Humanitarian Intervention

1351 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The importance of international cooperation

Humanitarian Intervention

In a world plagued with conflict and political instability there are many manners in which the international community is prone to react. In current day the Nobel Peace Prize winning direction of Peace Making, an ideology that has been accredited to former Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, has received much time and attention. A further step beyond the latter movement has been referred to as "Peace Making". This rather new philosophy is founded on the premise of establishing peace even through forceful military presence. The final step is intervention; this is the deployment of an external party into a conflict where the external party has not been invited. The many moral and ethical implications set by such a precedent is subject to much debate and poses one of the toughest philosophical problems today. It is the contention of this thinker that the practice of intervention is one that should never have been used and furthermore must be seized as it is not fit for practice today in our world for the following points of reason: the concept is altruistic in theory but is practiced by political players, there is a dangerous standard set into place that could possibly be used maliciously by parties against the sovereignty of other nations and finally it is very difficult to determine the legitimacy of a nation state considering that the countries of the world do not share the same philosophical criterion to define "legitimate government".

The question of involvement in any sort of intervention is a difficult one to approach because the implications of the ideology are idealistic and altruistic to the point that the notion is completely hypothetical as opposed to being plausible phenomen...

... middle of paper ...

...yers to serve any interest but there own, making intervention something selfish and not altruistic. The compromising values of self-interest and benevolence are clear reasons in themselves to abandon intervention policy. The potential for malice is more than just great, but it is imminent. It is bound to occur and to be harmful. Intervention today spells intervention tomorrow and paves the road for havoc through a deadly precedent. Finally, there is no example of legitimacy that can be relied upon as the world is composed of so many systems founded on a multitude of cultural beliefs. Thus it is impossible to use intervention policy fairly, ensuring that Sovereignty is not impeded upon for the benefit of politics. Clearly upon the lines of reasoning represented in this paper there is no way that Canada or the world community can support intervention policy.

Show More
Related

  • On The American Indian Vitoria Summary

    630 Words  | 2 Pages

    In “On the American Indians” Vitoria argues that there are few situations that justify a country to use humanitarian intervention. Humanitarian intervention is defined as military force, publicly stated to end the violation of human rights, against another state. Vitoria discredits the justification of humanitarian intervention in every case, unless you are intervening for an ally or a friend. In this paper, I will argue that his view is more plausible than it may at first appear.

    Read More

  • The Key Differences Between Realists, Morality of State Theorists, and Cosmopolitans

    1550 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...heories outlined in this paper. One of the defining principles of realism is that the state is paramount to anything else, including morality. Realists argue that deviation from the state interests in an anarchic system creates vulnerability. Morality of state theorists uphold state sovereignty and argue that intervention is not permissible unless the circumstances are crass and warrant action. They talk about aggression as the only crime that one state can commit to another and suggest that aggression should only be allowed as a retaliatory measure. Finally, cosmopolitans believe that morality can be achieved at the individual level and that morality can be somewhat universally applied. Non-realists do not support preemptive actions or intervention under almost any condition, and the criteria by which intervention is warranted aligns with the principles of justice.

    Read More

  • Plato’s Republic and the Just War Theory Versus Humanitarian Intervention

    1033 Words  | 3 Pages

    American involvement in humanitarian intervention is one of the most controversial issues in contemporary US foreign policy. The definition of humanitarian intervention is a military intervention; entering into a country for the purposes of saving lives and protecting citizens from the violation of their human rights. As in all debates, there are always two sides. One side disputes that military force should only be applied when, in the words of former Secretary of Defense Weinberger, ‘a vital national interest is at stake.’ ¹ The opposing side disputes that the US should apply military force to mediate when in the words of former president Clinton, “someone comes after innocent civilians…and it is in our power to stop it, we will stop it,” even if a vital national interest is not at stake.² The just war theory and Plato’s Republic can both be used to justify the humanitarian intervention doctrine.

    Read More

  • Interventionist or Isolationist?

    1036 Words  | 3 Pages

    So, as you can see, there are advantages and disadvantages to being Isolationist or Interventionist. We can do a lot of good for the world by stepping in, however it is often at a great cost to ourselves. And our country can be seen as a great protector or a greater destroyer. Being only Isolationist or Interventionist would mean we are weak or too controlling. All we can do is try to find a medium and decide when is the right time for action.

    Read More

  • Ways Of War And Peace Liberalism Vs Realism

    1120 Words  | 3 Pages

    Michael W. Doyle’s book Ways of War and Peace systematically analyzes classic theories like realism and liberalism that try to explain why nations wage war. However, not all theories discussed within the text are equal. In this paper I will try to argue that within the book written by Michael Doyle he paints a picture that the theory of realism is more applicable today then liberalism, even if that was not his original intention. Through careful evaluation I will prove that not only is realism a more pragmatic and realistic approach for the present time compared to liberalism, but I will also argue that fundamentalism is the best of Michael Doyle’s four different forms of realism.

