DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ

Ceren Zeynep PİRİM (Galatasaray Üniversitesi, Hukuk Fakültesi, Milletlerarası Hukuk Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul, Türkiye)
Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi
20 2
Yıl: 2019 Cilt: 0 Sayı: 40 Sayfa Aralığı: 245 - 303 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 13-11-2020

DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ

Öz:
BM Şartı’nın 51. maddesi devletlerekarşı gerçekleştirilen silâhlı saldırılara karşımeşru müdafaa hakkının doğacağını hükmebağlamakta ancak hakkın doğmasınasebebiyet verecek saldırıların faillerininkimler olması gerektiği sorusuna yanıtvermemektedir. 21. yüzyıla kadar yalnızcadevletlere atfedilebilen silâhlı saldırılara karşımeşru müdafaa hakkını düzenlediği şeklindeyorumlanan 51. maddenin, özellikle 11 Eylülsaldırılarının ardından, sınır aşan teröristfaaliyetler ile mücadele edilebilmesi içinyenilikçi ve dinamik bir biçimde yorumlanmasıönerilmiş ve bir devletin ülkesi üzerindenbaşka devletlere saldıran terörist gruplara karşıda meşru müdafaa hakkının bulunduğununkabul edilmesi gerektiği yönünde görüşlergeliştirilmiştir. Bu çerçevede, devlet dışısilâhlı grupların ve düzensiz birliklerin,konuşlandıkları devletin ülkesi üzerindenüçüncü bir devlete karşı gerçekleştirdiklerişiddet eylemlerinin ülke devletine atfedilebilirolmadığı durumlarda saldırıya uğrayandevletin meşru müdafaa hakkının bulunupbulunmadığı meselesi devletleri ve uluslararasıhukukçuları ikiye bölmüş durumdadır.Makale, uluslararası hukuk doktrininin,içtihadın ve devlet uygulamalarının devletlereatfedilemeyen silâhlı eylemlere karşımeşru müdafaa hakkı tanıyıp tanımadığınıincelemekte ve sınır ötesi operasyon olarak daadlandırılan meşru müdafaa hakkının bu özelgörünümünün hukukî zeminini tartışmaktadır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Self-Defence in Response to Attacks by Non-State Actors: The Legal Basis of Cross-Border Operations in International Law

Öz:
Article 51 of the UN Charter provides that states against which an armed attack is committed have an inherent right of self-defence but does not mention the identity of the perpartrators of the attack that would give rise to the right of selfdefence. In this context, the doctrine is divided as to whether an attack by non-state actors is the kind of armed attack that allows a state to exercise its right of self-defence by using armed force. Indeed, Article 51 which was narrowly interpreted until the 21th century has started, following the 9/11, to be subject to a more innovative and dynamic interpretation that suggests to recognize the right of self-defence against armed activities committed by non-state actors. This paper analyzes whether the international law doctrine, the jurisprudence and state practice provides a right to self-defence against attacks which are not imputable to a state and discusses the legal basis of cross-border operations which constitute a specific form of selfdefence.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Akande Dapo & Lieflander Thomas, “Clarifying Necessity, Imminence, and Proportionality in the Law of Self-Defense, American Journal of International Law, 2013, Vol. 107, ss. 563-570.
  • Akutay Sercan Semih & Ateş Davut, “Türkiye’nin Sınır Ötesi Operasyonlarının Hukuki Çerçevesi”, Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 2013, Cilt XVII, Sayı 3, ss. 109-146.
  • Antonopoulos Constantine, “Force by Armed Groups as Armed Attack and the Broadening of Self-Defence”, Netherlands International Law Review, 2008, Vol. 55, ss. 159-180.
  • Banks William C. & Criddle Evan J., “Customary Constraints on the Use of Force: Article 51 with an American Accent”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2016, Vol. 29, ss. 67-93.
  • Bethlehem Daniel, “Self-Defense Against An Imminent or Actual Armed Attack by Non-State Actors”, American Journal of International Law, 2012, Vol. 106, ss. 770-777.
  • Brownlie Ian, “International Law and the Activities of Armed Bands”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1958, Vol. 7, no: 4, ss. 712-735.
  • Buergenthal Thomas & Murphy Sean D., Public International Law, West Group, 2002.
