of any other similar weapons, such as the use of long-range artillery, rocket launchers or airfields. This occurred during the attack on Afrin.
- The sending of armed gangs, groups or mercenaries from one State in order to commit acts of armed force against another State, to incite the revolution, to provoke sedition, strikes, racial ostracism, and terrorist groups accompanying the Turkish army is proof of that.
Accordingly, the use of the armed forces acquires legal legitimacy, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and general international law, in only three cases and the other becomes aggression: in the case of legitimate defense, in the case of armed struggle for the right of peoples to self-determination, Armed force at the request of the United Nations or one of its organs.
The first paragraph of article VI of the London Agreement of 8 August 1945 on crimes against peace – including the crime of aggression – was defined as international crimes, article 5 of the Tokyo Regulations, as well as the General Assembly of the United Nations at its first session Article II, paragraph 4, of the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court, adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries, was also considered as an international crime and was supported by the International Law Commission as defined in article 5 (d)
Article 1 of the United Nations General Assembly resolution defines aggression as the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty or territorial integrity, political independence of another State or in any manner contrary to the Charter of the United Nations
Article II of the Draft Technicians for Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind defines it as: any act of aggression, including the use by the State authorities of an armed force against another State for purposes other than national or collective national defense, or the implementation of a decision or application of a recommendation of a competent organ of the United Nations.
The crime of war is one of the most serious and most serious crimes against world peace because of the real impact of this peace because of its negative effects on the aggressor State and the international community as a whole. But also criminalized acts prior to their occurrence, such as preparation, and propaganda, as confirmed by UN resolution (73/33) of 15/12/1978, where it said (the war of aggression and planning and preparation for it and the beginning thereof , Crimes against peace are prohibited by law International
The Turkish and Turkish forces have carried out attacks against Syria, through the use by the Turkish state of its armed forces against the Syrian state of Afrin – the essence of the aggression – and its air and ground assaults with heavy weapons and aircraft, along with thousands of military mercenaries organized in Turkey with the aim of attacking and invading the territory. Where civilians and civilian objects were shelled by bombs, cannons, rockets and internationally banned chlorine gas, villages, humanitarian facilities and places of worship were shelled, out of the principles of public international law, It violated the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the Syrian state and violated the civil, intellectual and religious rights of civilians in Afrin because of its desire to achieve political and strategic interests and considerations, to exploit the natural resources of the region of Afrin, or to obtain benefits Economic concessions, or imposing demands on them in Syria.
And the availability of a moral pillar also for the crime of Turkish aggression on Afrin. The war of aggression is a deliberate crime in which the moral element takes the form of criminal intent. The intended purpose is the general purpose only. The general purpose consists of knowledge and will – knowledge of the elements of the crime and a will to achieve its material or acceptance The Turkish leaders learned of the elements of the crime they had committed, and learned that they were violating the sovereignty of a state with independent rule, and that their aggression was a violation of the territorial integrity and political independence of the Syrian state, and turned their will towards achieving the desired ends of this exercise The criminal intent, whatever the motive for the commission of the crime, has no effect on the existence of the criminal intent, whether honest: that is, to achieve the interests of the abused State, whether bad or evil, such as the purpose Revenge or greed or political political interest, and this was the emulator of the Turkish leaders and their goals.
It should be stressed that aggression cannot be justified by Turkish states on the pretext of protecting the borders, maintaining their national security or wishing to return Syrian refugees to Syria and settling them in the area of Afrin, or under the pretext of the presence of units of protection of the Syrian people, Note that these units did not commit a mistake, even a small right of the Turkish state throughout its presence on the Turkish border for several years, and did not infringe on its interests or armed forces days.
Article 5 of the United Nations General Assembly resolution referred to in its special section on aggression states that: “No justification whatsoever shall be justified for aggression, political, economic, military or otherwise. The war of aggression is a crime against world peace. And the legal formula for any regional gains or other gains resulting from aggression cannot be recognized.
According to the Nuremberg Rules and Regulations, the war of aggression applies only to senior officers, chiefs of staff, high ranking military officers, senior state officials who carry out the State’s foreign, military and internal policy, and every officer with planning authority such as the head of state, the prime minister and members of state ministries. Their decisions are aware of the criminal project of the war of aggression, which was done by the Prime Minister of Turkey (Recep Tayyip Erdogan) during the war and assault on the territory of Afrin through supervision, planning and implementation, and according to Article VI of the regulation (Nuremberg) This does not preclude accountability Jinn.
The launching of an aggressive war is a great international crime, but it is the mother of crimes. Therefore, whoever administers that war, whether military or civilian, whether military, administrative or economic, is punished, whether it is instigator, interference, organizer, the general plan is in the stage of preparation and organization or in the stage of war, and there is no difference then that they are followers of the aggressor state or its accomplices. Therefore, the perpetrators of the war of aggression must be punished against Afrin with the maximum penalties, because they produced destruction, destruction and massacres. The punishment and punishment shall be a deterrent to any person who pleads for committing such crimes in the future. The Turkish State shall pay the financial compensation to the families of the civilian victims and the civil liability for the damages suffered by the people in the region of Afrin as a result of the commission of the crime. Its members for the crime of aggression and aggression with all will, determination and science.
The international community should shoulder its moral responsibilities at the very least and ensure cooperation in order to help the victims of the aggression in the Afrin region and to confront the Turkish state and demand that the occupation be stopped immediately and deterred so as not to commit further grave violations against civilians there. The international community to prevent international participation and the formation of an impartial international commission to investigate and investigate the causes of the Turkish aggression and the consequences of this illegal aggression. The Committee should submit its report to the Security Council and the General Assembly. The UN Security Council must also work seriously to strengthen international security in accordance with concrete criteria and means, to avoid further resort to war without convincing reasons and to have a more robust mechanism to combat Wars and the avoidance of peoples and civilians
Legal Office of the Syrian Democratic Forces