session 19- ir humanitarina int

8/7/2019 Session 19- IR Humanitarina int

1/12

International Relations

Session 19: Humanitarian

Intervention


2/12

Humanitarian intervention refers to armedintervention in one sovereign state by anotherstate with the objective of ending or reducing thesuffering of a population within the first state.

That suffering may be the result of civil war,humanitarian crisis, or crimes committed by theoccupied nation (such as genocide).

The goal of humanitarian intervention is neitherannexation nor interference with territorialintegrity, but minimization of the suffering ofcivilians in that state.


3/12

What is Humanitarian Intervention?

No formal legal definition exists

Outside powers have the right and also a moral

duty to intervene to protect people, even if what

is taking place is a conflict within the state. Traditionally, intervention itself, is political in

character and has been defined as a forcible

breach of sovereignty that interferes in a states

internal affairs.

Advocated by Solidarists* and counter-restrictioni

sts

*International society is capable of agreeing on universal standards of justice and morality.


4/12

Its logical consequence, the rule of non-

intervention, is enshrined in customary

international law and codified in Article 2(4) of

the UN Charter, prohibiting the use of force in

matters that are essentially within the

domestic jurisdiction of any state.


5/12

Opponents of intervention

Restrictionists: the majority of international

lawyers who argue that to forcibly intervene on

humanitarian grounds is illegal due to the

prohibition of the use of force in Article 2 (4) of

the UN Charter.

The only legitimate exception, they claim, is the

right to self-defense, as articulated in Article 51 ofthe Charter.


6/12

Objections to humanitarian

interventionThese problems are pointed out by realists and

pluralists*:

1. States do not intervene for primarilyhumanitarian purposes and only pursue their

interests.

*states are conscious of common goals and interests but theseare limited to rules of sovereignty and non-intervention


7/12

2. States do not have the right to risk the lives of

their armed forces on humanitarian missions

(pragmatism). State leaders have no right to

sacrifice their people on behalf of a the

suffering humanity.

If there is a problem in a country, it is the

responsibility of that state, not of external

states.


8/12

3. The problem of abuse of international rules:

Methods of legitimizing humanitarian efforts

are not neutral or impartial. Already UN

articles are twisted to justify intervention. This

will only increase and lead to more

intervention that may not have humanitarian

motivations.


9/12

4. Selectivity of response: States intervene only

where there are geo-political interest

involved. Humanitarian response is not

uniform.

5.What moral principle should legitimize

intervention? How is a consensus reached?

Morals and values are determined by culture

and states may impose their own definitions

of morals to facilitate intervention.


10/12

Counter-restrictionist argument

There is in fact a legal right of unilateral andcollective humanitarian intervention in thesociety of states, as well a moral duty to help

fellow men by virtue of their humanity. They argue this based on two claims:

(1) The UN Charter also commits states to

protecting fundamental human rights.(2)There is a right of humanitarianintervention in customary international law.


11/12

1. Protection of human rights:

The UN has provisions for the protection ofcivilian rights in its charter.

If the UN fails in its responsibility to protect,

states can and should unilaterally take action to

stop mass killings or genocide.

If the UN does not provide a legal basis for

humanitarian intervention, it contradicts its

original purpose.

If the right to self defence is legal, so should be

the right to intervene humanitarian grounds

unilaterally.


12/12

2. Customary international law is grounds forhumanitarian intervention

Over a period of time, if states start behaving a

specific way, it becomes part or customary law,

that can be legally imposed.

3. Moral requirements (how many people have t

die before something is done to stop it?)

Morals may not be legally recognized, but theycan still be the basis of policy.

session 19- ir humanitarina int

Documents