The Conflict in Syria and the Failure of International Law to Protect People Globally: Mass Atrocities, Enforced Disappearance and Arbitrary Detentions by Jeremy Julian Sarkin (review)

Abstract

Mass atrocities are—unfortunately—a persistent tragedy in world politics. How to halt them and save human lives has been a pressing issue of scholarship and policy for a long time.1 The book under review sheds light on one such contemporary tragedy, namely lack of civilian protection in the ongoing Syrian War (2011 -) with particular reference to mass atrocities, enforced disappearance, and arbitrary detentions. A humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions, the Syrian War features immense intensity of fighting and levels of brutality against civilians, who have been—continuously—targets of both state and non-state violence. Since the inception of this war, more than half a million Syrians have been killed, more than 5 million have fled the country, and more than 6 million others have been internally displaced. Millions more Syrians have been injured and have suffered violations at the hands of multiple fighting parties in this war. The surviving Syrians have experienced a catalogue of horrors (in addition to those mentioned above)—such as sieges, starvation, torture, the use of chemical weapons, and other grave offences to human dignity—which have occurred on a widespread and systematic basis.2 As this tragedy has unfolded the world has watched on and done little to help the needy. What counts for this shocking failure in an institutional sense, and can there be responses to this human tragedy in ways that make a positive difference? This is the main consideration of the book under review. Jeremy Sarkin is not oblivious of the UN responses being offered with the view of halting the Syrian War. He pays detailed attention to institutional responses at various levels, from the UN Security Council to the UN General Assembly, to the Human Rights Council, to the High Commissioner for Human Rights, to the Geneva talks, to the Astana process.3 His findings are grim. Although steps have been taken to end this war, they have been completely inadequate. Both architecturally and methodologically, the UN has been ineffective in all respects, with dire consequences for hundreds of thousands of lives lost and millions of Syrians suffering at home or being uprooted abroad. This dark failure stands in stark contrast to the rhetoric of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) which has penetrated scholarly and policy discourses since 2005, when the principle of R2P was adopted by the UN General Assem-