  • Cassese Antonio, “Terrorism is Also Disrupting Some Crucial Legal Categories of International Law”, European Journal of International Law, 2001, Vol. 12, no: 5, ss. 993-1001.
  • Cenic Sonja, “State Responsibility and Self-Defence in International Law Post 9/11: Has the Scope of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter Been Widened as a Result of the US Response to 9/11?”, Australian International Law Journal, 2007, Vol. 14, ss. 201-216.
  • Christakis Theodore, “‘Unwilling or Unable’ Test” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 17-20.
  • Condorelli Luigi, “A propos de l’attaque américaine contre l’Iraq du 26 juin 1993”, European Journal of International Law, 1994, Vol. 5, ss. 134-144.
  • Corten Olivier, “Has Practice Led to an ‘Agreement Between the Parties’ Regarding the Interpretation of Article 51 of the UN Charter?” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 14-20.
  • Corten Olivier, “The ‘Unwilling or Unable’ Test: Has it Been, and Could it be, Accepted?”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2016, Vol. 29, ss. 777-799.
  • Couzigou Irène, “The Right to Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors – Criteria of the ‘Unwilling or Unable’ Test” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 47-49.
  • Çetinkaya Lokman B., Safe Zone. A Response to Large-Scale Refugee Outflows and Human Suffering, Springer, 2017.
  • Deeks Ashley S., “‘Unwilling or Unable’: Toward a Normative Framework for Extraterritorial Self-Defence”, Virginia Journal of International Law, 2012, Vol. 52, ss. 483-550.
  • Dinstein Yoram, War, Aggression and Self-Defence, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
  • Farer Tom J., “Beyond the Charter Frame: Unilateralism or Condominium?”, American Journal of International Law, 2002, Vol. 96, ss. 359-364.
  • Feder Norman Menachem, “Reading the U.N. Charter Connotatively: Toward a New Definition of Armed Attack”, New York University Journal of International Law & Politics, 1987, Vol. 19, ss. 395-432.
  • Feinstein Barry A., “A Paradigm for the Analysis of the Legality of the Use of Armed Force against Terrorists and States that Aid and Abet Them”, The Transnational Lawyer, 2004, Vol. 17, ss. 51-81.
  • Franck Thomas M., “Terrorism and the Right of Self-Defence”, American Journal of International Law, 2001, Vol. 95, no: 4, ss. 839-843.
  • Frigessi di Rattalma Marco, “War in Afghanistan, Self-Defence and Questions of Attribution of the September 11 Attacks to the Afghan-Taliban Regime”, Italian Yearbook of International Law, 2003, Vol. 13, ss. 59-75.
  • Frowein Jochen Abr., “Article 51 and the Realities of the Present Day World” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 42-43.
  • Gazzini Tarcisio, “A Response to Amos Guiora: Pre-Emptive Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors?”, Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 2008, Vol. 13, ss. 25-32.
  • Gazzini Tarcisio, The Changing Rules on the Use of Force in International Law, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2005.
  • Gray Christine, International Law and the Use of Force, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008.
  • Gray Christine, “The Use of Force and the International Legal Order” in Malcolm D. Evans (ed.), International Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014, ss. 618-648.
  • Hartwig Matthias, “Which State’s Territory May be Used for Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors?” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self- Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 39-41.
  • Heinze Eric A., “The Evolution of International Law in Light of the ‘Global War on Terror’”, Review of International Studies, 2011, Vol. 37, ss. 1069-1094.
  • Henkin Louis, “Use of Force: Law and US Policy” in Henkin Louis et al., Right v. Might: International Law and the Use of Force, 1991, ss. 37-69.
  • Hovell Devika, “Chinks in the Armour: International Law, Terrorism and the Use of Force”, University of New South Wales Law Journal, 2004, Vol. 27, no: 2, ss. 398-427.
  • Jinks Derek, “State Responsibility for the Acts of Private Armed Groups”, Chicago Journal of International Law, 2003, Vol. 4, no: 1, ss. 83-95.
  • Kammerhofer Jörg, “The Armed Activities Case and Non-State Actors in Self- Defence Law”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2007, Vol. 20, ss. 89-113.
  • Kammerhofer Jörg, “International Legal Theory. Introduction: The Future of Restrictivist Scholarship on the Use of Force”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2016, Vol. 29, ss. 13-18.
  • Kawagishi Shin, “Clearing Uncertainties of the Jurisprudence of the ICJ on Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 24-27.
