FOR the past five months, President Bashar Assad has engaged in a vengeful suppression of those Syrians demonstrating for the right to participate in Syria's transition to democracy. The president has, from time to time, offered promises of reform, but he has failed to follow through. The escalating violence of the past few weeks against his own people, with more recent events in Latakia that much more concerning, has left hundreds dead and heightened the need for more decisive and bold moves by the international community.

Unfortunately, the statement earlier this month by the United Nations Security Council condemning Assad's actions was a weakly worded outcome of months of deliberation and discussion while the Syrian people paid the price. The statement is so much less desirable than a resolution because it is not backed by any definitive action. It holds no party to account and, as we have seen since, has held no influence on Assad's reactionary violence against his own people.

The same kind of watered down condemnation was issued by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon with the same impunity. It is said these pusillanimous efforts by UN policy-makers are a result of the ongoing and inconclusive results of the intervention in Libya, but we should not let events in Libya cast a shadow on international resolve to put the safety and security of civilians first. In the historical push and pull between sovereignty as a right and as a responsibility, now is the time to firm up the emerging norm that is expressed by the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. The overt and calculated use of violence against the peaceful demonstrations is a crime against humanity and should be treated as such.

As usual, Russia and China appear to be the most vocal opponents to any foreign intervention in the Syrian case but, as noted in The Economist last week, a growing chorus of regional condemnation from the likes of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and even the Arab League should give them enough to ease their recalcitrance.

Given the prolonged military intervention in Libya, some hesitation is understandable, if not defensible, but it should not be used as an excuse to stand idly by while thousands of civilians put their lives at risk in the name of democracy.

Syria can become the opportunity where means beyond intervention are used to get the message through that sovereignty is not inviolable, and leaders who commit war crimes must pay the price.

It is time to use another tool in the arsenal of protecting people. Hillary Clinton has condemned the actions of the Syrian government and, along with human rights groups, called for the EU to apply strict sanctions on Syria's oil. In addition to heightened diplomatic pressure, it is time that requests are made by countries like Canada to the Security Council for full investigation of the Assad regime, which may lead to indictments of war crimes under the Rome Statute.

Initiating an investigation through the International Criminal Court in Syria now would create a powerful incentive for Assad to refrain from further repression and to participate in a meaningful dialogue towards greater democratization. It would also serve to validate the actions of the Syrian people who continue to valiantly face adversity and repression.

To this point, the indictment of violent leaders has previously demonstrated the ability to influence official behaviour, in both those who are being investigated, as well as those who surround them who then must decide for themselves if it is in their best interests to hang on to a sinking ship.

We saw this most clearly with Slobodan Milosevic in 1999 in Serbia, as well as Charles Taylor in Liberia in 2003. Even Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, who appears to have committed himself to fighting through to the bitter end, lost legitimacy with various senior officials as international pressure was applied.

The matter has already been referred to the chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, but as Syria has not ratified the Rome Statute, the ICC will require a referral by the Security Council. To date, international action pertaining to Syria has primarily taken the form of independently determined sanctions by both the United States and the EU, and a more unified effort is clearly past due.

The UN's mandate is to ensure international peace and security, but it is merely politics within the Security Council that is placing fetters on its ability to do so and has allowed for such an unsatisfactory outcome this week. Despots assume their power is absolute, but like Egypt's Hosni Mubarak is experiencing right now, they shall eventually learn real power comes from the people. The International Criminal Court must be brought into play before the massacres continue.

The article was published in Winnipeg Free Press on August 20, 2011

By Civilitas honorary board member Lloyd Axworthy. Mr. Axworthy is a former minister of foreign affairs and currently president of the University of Winnipeg.