scholarly journals Humanitarian intervention and the protection of civilian populations

2009 ◽  
Vol 61 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 7-35
Author(s):  
Isiaka Badmus
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Vulnerable Populations ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Human Security ◽  
The State ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Classical Approach ◽  
Critical Question ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
State Relations

The author interrogates the critical question of whether forcible humanitarian intervention be legitimised in spite of clear contradiction to the classical norms of inter-state relations. Classical approach puts emphasize on the principle of sovereignty when governments become the perpetrators of human rights abuses of their citizens, or if states have collapsed into civil war, chaos, and disorder. The author examines this security debate by juxtaposing the age-old doctrine of humanitarian intervention vis-?-vis the imperatives of the concept of ' Responsibility to Protect'. The author argues that humanitarian intervention, due to the ambiguities and controversies surrounding its application, has become an anachronism, which ultimately led to the conceptualisation of Responsibility to Protect vulnerable populations. This approach is based on its concerns with human security as against that of the state and its relevance as arbiter to the longstanding discord between sovereignty and intervention.

A Model Humanitarian Intervention? Reassessing NATO's Libya Campaign

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan J. Kuperman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Regime Change ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Weapons Proliferation ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Nato Intervention

NATO's 2011 humanitarian military intervention in Libya has been hailed as a model for implementing the emerging norm of the responsibility to protect (R2P), on grounds that it prevented an impending bloodbath in Benghazi and facilitated the ouster of Libya's oppressive ruler, Muammar al-Qaddafi, who had targeted peaceful civilian protesters. Before the international community embraces such conclusions, however, a more rigorous assessment of the net humanitarian impact of NATO intervention in Libya is warranted. The conventional narrative is flawed in its portrayal of both the nature of the violence in Libya prior to the intervention and NATO's eventual objective of regime change. An examination of the course of violence in Libya before and after NATO's action shows that the intervention backfired. The intervention extended the war's duration about sixfold; increased its death toll approximately seven to ten times; and exacerbated human rights abuses, humanitarian suffering, Islamic radicalism, and weapons proliferation in Libya and its neighbors. If it is a “model intervention,” as senior NATO officials claim, it is a model of failure. Implementation of R2P must be reformed to address these unintended negative consequences and the dynamics underlying them. Only then will R2P be able to achieve its noble objectives.

Part VI Human Rights and General International Law, Ch.34 The Use of International Force to Prevent or Halt Atrocities: From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thakur Ramesh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Political Understanding ◽  
Historical Origins

This article examines the history of the use of international force for preventing atrocities and human rights abuses. It analyses the concept of humanitarian intervention in the context of the historical origins of sovereignty and the reasons behind the shift to the use of the term responsibility to protect (R2P). It evaluates the progress of R2P from its unanimous endorsement in 2005 to its implementation in Libya in 2011. This article also discusses the role of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in implementing R2P and the General Assembly in refining the concept and building political understanding and support for the norm.

Humanitarian Intervention

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Caplan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Real Effect ◽  
General Decline ◽  
Humanitarian Crises ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Way

States – Western ones, at least – have given increased weight to human rights and humanitarian norms as matters of international concern, with the authorization of legally binding enforcement measures to tackle humanitarian crises under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. These concerns were also developed outside the UN Security Council framework, following Tony Blair’s Chicago speech and the contemporaneous NATO action over Kosovo. This gave rise to international commissions and resulted, among other things, in the emergence of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) doctrine. The adoption of this doctrine coincided with a period in which there appeared to be a general decline in mass atrocities. Yet R2P had little real effect – it cannot be shown to have caused the fall in mass atrocities, only to have echoed it. Thus, the promise of R2P and an age of humanitarianism failed to emerge, even if the way was paved for future development.

Humanitarian Intervention and Non-Ideal Theory

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramon Das
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Ideal Theory ◽  
Military Power ◽  
Moral Integrity ◽  
Philosophical Debate ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Target State ◽  
Target States

This chapter argues that the philosophical debate around humanitarian intervention would be improved if it were less ‘ideal-theoretic’. It identifies two ideal-theoretic assumptions. One, in target states where humanitarian intervention is being considered, there are two distinct and easily identified groups: ‘bad guys’ committing serious human rights abuses, and innocent civilians against whom the abuses are being committed. Two, external to the target state in question, there are suitably qualified ‘good guys’—prospective interveners who possess both the requisite military power and moral integrity. If the assumptions hold, the prospects for successful humanitarian intervention are much greater. As a contrast, some possible non-ideal assumptions are that (i) there are many bad guys in a civil war, and (ii) the good guy intervener is itself supporting some of the bad guys. If these non-ideal assumptions hold, prospects for successful humanitarian intervention are small.

