Rereading the Sovereignty Paradox and Intervention in Modern International Law (Case Study: The Syrian Crisis)

Sovereignty is a fundamental and consolidating element in the formation and continuation of modern nation-states in international relations. This concept, over time, has undergone a substantial transformation in such a way that in the contemporary period, absolute sovereignty has become a relative sovereignty with responsibility. In this context, the original and common concept of intervention and its relationship with sovereignty in international law has also undergone new changes. So, by a narrow interpretation of sovereignty, some concepts such as Humanitarian Intervention and the Response to Protect doctrine (R2P) have appeared in international law. Meanwhile, crises in some states such as Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc., with the confrontation of multiple regional and supra-regional powers interests, the paradox of sovereignty and intervention in new international law has become more apparent. Hence, this article attempts to examine the question of how contemporary international law has responded to the paradox of sovereignty and intervention. Therefore, the purpose of this study, which are presented in a descriptive-analytical manner using library and Internet documents is to examine the approach and rules of current international law in the relationship between sovereignty and intervention. The findings of this study show that in the light of international communications and the formation of collective human conscience and increasing responsibility of states, especially under the influence of global cyber conscience, the restriction of sovereignty in favor of intervention has been strengthened and joint sovereignty among nation-states and transnational actors in line with the interests of the great powers has been appeared.