Cenap Çakmak

Review and Analysis

One could infer many conclusions from the evolution of international criminal law as surveyed earlier. However, the following are highlights and should not be considered representative or reflective of the full picture: The study of the history of international criminal law clearly demonstrates that all components of the international community, including nation-states, always showed interest in establishing strong, concrete institutions and mechanisms for the general purpose of ensuring the prosecution and punishment of criminals who had committed what were deemed to be crimes under international law and the particular purpose of creating a permanent international penal tribunal with universal jurisdiction to address preventing the commission of the aforementioned types of crimes or, in the case of their commission, punishing the perpetrators.

Turkish–Syrian relations in the wake of the Syrian conflict: back to securitization?

Abstract This paper analyses the bilateral relations between Turkey and Syria since the breakout of the popular uprising in 2011, with particular reference to a securitization–desecuritization framework. The author inquires whether Turkish policymakers have securitized the Syrian civil war and framed it in security-laden discourse in the time period under review. Turkey extended strong support to the demonstrations and invested efforts towards a regime change. Assad’s response was unfriendly. Both the Assad regime’s policy vis-à-vis Turkey and the repercussions of the civil war in Syria posed serious threats to Turkish national security. However, based on the analysis of official statements by Turkish authorities during the crisis, the author argues that Turkey avoided framing the Syrian refugee crisis in security terms, whereas border violations, such as the downing of a military aircraft by Syrian regime forces, were defined as threats to national security. The paper further discusses the reasons for Turkey’s selective approach to issues concerning bilateral relations with Syria.

Statehood, Autonomy, or Unitary Coexistence? A Comparative Analysis of How Kurdish Groups Approach the Idea of Self-Determination

Self-determination still remains a vague and controversial term in both international legal scholarship and the political science literature. Attributed either a fairly negative or positive connotation, the concept, for this reason, suffers from analytical inadequacy in the academic discussions. Proponents, from either a moralistic or legalistic perspective, often tend to view it as an absolute and inherent right that particularly ethnic minorities can and should exercise. Opponents, on the other hand, are of the opinion that the notion, in fact, refers to a very ambiguous legal and political framework that it cannot serve as a basis for any nationalist or ethnic aspirations for full or partial independence, autonomy, or further recognition as a separate entity within a certain political sphere of authority. These two extreme approaches have so far been raised in both popular and academic debates in the case of the political rights of the Kurds, including the right to self-determination. A denialist rhetoric (which sometimes even amounts to the level of assimilationism) suggests that the Kurds may not become eligible, under international law, to have a separate state of their own, or that they should not be recognized certain political rights as a separate political group. A pro-Kurdish view, however, underlines that the Kurds, for the sake of being a political group (either minority, people or even a nation), have the inherent indispensable right regardless of the political hurdles emanating from the intricacy of the interstate relations or regional affairs. This study seeks to investigate how the notion of self-determination has been used or framed by pro-Kurdish groups in their political discourses. As part of a comparative analysis, the paper is focused on how three major Kurdish groups or political movements have employed a discourse of self-determination to achieve their political goals, and tries to identify the conditions under which different political claims have been made. I, for this purpose, analyze how pro-Barzani groups and entities (including himself, and the Kurdistan Regional Government in general), the pro-Ocalan groups (including the PKK, HDP and YPG), and the Kurdish Islamist groups view the idea of self-determination to shed light on their political vision. A pro-Kurdish agenda may be attentive to the attainment of one of the three political outcomes: an independent state, political autonomy as either a minority or a constituent of the state, or greater recognition of group rights. The study investigates which group exercised a discourse of self-determination for which political outcome and under what conditions.

Traveling along Sword’s Edge: Germany’s Ambivalence between Protecting Civil Rights of Muslim Communities and Fighting Terror

This chapter begins with an overview of contemporary counterterrorism (CT) policies in Germany. The general focus in CT has been on domestic elements up to 2001; but Germany has shifted its attention from domestic level to global terrorism since the September 11, 2001 (the infamous 9/11 attacks). The primary reason for Germany’s eagerness to wage a war against Islamist fundamentalism is the belief that there were many Islamist extremists in situation in and across Germany and they were believed to be enjoying the liberal environment and extensive rights and freedoms, which facilitated al-Qaeda’s attacks on 9/11. A discussion is made of the change in the direction of CT policies in Germany and the current outlook in the field of CT more generally. The chapter moves forward by presenting an analysis of Germany’s activism in its fight against global terrorism. Unlike the country’s Cold War and post–Cold War period stance, Germany adopted an ambitious position to address growing threats posed by terrorism beyond the domestic and regional levels. In the period since the 2000s, Germany has demonstrated unprecedented activism in the domain of CT. This activism involves at least five main strategies: (1) identifying and prosecuting terrorists; (2) dealing with social, economic, and cultural causes of terrorism; (3) assisting other countries facing a danger of collapse and failure; (4) reliance on the EU for multilateral legitimization; and (5) addressing radicalization and extremism processes in fight of terrorism. Addressing these strategies also requires taking into consideration the way Muslim communities in Germany are affected by growing CT measures. Germany is known for broad constitutional and legal rights recognized for both citizens and foreigners, and for its subscription to human rights mechanisms. However, unlike the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK), Muslims in Germany have expressed feelings of alienation despite having been able to exercise their rights. Muslim communities who failed to integrate within German society and feel part of the German social and political life, despite recognition of their rights and freedoms, were further alienated by the shifted attention to Islamist extremism and concrete measures to deal with so-called Islamist terrorism. Germany’s response to global terrorism and to the root causes of terrorism in domestic level includes some cliche and predictable strategies that suggest a flawed CT strategy. It is observed that this strategy failed to consider the sensitivities of Muslim peoples in Germany. The situation has become quite delicate with a growing number of German people expressing the view that tolerance towards Muslims, via recognition of their rights under German laws, contributed to the increased activities of Muslim radicals; on the other hand, reliance on CT measures that could offend Muslims would not properly address the problem.

The Period Between World War II and the End of the Cold War

The world’s failure to introduce satisfying remedies to prevent future atrocities such as those committed during World War I could surely be considered one of the leading contributors to the deaths, enormous in amount and horrifying in type that occurred during World War II. It could be argued that if some effective measure had been taken in the immediate aftermath of World War I, there would have been no appalling massacres such as the Holocaust as late as the 1940s, when the world was much more civilized in many respects but equally ignorant of large-scale crimes committed against the human race.

Negotiations at the Rome Conference

The discussions at Rome Conference revolved around three major issues and aspects that were relevant to the future court. The first was the issue of trigger mechanism and the court’s jurisdiction, which was closely related to the fairness and effectiveness of the future court in that if the states or the UN Security Council had been given determinative roles in submitting cases before the Court, it would have been an “alibi” court. Most issues that were relevant to the issue of jurisdiction had already been resolved even before the inauguration of the conference.

The Rome Conference

The decision, made at the end of the process by which an ad hoc committee and six preparatory committee meetings had been held, to convene a multilateral conference to discuss the issue of creating an International Criminal Court (ICC) with a permanent seat and inherent power to address the most egregious crimes was surely a huge success. Yet, at the outset of the conference, a number of unresolved issues still caused a great deal of skepticism over the prospect of the court as envisioned by the civil society actors.

Global Civil Society and the ICC

The codification of international treaties pertinent to such areas as human rights, environmental problems, poverty, and women’s rights are quite appropriate for a better and larger involvement of civil activist groups. The contribution of NGOs, social movement organizations, religious groups, etc., might sometimes be substantial in the cases where the aforementioned issues are discussed, as those issues are very sensitive, and directly related to human beings; thus draw significant attention and a growing interest from the peoples of the world.

Prior to World War I

Over the past 500 years, the global community has sought numerous ways to address the most serious crimes that concerned and equally horrified the whole world. Bassiouni even argues that there is evidence of a tribunal that held individuals responsible for war crimes in Greece in 405 BC. Schabas joins this view, saying, “War criminals have been prosecuted at least since the time of ancient Greece, and probably well before that.” Others also refer to similar examples from ancient China, India, and Japan. Therefore, it could be argued that the world has always shown an interest in and a desire for a superior judicial body with the power to address the most heinous crimes, given that such crimes have always been committed.

The ICC Versus National Sovereignty: Analyzing ICC’s Performance as a Legal and Political Institution

One of the most debated issues concerning the International Criminal Court (ICC) is that whether it constitutes a major threat to the international system that is based on the principle of national sovereignty. Relevant to this is also that whether the Court will be able to succeed to implement its mandate, given that states would strongly seek to retain their sovereign authority. Therefore, as one observer puts it clearly, “perhaps the central issue facing the ICC is its effect on sovereignty.”