Aufsatz(elektronisch)27. November 2024

The concept of humanitarian intervention in ancient Chinese philosophy and contemporary Chinese discourse

In: Političeskie issledovanija: Polis ; naučnyj i kul'turno-prosvetitel'skij žurnal = Political studies, Heft 6, S. 122-139

Verfügbarkeit an Ihrem Standort wird überprüft

Abstract

This paper, for the first time in Russian science, outlines the evolution of ancient Chinese views on humanitarian intervention and their potential use in Beijing's modification of the contemporary concept of humanitarian intervention and the 'responsibility to protect' (R2P) initiative. There are good reasons to believe that the concept of humanitarian intervention was formulated for the first time in the world history of thought in China during the Warring States period (5th–3rd centuries BC). Its functional equivalents were the terms zhū 誅 'judgement/punishment' and zhēng 征 'expedition,' used in the discussions of the 'sage kings of antiquity' (gǔ-zhī shèng wáng 古之聖王, semi-legendary exemplary cultural heroes and dynastic founders) and in the discourse on the 'proper [use of] military force' (yì-bīng 義兵), an ancient Chinese equivalent of the just war theory. The views on humanitarian intervention evolved from 'divine intervention' (i.e. military actions as the execution of heavenly judgment, till the beginning of the 3rd century BC) to 'humanitarian intervention' (military actions as a means for rescuing the people from the villainous government, by the end of the 3rd century BC). Beijing's use of this tradition might create a greater scope for legitimizing political actions that meet the interests and values of the PRC, thus raising the legitimacy bar of humanitarian intervention, and helping to specify the methods and mechanisms of peaceful conflict resolution under the R2P. The main aspects of the 'sinicization' of modern humanitarian intervention, taking into account the ancient Chinese ethics of war, can be an alternative conceptualization of the political space, an emphasis on the morality of a legitimate actor, a criterion of popular approval, a rethinking of jus in bello and jus post bellum as verifiers of jus ad bellum, the distinction between a regime change and a ruler change, and a focus on intervention as the last resort.

Verlag

Non Profit Partnership Polis (Political Studies)

ISSN: 1684-0070

DOI

10.17976/jpps/2024.06.09

Problem melden

Wenn Sie Probleme mit dem Zugriff auf einen gefundenen Titel haben, können Sie sich über dieses Formular gern an uns wenden. Schreiben Sie uns hierüber auch gern, wenn Ihnen Fehler in der Titelanzeige aufgefallen sind.