Obligation to Bring an End to the Brach of the Rule Prohibiting Use of Chemical Weapons in the Light of Law of International Responsibility

The most recent reactions of States to the use chemical weapon in Syria, whether in the form of institutional co-operation, for example, measures set forth in UNSC Resolutions 2118 dated September 27, 2013, 2209 dated March 2015 and 2235 dated August 7, 2015, or individual reactions, including the US response to the use of chemical weapons in Khan Shaykhun suggests the obligations arising under Article 41 of the draft Articles of 2001 International Law Commission, following a breach obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law. Therefore, this paper seeks to answer the fundamental questions whether the rule in question is acceptable as a peremptory norm of general international law. A positive answer to this question will lead to questions about how to respond to the breach. According to the criteria set out in the report of International Law Commission reporter of 2017, the aforementioned rule has made its way to the top of international law norms, but practice of States in reacting the breach of the rule shows that any reaction to its violation must conform the relevant legal framework and using legitimate means.