    Read More

  • The Skeptic Theory of Morality in International Relations

    1410 Words  | 3 Pages

    Nuclear bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, not answering the call for help in Rwanda, allowing Germany to take over Czechoslovakia, supporting the creation of the state of Israel, giving out loans (with interest) to developing countries, and the creation of the United Nations are all forms of international interference and cooperation amongst states. When looking at these examples and many more, it begs the question, does morality play a role in international affairs of a state? George Kennan, a prominent Skeptic, would argue that in international politics “other criteria, sadder, more limited, more practical, must be allowed to prevail.”

    Read More

  • Realism Vs Realism

    1264 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, realists may have the edge when they debate that the “logic of collective security is contrasted with the difficulties of its application” (Weiss, 2007: 4). Unsurprisingly, distrust was an elephant in the room after WWII, as highlighted by the Security Council’s 193 vetoes between 1945-1990” (Baylis, 2011: 316). The United State’s invasions of Vietnam, Grenada and Panama in addition to the Soviet Union’s invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan (Weiss, 2007: 4) are merely a few examples of the constant proxy war operations that took place throughout the second half of the 20th century. This highlighted the ineffectiveness of the UN’s Security Council in preventing conflict across the world, and supported realists, that “there is no supranational authority [the UN] capable of wielding overwhelming power” (Rittberger, 2006: 15). This largely contradicts Kant, who claims that “international organizations can constrain decision-makers by positively promoting peace” (Dunne, 2010: 102). Liberalists including Kofi Annan argued that the ‘security dilemma’, which is built on the premise that “one country improves its security at the expense of other states” (Dunne, 2010: 81) had been averted. Although recently it has been bright in terms of the UN serving as a successful platform for peace and compromise between states; I still take into account the period 1945-1990 where the UN

    Read More

  • ‘Is humanitarian military intervention an example of a justified war.’

    1325 Words  | 3 Pages

    Humanitarian intervention is one of the most controversial topics in world politics today. This is due to the ethical dilemma at the core of humanitarian intervention – that it violates a state’s sovereignty in the name of upholding human rights and human security (Lang: 2002). Despite it being heavily contested, humanitarian intervention is commonly employed by international organisations today as a way to address human rights violations committed within a state’s domestic politics. Therefore, humanitarian intervention is often described as a contemporary form within the just war tradition. However, a central question is whether intervention can be legitimate and if so, under what circumstances. In this essay I will critically interpret the notion of humanitarian intervention as an example of just war theory. I will open the concept to challenge by looking at what motives drive humanitarian intervention and the consequences they produce for the states, which are subjected to intervention. Then, I will look at the responsibility to protect (2001) from its origins in the United Nations peacekeeping doctrines (Lang: 2010). Observing this, I will look at how the concept of humanitarian intervention is inseparable form the context of politics and history, and particularly, the concept of power. This necessarily calls for a critical examination of humanitarian intervention, which is often considered a modern form of colonialism (what is colonialism?). In conclusion, I suggest that humanitarian intervention can be considered an example of just war theory, but it is debatable whether or not the ethical foundations of humanitarian intervention can be realised in the context of a power-motivated international world system.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On Humanitarian Intervention

    1319 Words  | 3 Pages

    Consequences of intervention can include the loss of lives from an otherwise uninvolved country, the spread of violence, and the possibility of inciting conflict over new problems, just to name a few (Lecture, 11/15/16). For example, John Mueller considers the potential negative consequences of intervention prove that they are insignificant to the cause of humanitarian intervention as a whole. Moreover, with intervention into ethnic conflicts, the outcome, no matter how positive, is overshadowed by a gross exaggeration of negative consequences (Mueller). In both Yugoslavia and Rwanda the solution, to Mueller appeared simple, a well ordered and structured militarized presence was all that was required to end the conflict (Mueller). If this is the case, when discussing whether or not intervention is necessary the political elite must not over-exaggerate the difficulty.

