Some critics contend that modern philosophical arguments for humanitarian aid fail to recognize the flaws of current international law itself.
No people ever was and remained free, but because it was determined to be so April 7th, Powers, G. But there assuredly are cases in which it is allowable to go to war, without having been ourselves attacked, or threatened with attack; and it is very important that nations should make up their minds in time, as to what these cases are After the tragedies in Rwanda and the Balkans in the s, the international community began to debate how to react to cases in which human rights are grossly and systematically violated.
Mill brushes over the situation of intervening on the side of governments who are trying to oppress an uprising of their own, saying "government which needs foreign support to enforce obedience from its own citizens, is one which ought not to exist".
This would deem outside states free to assist, and to use force if necessary. Benefits of this approach include Is humanitarian intervention justifiable essay it contemplates no new legal rules governing the use of force, but rather opens an "emergency exit" when there is a tension between the rules governing the use of force and the protection of fundamental human rights.
The potential for an erosion of rules governing the use of force may also be a point of concern. This approach involves reviewing the evolution of customary law for a legal justification of non-authorized humanitarian intervention in rare cases.
However, critics base their arguments on the treaty of Westphalia, which states the rights of sovereign nations to act freely within their own borders. Attempts were made under the auspices of the League of Nations to arbitrate and settle international disputes.
The Zimbabwean government however responds to these accusations from Western countries with counter-accusations of colonial attitudes and hypocrisy. However, Kosovo war has also highlighted the drawbacks of this approach,  most notably when effective and consistent humanitarian intervention is made unlikely by the geopolitical realities of relations between the Permanent Five members of the Security Council, leading to the use of the veto and inconsistent action in the face of a humanitarian crises.
Inevitably, fulfilling one set of responsibilities can involve the violation of the other in situations for example where governments are actively abusing the fundamental rights of their own citizens.
This historical perspective serves to demonstrate that it has taken a considerable amount of time and struggle for our contemporary conceptions of humanity and human rights to be formed.
In other instances non-military alternatives, such as diplomatic pressure and sanctions, might be more proportionate to the problem and hence better justified Powers, Therefore, in addition to humanitarian objectives the concept is designed to circumvent the UN Security Council by invoking a right.
Under Responsibility to Protect doctrine, rather than having a right to intervene in the conduct of other states, states are said to have a responsibility to intervene and protect the citizens of another state where that other state has failed in its obligation to protect its own citizens.
In this particular chapter he plays out the humanitarian war in East Timor and makes comparisons to relevant international action similar to the war in Kosovo. For their intervention to be accepted as solely humanitarian, states should however seek to follow certain criteria: John Rawlsone of the most influential political philosophers of the twentieth century, offers his theory of humanitarian intervention based on the notion of "well-ordered society.
To deal with this potential conflict between humanitarian intervention and the international legal system, there are some philosophical attempts to conciliate the two concepts and specify conditions for ethically justified interventions. Morally, more importance should be given to saving human lives and halting unjust, man-made suffering than to national self-interest and political agendas, an ideal which, however, is not guaranteed by the current international law and UN system.
Between such well-ordered societies, the principle of non-intervention should uphold.The U.S. humanitarian intervention can be defined as the successful intervention, which ended the suffering of civilians in Libya.
Because the successful intervention of Libya, the U.S. was able to show that it was the peacemaker and dominant power in the world. “ Humanitarian Intervention is military intervention that is carried out in pursuit of humanitarian rather than strategic objectives. This term is controversial and therefore often.
International Relations Relating to Humanitarian Intervention - In the following essay I will discuss aspects of international relations relating to humanitarian intervention and how they affect a nation’s responsibilities in the international arena.
The issue of humanitarian intervention has become increasingly prominent in worldwide debates regarding its role in ethics and legitimacy in international relations. Uncertainty arises as to whether there are any moral obligation for humanitarian intervention and the concerning justifications of the violation of state sovereignty.
We will write a custom essay sample on Humanitarian. Moral Justification of Humanitarian Intervention: Unreferenced Thoughts This essay shall take the position that “humanitarian intervention” can indeed be morally justified, if adhering to certain criteria.
Firstly, it shall provide a brief exploration of the concept of “humanitarian. Humanitarian Humanitarian intervention has been defined as a state's use of "military force against another state when the chief publicly declared aim of that military action is ending human-rights violations being perpetrated by the state against which it is directed." This definition may be too narrow as it precludes non-military forms of intervention such as humanitarian aid and.Download