  • Keinan Guy, “Humanising the Right of Self-Defence” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 50-52.
  • Kelsen Hans, Law of the United Nations, New York, Frederick A. Praeger, 1950.
  • Koh Harold Hongju, “The Spirit of the Laws”, Harvard International Law Journal, 2002, Vol. 43, no: 1, ss. 23-39.
  • Kretzmer David, “The Inherent Right to Self-Defence and Proportionality in Jus Ad Bellum”, European Journal of International Law, 2013, Vol. 24, no: 1, ss. 235-282.
  • Kreß, Claus, “Some Reflections on the International Legal Framework Governing Transnational Armed Conflicts”, Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 2010, Vol. 15, ss. 245-274.
  • Kritsiotis Dino, “The Legality of the 1993 US Missile Strike on Iraq and the Right of Self-Defence in International Law”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 1996, Vol. 45, ss. 162-177.
  • Kuran Selami & Gür Hande, “Devlet-Dışı Aktörlere Karşı Meşru Müdafaada ‘İsteksiz veya Âciz’ Doktrini: Suriye ve DAEŞ Örneği”, Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2017, Cilt 23, Sayı 1, ss. 57-88.
  • Lobel Jules, “The Use of Force to Respond to Terrorist Attacks: The Bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan”, Yale Journal of International Law, 1999, Vol. 24, Issue 2, ss. 537-557.
  • Lo Giacco Letizia, “Reconsidering the Legal Basis for Military Actions Against Non-State Actors” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 32-34.
  • Maogoto Jackson Nyamuya, “War on the Enemy: Self Defence and State- Sponsored Terrorism”, Melbourne Journal of International Law, 2003, Vol. 4, ss. 406-438.
  • Michael Brent, “Responding to Attacks by Non-State Actors: The Attribution Requirement of Self-Defence”, Australian International Law Journal, 2009, Vol. 16, ss. 133-159.
  • Murphy Sean D., “Protean Jus Ad Bellum”, Berkeley Journal of International Law, 2009, Vol. 27, Issue 1, ss. 22-52.
  • Murphy Sean D., “Self-Defense and the Israeli Wall Advisory Opinion: An Ipse Dixit from the ICJ?”, American Journal of International Law, 2005, Vol. 99, no: 1, ss. 62-76.
  • Myjer Eric P. J. & White Nigel D., “The Twin Towers Attack: An Unlimited Right to Self-Defense?”, Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 2002, Vol. 7, no: 1, ss. 5-17.
  • O’Connell Mary Ellen, “Lawful Self-Defense to Terrorism”, University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 2002, Vol. 63, ss. 889-908.
  • Oellers-Frahm Karin, “Article 51-What Matters is the Armed Attack, not the Attacker” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non- State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 44-46.
  • Öktem Emre, “Uluslararası Hukukta Terörizm: Tanım Sorunu ve Milli Bağımsızlık Hareketleri”, İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Dergisi, 2004, Sayı 5, ss. 133-147.
  • Österdahl Inger, “Scarcely Reconcilable with the UN Charter” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 21-23.
  • Paddeu Federica, “Use of Force against Non-state Actors and the Circumstance Precluding Wrongfulness of Self-Defence”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2017, Vol. 30, ss. 93-115.
  • Paust Jordan J., “Use of Armed Force against Terrorists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Beyond”, Cornell International Law Journal, 2002, Vol. 35, ss. 533-557.
  • Peters Anne, “The Turkish Operation in Afrin (Syria) and the Silence of the Lambs”, EJIL: Talk!, 30 Ocak 2018.
  • Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian, “Editors Introduction: Self-Defence in Times of Transition” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 3-13.
  • Ratner Steven R., “Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello After September 11”, American Journal of International Law, 2002, Vol. 96, ss. 905-921.
  • Reisman Michael W., “The Raid on Baghdad: Some Reflections on Its Lawfulness and Implications”, European Journal of International Law, 1994, Vol. 5, ss. 120-133.
  • Rostow Nicholas, “Before and After: The Changed UN Response to Terorism since September 11th”, Cornell International Law Journal, 2001, Vol. 35, ss. 475-490.
  • Ruys Tom, ‘ Armed Attack’ and Article 51 of the UN Charter: Evolutions in Customary Law and Practice, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2010.
