header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
20 April 2018 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 7789 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Is it lawful to bomb Syria?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7789_bindman

Geoffrey Bindman searches for a legal justification for the recent attack by the US, Britain & France on Syria

Maintaining the authority of international law has often seemed a vain hope in a world riven by conflict between the most powerful nation states. The worldwide agreement after the Second World War to settle disputes peacefully and through legal processes was a remarkable achievement but the Syrian catastrophe is only the latest of its many failures. Yet the need to uphold the rule of law remains as great as ever and we can be grateful that our politicians for the most part still feel the need to seek legal backing for their actions. Is there a legal justification for the recent attack by the US, Britain and France on Syria?

The United Nations Charter is a founding document of modern international law and its provisions are binding on all nation states. It prohibits the use of force by states except when authorised by the UN Security Council or in self-defence. Self-defence legitimises

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll