On justifying military intervention in Syria
in The Norman Geras Reader
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This is a short article which was originally published on 'Normblog' in 2013. Geras here speaks of how Washington and other Western powers, including Britain, were considering military action against Syria on account of the regime's apparent use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians. The article focuses on three types of issues that are centrally involved in the debate whether such action be justified: whether there is a basis in international law for military intervention; whether it is likely to do any good; and whether it might be merited in any case on retributive grounds.

The Norman Geras Reader

‘What’s there is there’

Editors: Ben Cohen and Eve Garrard

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 14 14 7
Full Text Views 0 0 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0