The use of force in foreign territories has been contained in the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, with the authorisation of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, in ‘cases deemed legitimate by international law’ and where required by international treaties to which Turkey is a party. Yet Turkey's extraterritorial use of force against armed non-state actors lead to the most important question of identifying the circumstances under which the Turkish authorities have long justified military intervention in foreign territories. This article aims to assess whether Turkey's use of force and alleged extraterritorial self-defence contravenes international law. In order to address how Turkey interprets the right to use armed force and the right of self-defence, and to bring clarity to the state's approach to international law on the use of force (jus ad bellum), the article explores Turkey's practice based on the assessment of the Turkish military intervention in Syria, in line with both bilateral security or defence treaties to which Turkey is a party and the use of force in self-defence. The aim is to determine whether Turkey's justifications are compatible with the jus ad bellum criteria.

在外国领土上使用武力已包含在土耳其共和国宪法中，经土耳其大国民议会授权，在“国际法认为合法的情况下”以及土耳其加入的国际条约要求的情况下派对。然而，土耳其对非国家武装行为体的域外使用武力导致了最重要的问题，即确定土耳其当局长期以来为在外国领土上进行军事干预辩护的情况。本文旨在评估土耳其使用武力和所谓的域外自卫是否违反国际法。为了解决土耳其如何解释使用武力的权利和自卫权的问题，并阐明国家的立场”jus ad bellum），文章根据对土耳其军事干预叙利亚的评估，探讨了土耳其的做法，该做法符合土耳其加入的双边安全或国防条约以及使用武力进行自卫。目的是确定土耳其的理由是否符合诉诸战争权的标准。