  • Ruys Tom, “Quo Vadit Jus ad Bellum?: A Legal Analysis of Turkey’s Military Operations Against the PKK in Northern Iraq”, Melbourne Journal of International Law, 2008, Vol. 9, ss. 334-364.
  • Ruys Tom & Verhoeven Sten, “Attacks by Private Actors and the Right of Self- Defence”, Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 2005, Vol. 10, no: 3, ss. 289-320.
  • Schachter Oscar, “In Defense of International Rules on the Use of Force”, The University of Chicago Law Review, 1986, Vol. 53, ss. 113-146.
  • Simma Bruno & Mosler Hermann & Randelshofer Albrecht & Tomuschat Christian & Wolfrum Rüdiger (eds.), The Charter of the United Nations. A Commentary, 2002, Vol. I, 2nd edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  • Sjöstedt Britta, “Applying the Unable / Unwilling State Doctrine - Can a State Be Unable to Take Action?” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self- Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 35-38.
  • Stahn Carsten, ““Nicaragua is Dead, Long Live Nicaragua” - The Right to Self- Defence under Art. 51 UN- Charter and lnternational Terrorism” in Walter Christian, Vöneky Silja, Röben Volker, Schorkopf Frank (eds.), Terrorism as a Challange in National and International Law: Security versus Liberty?, Heidelberg, Springer, 2004, ss. 827-878.
  • Tams Christian J., “Embracing the Uncertainty of Old: Armed Attacks by Non- State Actors Prior to 9/11” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self- Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 53-56.
  • Tams Christian J., “Light Treatment of a Complex Problem: The Law of Self- Defence in the Wall Case”, European Journal of International Law, 2005, Vol. 16, no: 5, ss. 963-978.
  • Tams Christian J., “The Use of Force Against Terrorists”, European Journal of International Law, 2009, Vol. 20, no:2, ss. 359-397.
  • Taşdemir Fatma & Özer Adem, “Kuvvet Kullanma Hukuku Açısından Fırat Kalkanı Operasyonu”, Akademik Hassasiyetler Dergisi, 2017, Cilt 4, Sayı 7, ss. 53-70.
  • Terzioğlu Süleyman Sırrı, “Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Fırat Kalkanı Harekâtının Meşruluğu Sorunu”, Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, 2018, Sayı 134, ss. 587-638.
  • Topal Ahmet Hamdi, Uluslararası Hukukta Devlet Destekli Terörizme Karşı Kuvvet Kullanma, Doktora Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Kamu Hukuku Anabilim Dalı, 2004.
  • Trapp Kimberley N., “Back to Basics: Necessity, Proportionality, and the Right of Self-Defence Against Non-State Terrorist Actors”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2007, Vol. 56, ss. 141-156.
  • Travalio Greg & Altenburg John, “Terrorism, State Responsibility, and the Use of Military Force”, Chicago Journal of International Law, 2003, Vol. 4, ss. 97-119.
  • Tsagourias Nicholas, “Self-Defence against Non-state Actors: The Interaction between Self-Defence as a Primary Rule and Self-Defence as a Secondary Rule”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2016, Vol. 29, ss. 801-825.
  • Urs Priya, “Effective Territorial Control by Non-State Armed Groups and the Right of Self-Defence” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 28-31.
  • Van Steenberghe Raphaël, “Self-Defence in Response to Attacks by Non-state Actors in the Light of Recent State Practice: A Step Forward?”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2010, Vol. 23, ss. 183-208.
  • Van Steenberghe Raphaël, “The Law of Self-Defence and the New Argumentative Landscape on the Expansionists’ Side”, Leiden Journal of International Law, 2016, Vol. 29, ss. 43-65.
  • Wedgwood Ruth, “Responding to Terrorism: The Strikes Against Bin Laden”, Yale Journal of International Law, 1999, Vol. 24, ss. 559-576.
  • Wittich Stephan, “The Use of Force, Self-defence and the Unrealism in International Law”, Austrian Review of International and European Law, 2009, Vol. 14, ss. 79-99.
  • Wood Michael, “Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors-A Practitioner’s View” in Peters Anne & Marxsen Christian (eds.) Self-Defence Against Non- State Actors: Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War, MPIL Research Paper Series No. 2017-07, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, ss. 65-67.
  • Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2005, s. 168.
  • Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1986, s. 14.
  • Case Concerning Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Merits, ICJ Reports 2003, s. 161.
  • Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 2004, s. 136.
  • Prosecutor v. Duško Tadic, ICTY Appeals Chamber, Case no: IT-94-1-A, 15 July 1999.
  • Prosecutor v. Duško Tadic, ICTY Trial Chamber, Decision on the Defence Motion on Jurisdiction, 10 August 1995.
  • The Corfu Channel Case, Merits, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1949, s. 4.
  • Draft Security Council Resolution of 30 October 1956, UN Doc. S/3710
  • General Assembly Resolution 26/25 (XXV), Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations
  • Security Council Resolution of 31 December 1968, UN Doc. S/RES/262
  • Security Council Resolution of 28 July 1969, UN Doc. S/RES/268
  • Security Council Resolution of 23 October 1972, UN Doc. S/RES/321
  • Security Council Resolution of 22 November 1972, UN Doc. S/RES/322
  • Security Council Resolution of 15 August 1973, UN Doc S/RES/337
  • Security Council Official Records, 31st Year, 1940th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.1940, 1976
  • Security Council Resolution of 31 March 1976, UN Doc. S/RES/387
  • Security Council Resolution of 6 May 1978, UN Doc. S/RES/428
  • Security Council Resolution of 8 March 1979, UN Doc. S/RES/445
  • Security Council Resolution of 28 March 1979, UN Doc. S/RES/447
  • Security Council Resolution of 2 November 1979, UN Doc. S/RES/454
  • Security Council Resolution of 27 June 1980, UN Doc. S/RES/475
  • Security Council Resolution of 20 December 1983, UN Doc. S/RES/545
  • Security Council Resolution of 6 January 1984, UN Doc. S/RES/546
  • Security Council Resolution of 20 June 1985, UN Doc. S/RES/567
  • Security Council Resolution of 21 June 1985, UN Doc. S/RES/568
  • Security Council Resolution of 4 October 1985, UN Doc. S/RES/573
  • Security Council Draft Resolution of 6 February 1986, S/17796.Rev.1
  • Security Council Resolution of 12 September 2001, UN Doc. S/RES/1368
  • Security Council Resolution of 28 September 2001, UN Doc. S/RES/1373
  • UN Doc. A/RES/41/38
  • UN Doc. S/1997/461
  • UN Doc. S/23141
  • UN Doc. S/23152
  • UN Doc. S/1995/605
  • UN Doc. S/1996/479
  • UN Doc. S/1997/7
  • UN Doc. S/1997/552
  • UN Doc. S/2001/946
  • UN Doc. S/2014/695
  • UN Doc. S/2014/440
  • UN Doc. S/2014/691
  • UN Doc. S/2002/854
  • UN Doc. S/2002/1012/Annex
  • UN Doc. S/2015/221
  • UN Doc S/PV.4836
  • UN Doc. S/PV.5489
  • UN Doc. S/PV.5493
  • UN Doc. S/2015/563
  • UN Doc. S/2018/53
APA Pirim C (2019). DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. , 245 - 303.
Chicago Pirim Ceren Zeynep DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. (2019): 245 - 303.
MLA Pirim Ceren Zeynep DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. , 2019, ss.245 - 303.
AMA Pirim C DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. . 2019; 245 - 303.
Vancouver Pirim C DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. . 2019; 245 - 303.
IEEE Pirim C "DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ." , ss.245 - 303, 2019.
ISNAD Pirim, Ceren Zeynep. "DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ". (2019), 245-303.
APA Pirim C (2019). DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, 0(40), 245 - 303.
Chicago Pirim Ceren Zeynep DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi 0, no.40 (2019): 245 - 303.
MLA Pirim Ceren Zeynep DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, vol.0, no.40, 2019, ss.245 - 303.
AMA Pirim C DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi. 2019; 0(40): 245 - 303.
Vancouver Pirim C DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ. Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi. 2019; 0(40): 245 - 303.
IEEE Pirim C "DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ." Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, 0, ss.245 - 303, 2019.
ISNAD Pirim, Ceren Zeynep. "DEVLETLERE ATFEDİLEMEYEN SİLÂHLI SALDIRILARA KARŞI MEŞRU MÜDAFAA: ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SINIR ÖTESİ OPERASYONUN HUKUKÎ ZEMİNİ". Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi 40 (2019), 245-303.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
17-04-2024 17:4

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları