Suchergebnisse

"There are two distinct contemporary challenges to the relief of war-induced human suffering--one within the institutions that make up the international humanitarian system, the other on the ground in war zones. Varied interests, resources, and organizational structures within institutions hamper the effectiveness of efforts on behalf of war victims. And at the same time, on the ground, there are ethical, legal, and operational challenges and dilemmas that require actors continually to choose a course of action with associated necessary evils. Humanitarian challenges and intervention concerns within the international humanitarian system--combined with the domestic context of armed conflicts--often yield policies that do not serve the immediate requirements of victims for relief, protection of rights, stabilization, and reconstruction. Based on compelling, up-to-date case studies of the post-Cold War experience in Central America, northern Iraq, Somalia, the former Yugoslavia, and the African Great Lakes, the authors Thomas G. Weiss and Cindy Collins make recommendations for a more effective international humanitarian system."--Provided by publisher

Should states use military force for humanitarian purposes? Leading scholars and practitioners provide practical and theoretical answers to this burning question, demonstrating why humanitarian intervention continues to be a controversial issue, not only for the UN, but also for Western states and humanitarian organizations.

The question of 'humanitarian intervention' has been a staple of international law for around 200 years, with a renewed interest in the history of the subject emerging in the last twenty years. This book provides a chronological account of the evolution of the discussion and uncovers the fictional narrative provided by international lawyers to support their conclusions on the subject, from justifications and arguments for 'humanitarian intervention', the misrepresentation of great power involvement in the Greek War of Independence in 1827, to the 'humanitarian intervention that never was', India's war with Pakistan in 1971. Relying on a variety of sources, some of them made available in English for the first time, the book provides an undogmatic, alternative history of the fight for the protection of human rights in international law.

A review essay on four reports published as books: (1) Responsibility to Protect: Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, 2001); (2) Humanitarian Intervention (Netherlands: Advisory Committee Issues Public International Law, 2000); (3) Humanitarian Intervention: Legal and Political Aspects (Danish Instit International Affairs, 1999); & (4) The Report of the Independent International Commission on Kosovo Oxford: Oxford U Press, 2000).

A Critical Humanitarian Intervention Approach explores ways of reconceptualising security in terms of Ken Booth's Theory of World Security. This approach, focusing on human development more broadly can improve upon the theoretical and practical limitations of solidarist theories on the subject of humanitarian intervention.

The Conceit of Humanitarian Intervention rejects, on political, legal, ethical, and strategic grounds, the widespread claim that military force can be used effectively-and on the basis of a universal consensus-to stop mass atrocities. As such, it is an against-the-current treatment of an important practice in world politics

Several aspects of contemporary humanitarian intervention practices are examined, emphasizing the relationship between such interventions & state sovereignty. After providing an overview of the notion of sovereignty, the association of sovereignty & human rights is explored. Differences between pre- & post-1990 justifications for humanitarian intervention are identified. It is contended that sovereignty became associated with both authority & responsibility during the 1990s. The connection between humanitarian objectives & national interests is studied, maintaining that some humanitarian interventions have been guilty of double standards, eg, the creation of no-fly zones in parts of Iraq. The international community's response to US intervention in Iraq, Haiti, & Rwanda & UN intercession in Bosnia is considered. Issues regarding how certain states & international organizations can circumvent the UN Security Council & abuse humanitarian objectives & the tendency for developing nations to be potential targets for humanitarian interventions are addressed. It is asserted that new guidelines that detail the conditions required before humanitarian interventions can be launched are needed & that such decision-making authority be removed from the UN Security Council & presented to a larger international coalition. It is concluded that this relocation of power will benefit the global South in terms of order & justice. J. W. Parker

Cover -- Half-title -- Title page -- Copyright information -- Table of contents -- List of contributors -- Preface -- List of abbreviations and acronyms -- Part I Intervention and debate -- 1 Introduction to armed humanitarian intervention -- Terminology and the concept of armed humanitarian intervention -- Moral terrain -- Does morality apply? -- What is the nature of AHI responsibilities to foreign peoples? -- Moral conditions for AHI -- Political philosophy and international law -- Sovereignty and human rights -- The UN Charter's requirement of threat to "international peace and security" -- Conditional sovereignty -- Responsibility to Protect -- Legal authority -- Adoption and implementation of RtoP -- Adoption -- Implementation -- Intervention in Libya -- Calls for Gaddafi's resignation, sanctions -- Armed humanitarian intervention -- Regime change, taking sides -- Criminal acts -- 2 Revisiting armed humanitarian intervention -- I -- II -- III -- IV -- 3 The responsibility to protect and the war in Libya -- Part II Moral perspectives -- 4 The moral basis of armed humanitarian intervention revisited -- Armed humanitarian intervention as defense of persons -- Intervention and state legitimacy -- Sovereignty and culture -- Proportionality -- The distinction between intention and foresight -- The role of the just cause in the Doctrine of Double Effect -- 5 All or nothing -- I -- II -- III -- Conclusion -- 6 Judging armed humanitarian intervention -- What is a humanitarian intervention? -- Judging permissibility -- Motives versus outcomes -- Intentions -- Ad bellum intentions -- State intentions -- Intentions and justifications -- Establishing intentions by comparison -- Logical necessity -- In bello intentions -- Distribution of risk -- Parsing behavior -- The justification-based account -- Consent -- Conclusion -- 7 Bombing the beneficiaries.

Considers the utility of (militarized) humanitarian interventions (or humanitarian warfare) in recent extreme cases where rights violations are so severe as "to shock the conscience of humankind." Discussed are conditions required to invoke humanitarian intervention, its implementation & preferred agents, & appropriate conditions for halting the intervention. Drawing on examples of Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda, East Timor, Liberia, Sierra Leone, & Kosovo, it is suggested that violations of human decency must be evaluated case by case to determine the need to intervene, especially when terror is state-sponsored against a group or vulnerable minority. Without harming innocent civilian populations, interventions should mobilize capable & effective forces to prevent further atrocities until a locally legitimate form of governance can operate freely. Common objections to these principles are addressed. J. Sadler