Human (In)Security

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Hayes
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
National Security ◽  
Human Security ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Significant Challenge ◽  
Humanitarian Crises ◽  
Privileged Status ◽  
Heated Debate ◽  
The Cold War

The 1990s was host to a range of conflicts emerging from weak or failed states. These conflicts typically involved significant humanitarian crises and widespread human rights abuses. Within this changing global environment, new security thinking started to engage “people” as the referent of security, moving away from the previous privileged status granted to the state as the only referent of security. The end of the Cold War enabled the human security paradigm to provide a significant challenge to the primacy of the state in security thinking. On the other hand, human security has been subject to much criticism and there has been heated debate over its applicability within the security agenda. This chapter argues that despite earlier concerns over its efficacy, human security has made inroads into security thinking and is mutually reinforcing to national security.

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Responses from Southeast Asia

2019 ◽  
pp. 17-42
Author(s):  
See Seng Tan
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
International Security ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
The State ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
A Charge

This chapter examines extant understandings of sovereignty as responsibility, beginning with the idea of sovereign responsibility as conceptualised by Francis Deng and his collaborators, who contend that sovereignty can no longer be seen as a protection against interference, but as a charge of responsibility where the state is accountable to both domestic and external constituencies. The understanding is foundational to the thinking behind the 2001 International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) report, which introduced the responsibility to protect (R2P) with the aim to popularise the concept of humanitarian intervention and democracy-restoring intervention. Since its endorsement by the United Nations, the R2P has evolved through efforts by the UN and others to enhance, operationalise as well as to implement it in actual crisis situations – with varying degrees of success and in some instances not without controversy. The chapter discusses the relevance of the sovereignty as responsibility idea to Southeast Asia. It also examines the existing academic and policy debate over the R2P and its relevance to international security and sovereign responsibility, as well as its ambivalent reception in Southeast Asia.

The Responsibility to Protect and Humanitarian Intervention in Africa

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Will ◽  
Global Peace ◽  
External Interventions

AbstractThis essay investigates the connection between humanitarian intervention and R2P within an historical, legal, and conceptual context. It challenges the widely held view that Africa lacks the capacity to intervene in areas of conflict and human rights violations, arguing instead that the continent possesses the will and instruments to protect human rights. The author notes that, while the UN Security Council retains the primary responsibility for promoting global peace and security, the R2P norm remains contested even within the UN. The ECOWAS interventions in Liberia and Sierra Leone in the 1990s were initially undertaken without UN approval, but were later sanctioned by the world body. These interventions undermined the idea of state sovereignty as independence from external interventions, which had previously constrained humanitarian missions in Africa. However, the essay argues that the R2P principle was boosted by the establishment of the International Criminal Court in 2002 to prosecute persons suspected of committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and/or genocide. In addition, the intervention clause in the AU's Constitutive Act of 2000 supports the R2P principle while prohibiting unilateral interventions. Notwithstanding these developments, the author notes that the AU and Africa's regional bodies still have a long way to go in translating the R2P doctrine into practice.

The Role of the United Nations, the African Union and Africa's Sub-Regional Organizations in Dealing with Africa's Human Rights Problems: Connecting Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect

2009 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
African Union ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
African Context ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis article examines the basis for humanitarian intervention (HI) in the United Nations Charter, the African Union (AU) Charter and in a number of African sub-regional institutions. It traces the historical development of HI and argues that, while the right to HI emerged more than 100 years ago, that right also emerges from the Genocide Convention. The article argues that this treaty connects HI to the developing norm of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and examines the extent to which R2P is garnering wider support around the world. It focuses on the UN, and the various AU and sub-regional institutions and instruments that sanction HI. It assesses whether intervention can be authorized even in the absence of a UN Security Council mandate and examines the principles, application and interrelationship of R2P and HI in the African context. It traces the use of these norms in Africa, including in the various sub-regional structures, and evaluates the AU's political will and capability to deal with conflict and human rights abuse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document