    Read More

  • Peter Singer's Justification Of Humanitarian Intervention

    1063 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many debates have concluded that imperialism seems to be among the biggest of concerns. Singer’s rebuttal is that moral relativism, “the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others”. However, that does not prevent intervention from destroying nations sovereignty nor does it take away from the fact that the costs of intervention may turn out to be much higher than the benefits. For example, imperialism is normally a term used to imply acts of aggression between states or a policy of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or military force. Armed forces today are trained to fight with the aim of securing a quick victory and alas this simply cannot be the strategy involved in terms of humanitarian intervention. However, most acts of intervention would still enable a military task force and regrettably there are unavoidable consequences when involved in a military intervention. Using force to save lives usually involves taking lives and although military interventions are calculated to decrease the costs of innocent human lives taken there is absolutely no way to eliminate collateral damage altogether. Therefore an intervention to create peace has actually done the opposite, creating tension between the state that “benefitted” and the one that intervened. If the civilians of that nation state begin to

    Read More

  • Realist Approach To International Relations

    3116 Words  | 7 Pages

    In the realm of international relations, there are many theories that propose a framework for analysis of the happenings of international relations. One of the predominant theories is the realist theory. The state centric Realist theory, rooted in ancient western philosophy is one of those theories that have been proven effective after centuries of use. The early 20th century however, marked the beginning of a time that would require advocates of realism to reevaluate its approach to international relations. Some events do not fit in the realist framework; as such some have questioned its validity in the current state of affairs. Predominantly, one of the forces at play is that of international non-governmental organizations or NGOs. The coalition to ban landmines, for example, was a joint effort on behalf of many actors and NGOs that eventually led to the policy changes of numerous countries worldwide. Through the use of NGOs women’s rights movements have also been successful at influencing governments in recent years with direct and indirect pressures on government. Consequently, through the effort of NGOs awareness has been brought to problems otherwise overlooked. Increased awareness on issues could lead to a widespread change in party preferences, if the government fails to act. Conformity may be the government’s only choice when faced with these pressures. Though the state centric realist approach to international relations has been widely accepted, this paper will illustrate how the realist framework falls short in explaining some of the dynamics of global politics today. This will be done through the analysis NGOs, the Ottawa Convention, and the Wom...

    Read More

  • Communitarianism vs. Cosmopolitanism

    1136 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...t state autonomy cannot be restricted by anything but the community (state) itself. As one might assume, it follows from these differing standpoints that the way each theory view intervention, etc., will be in opposition. (Steve Smith, The Globalisation of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations p. 173A)

    Read More

  • Humanitarian Intervention

    1921 Words  | 4 Pages

    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. In viewing the matter ethically and applying Immanuel Kant’s principle of cosmopolitan law from his 1795 essay Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Essay, humanitarian intervention can be established as a conflict between a cosmopolitan responsibility, which is to protect and promote human rights because of their universality, and an obligation to respect state sovereignty as a crucial basis for moral and political international order. 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. Many Third World leaders, consider the concept of humanitarian intervention to be potentially destabilising for the international system, and view it as an excuse for more powerful nations to undermine and threaten their state sovereignty (Ayoob, 2004; p.99). By using the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) as a reference point, this essay will investigate the relationships between states when dealing with human rights standards and cultural differences. In examining the doctrine of ‘the responsibility to protect’, this essay will justify humanitarian intervention as a moral requirement of international order by focusing on the idea that the broader community of states must assume the responsibility of intervention when individual sovereign states are unw...

    Read More

  • A Challenge To Sovereigntyty In The United Nations: A Challenge To Sovereignty

    1131 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, as the nature of conflict changes and the international system edges towards a global society based on interdependence, some argue that this traditional notion must be updated. Tony Blair, for example, called for sovereignty to be “reconceptualised” (Bellamy, 2009; p.25). This is most likely due to the rise of humanitarian crises and the UN’s growing role in intervention. With global media coverage, it is harder for governments to ignore the will of the people, and public pressure to intervene in said crises. Therefore, humanitarian intervention is being viewed more as a responsibility than an option. The current system cannot effectively deal with this, as the debates over the violation of traditional sovereignty slow the process. As Lu says (2006; p. 81) “Critical opportunities to engage in preventive and non military actions, before a crisis explodes or escalates to the level of mass atrocity, are missed when the concepts of intervention and the use of force are conflated”. The problem of sovereignty blocks the UN from completing its mandate of “maintaining international peace and security”. Moreover, Kofi Annan points out that state sovereignty must not replace human rights: “the Charter protects the sovereignty of peoples… Sovereignty implies responsibility, not just power.” (Bellamy 2009; p. 28) Again we are reminded that governments should be

    Read More

  • Mutual Interdependency and the Potential for Conflict

    2656 Words  | 6 Pages

    Meanwhile, the world is further shaken by a series of regional conflicts, internal conflicts. From 1945 to date, although there is no world wars occurred, but there are more than 60 small and medium sized wars with conventional weapons and high-tech weapons. It seems that there is a development in the trend of conflicts, not cooperation. The two prominent schools of thought, Realism and Idealism, both identify conflict as the main issue in international relations. For Realists, war is the product of the states’ competition for power; therefore, war is unavoidable. On the other hand, Idealists believes that war is the product of socio-economics inequality and the interest of the monarchy. It is difficult to address a single cause of war. However, in the world...

    Read More

More about Humanitarian Intervention

Open Document