Suchergebnisse

Forty million civilians were killed during wars between states and approximately 240 million civilians were murdered by their own governments during the 1900s. More than ever before, civilians are being illegally targeted by governments and rebel groups during armed conflict [6]. So, humanitarian intervention is created and is justified because the international community has a moral duty to protect common humanity and because there is a legal obligation, codified in international law, for states to intervene against large scale human rights abuses.

Cover -- Contents -- Introduction: Humanitarian Intervention in Contemporary International Relations -- The contemporary debate -- The end of history -- The rise of the 'international community' -- Globalization and the communication revolution -- Using this book -- PART I: CONCEPTS AND CONCEPTIONS -- 1 What is 'Humanitarian Intervention'? -- 'Humanitarian intervention', 'humanitarian action' and 'military action' -- Features of humanitarian intervention -- Conclusion -- 2 The Just War Tradition and Natural Law -- The central tenets -- The evolution of the Just War tradition -- Contemporary relevance -- Conclusion -- 3 The Sovereign State -- The evolution of the sovereign state -- Organized hypocrisy? -- Challenging the sovereign state in the contemporary era -- Conclusion -- 4 Theoretical Perspectives -- Realism -- Marxism/critical theory -- Liberalism -- The English School -- Cosmopolitanism -- Post-structuralism -- Conclusion -- PART II: CONTROVERSIES -- 5 International Law and Human Rights -- The evolution of international law -- State responsibility -- The legal status of humanitarian intervention -- 'Illegal but legitimate'? -- The need for legal reform -- Conclusion -- 6 The Responsibility to Protect -- The origins of the responsibility to protect -- International reception and evolution -- Challenging the responsibility to protect -- Conclusion -- 7 Who Decides? Authority and Legitimacy -- Legitimacy, authority, power and rights -- The UN Security Council -- Alternative authorities -- Conclusion -- 8 Motives and Means -- Motives -- Means -- Conclusion -- PART III: CASES -- 9 Humanitarian Intervention in History -- Humanitarian intervention: trends and changes -- The state and the evolution of humanitarian intervention -- Humanitarian intervention in historical context -- Conclusion: assessing the record -- 10 Rwanda.

Humanitarianism as a concept is arguably as old as humanity itself. To help one's fellow man in their time of need irrespective of race, religion, caste, or creed has been preached by innumerable ideologies. Despite being such a universally understood concept, in recent decades humanitarianism, has faced increased conflation with 'humanitarian intervention'. This paper seeks to discern the differences between humanitarianism and humanitarian intervention and will do so by examining the ideological and foundational differences between the two concepts. The two concepts despite sounding similar are fundamentally different; they involve different actors and have different objectives. This paper will distinguish between state and non- state actors and the different humanitarian roles, values, and interests they have. This paper will posit that states that engage in military interventions are not humanitarians and that the conflation of such actions with those of impartial non-state actors are highly damaging to the ideals and values of humanitarianism.

In this essay, I offer a utilitarian perspective on humanitarian
intervention. There is no generally accepted precise definition of the term
'humanitarian intervention'. I will provisionally, and roughly,
define humanitarian intervention as the use of force by a state, beyond its
own borders, that has as a purpose or an effect the protection of the human
rights of noncitizens or the reduction of the suffering of noncitizens.

Although the currently dominant concept of humanitarian intervention has a long history, it is also distinctive in several crucial respects. This article analyzes its nature, historical specificity and presuppositions. It argues that the concept of humanitarian intervention is logically unstable in the sense that it both presupposes and seeks to go beyond the statist manner of thinking which has dominated political life for the past three centuries. The article exposes the incoherence of the statist paradigm and concludes by arguing that, although humanitarian intervention is justified under certain circumstances, it is too limited, too late and too superficial to be of lasting value, and needs to be embedded in and undertaken as part of a larger project of creating a just and non-statist global order.

Cover -- Contents -- List of Illustrative Material -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Rights beyond states -- 'Never Again' all over again: reluctant state actors -- From humanitarian intervention to human protection -- Overview -- Notes -- 1. Atrocities and Responses -- Why atrocities happen -- How atrocities end -- Implications -- Notes -- 2. Towards Human Protection -- Declining atrocities, rising activism -- The international human protection regime -- Human protection and the decline in mass violence -- Alternative explanations -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 3. Protection without Force -- The peaceful dimension of human protection -- Peaceful protection actors -- Peaceful measures -- Taking stock of peaceful measures -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 4. Intervention in Libya -- Countdown to Resolution 1973 -- Explaining Resolution 1973 -- Why Resolution 1973 is significant -- Libya since Resolution 1973 -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 5. The Problem of Regime Change -- Historical contours -- Sovereignty, self-determination, and human rights -- Towards responsible protection -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 6. The Problem of Accountability -- Divided counsels on Syria -- Responsibility while protecting -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 7. Consistency and Complications -- The question of consistency -- Consequences of humanitarian intervention -- The case for prevention -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 8. Human Protection in Crisis? -- The crisis of human protection -- A crisis explained -- Can human protection survive? -- Conclusion -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index.

Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. All are examples where humanitarian intervention has been called into action. This timely and important new volume explores the legal and moral issues which emerge when a state uses military force in order to protect innocent people from violence perpetrated or permitted by the government of that state. Humanitarian intervention can be seen as a moral duty to protect but it is also subject to misuse as a front for imperialism without regard to international law. In Humanitarian Intervention , the contributors explore the many questions surrounding the issue

"The dilemma of how best to protect human rights is one of the most persistent problems facing the international community today. This unique and wide-ranging history of humanitarian intervention examines responses to oppression, persecution and mass atrocities from the emergence of the international state system and international law in the late sixteenth century, to the end of the twentieth century. Leading scholars show how opposition to tyranny and to religious persecution evolved from notions of the common interests of 'Christendom' to ultimately incorporate all people under the concept of 'human rights'. As well as examining specific episodes of intervention, the authors consider how these have been perceived and justified over time, and offer important new insights into ideas of national sovereignty, international relations and law, as well as political thought and the development of current theories of 'international community'"--

Main description: Humanitarian Interventions - that sounds nice; much nicer than wars, battles and use of military force. Foremost, the phrase makes you think of the delivery of sanitary goods, medication, of soup-kitchens. Here we are not supposed to think of interventions of this kind; we have to have humanitarian interventions in mind which are humanitarian intervention-wars. (I) At exactly what point is the use of military force a humanitarian intervention? What is the humanitarian aspect of those interventions? Their occasion? Their motive? Their alleged as well as their actual consequences? (II) At exactly what point are humanitarian intervention-wars morally justifiable? Are they justifiable even if they are wars of aggression breaching international law? And finally: (III) Was the war which was presented to us as the paradigmatic example of a humanitarian-intervention-war, that is: the war in Kosovo in the spring of 1999 (with over 37,000 bombing missions), really justifiable as a humanitarian intervention? Many of us wanted to believe so at the time. Does our ex ante judgement hold today in an ex post reflection? And which lessons for the future should we learn from the success or failure of this humanitarian war? These are the questions proposed in this book; therefore, it is concerned with problems of semantics (part I), problems of moral assessment (part II) and with the moral, legal and political conclusions we draw from our experiences with the war in Kosovo, our primary example of a humanitarian intervention (part III). International experts in the areas of philosophy, international law, sociology and peace studies debated these questions vigorously for several days. This is the resulting volume.