Humanitarian Assistance and Sierra Leone Essay

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 a 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 one is 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.

Over the recent years the military has had a greater involvement with aid programs, this was most notable from her experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan. Militarization of aid politicizes it for something that shouldn't be political. As the author believes humanitarian aid needs to exist in a neutral humanitarian space in order to remain its legitimacy and maintain close ties to the community level. From one example mentioned in Damned Nations, during the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan, international aid agencies that worked closely with communities showed greater progress and effectiveness (Nutt, 92). In essence this administered a positive attitude towards westerners, and symbolized progress within hostile nations. Aid that is not militarized allows civilians to feel safe access to services and without the fear in putting themselves or their families at risk (Nutt, 92). In comparison military administered aid has proven to lack the same level of trust because civilians inherently become worried about being targeted as collaborators (Nutt, 92). In addition the militarization of aid proves to bring further danger towards humanitarian workers. “Over the past decade, attacks against aid workers have increased 177 percent, with reports of rape, violence, extortion, abduction, and killings” (Nutt, 94). The author states this was reflected from a misjudgment that involving armed militants into

The efficiency of humanitarian intervention is normative because of people having different views on the output and the unlikeliness of every one being pleased by the new regime therefore it is very hard to affirm the real results of the intervention. In 2011, a group of countries intervened during the Libyan civil war, which lead to the abolition of Muammar Gadhafi’s regime. The Operation Unified Protector by NATO was partly successful because they achieved to kill the dictator on 20th October, but partly ineffective because the standards of living in Libya have not increased and the state is facing a lack of government’s ruling. This case study supports the statement that HI could be an abandoned project as it is not always favourable to everyone.

[1] In her widely known call for American action in the face of genocide, A Problem From Hell, former journalist Samantha Powers wrote “’all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’ After a century of doing so little to prevent, suppress, and punish genocide, Americans must join and thereby legitimate the ranks of the unreasonable.” Her demand was that American society at large join the few in its ranks who have vehemently fought for U.S. action in the face of genocide, long considered the “unreasonable”. Power is but one member, albeit a prominent member, of a school of though called interventionism. Interventionism strongly advocated for the use of U.S. military action to put a stop to genocide. It draws strongly from language of

Humanitarian action is what the world turns to in case there is a crisis in any part of the world. But as David Rieff suggests in his book, “A Bed for the Night: Humanitarianism in Crisis,” there is a crisis in the humanitarian world and space. He draws from first personal experience in places like Bosnia, Rwanda and Kosovo to tell how some of the challenges humanitarian organizations face; including their struggle to be neutral and apolitical.

This paper considers two issues: firstly, human rights in the developing world and secondly Canada’s responsibility of humanitarian assistance. Both issues are of grave importance and are mutually exclusive - as nations lacking strong human rights standards are more likely to require the greatest humanitarian assistance. Additionally, the need for humanitarian assistance will increase as global crises become more frequent, due to climate change insecurity (Adger, Huq, Brown, Conway & Hulme, 2003). The example of climate change will be utilised throughout this paper to explore the disparaging links between climate justice and human rights. In defining humanitarian assistance this paper will take Jamieson’s (2004) definition that humanitarian assistance is a response to crises via support in the short term to overcome disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis. Whereas, development assistance considers the longer term issues in developing countries. By defining the two main types of assistance this paper will propose that greater investment into development aid may reduce the need for humanitarian aid as nations become more capable to support themselves. The body of this paper will consider key arguments concerning humanitarian assistance and human rights, including: Canadas humanitarian response in the developing world, the increasing need for global crisis response, human rights as a global responsibility and lastly the move from humanitarian to development assistance. In

To understand the impact of humanitarian crises and how international politics play a role, a common definition of such crises must be understood. In his book “Humanitarian Crises and the International

The blood of my people stains my homeland. The violence stripped away my family, my home, and my childhood. Although many people are unaware of the horrors in Sierra Leone, I believe that sharing my story will enlighten the world about my country's sufferings and thus bring hope to others.

Creating relations between races and ethnicity's has always been vital to the success of the world. The United States and the international community have been, more often than not, late to stop violent acts against humanity. It took decades after the United Nations was created, and after a horrendous genocide in Rwanda, for the International Criminal Court to be created. Despite these two establishments created for international peace and security, crimes against humans rights are still occurring.When human rights are being violated, it is necessary for the U.S. and its allies to intervene in ethnic conflicts. While others may say humanitarian intervention goes against a state’s sovereign authority,it is necessary to protect

Also intervention can cause huge amounts of tension and can lead to more conflicts. Again, the United States faces this problem. The U.S. currently has troops in over 150 countries do to it's constant intervention in conflicts abroad.

The debate of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect have been discussed in international relations discourse more seriously within the last 60 years. The major historical developments which have led to an increase in the intensity of these debates have had beneficial and detrimental effects on Earth within the last 20 years. Several factors have contributed to this including; globalization, the rise in international accountability, an increase humanitarian consciousness to prevent major atrocities from occurring, the expansion of territorial to global responsibility of the western world, and the realization of the western world that regional sovereignty no longer accounts for national security. To develop an opinion

However, it can be argued that the motives behind intervention are not as important as the interventions themselves – the moral function of humanitarian intervention is to save lives and this can be achieved with or without altruistic motives. To this a possible reply is that seemingly unjust intervention may aggravate the receiving state, more so perhaps in military interventions than economic, political or social. A threatened state is arguably more likely to initiate a backlash. However, such an argument cannot be made against a UN-sanctioned intervention, where it can be agreed that the intervention is legitimate and in the interests of the global community. The issue of marginalising state sovereignty completely ignores the fact that sovereignty is granted by the international community , . The arguments that states such as China may put forward, that state sovereignty is absolute and deserving of unadulterated respect, rests on the idea that states grant themselves sovereignty, which upon reflection, one finds to be untrue. State sovereignty can only be realised if it is acknowledged by the global society of states. To this a realist might argue that theoretical sovereignty is separate from actual sovereignty, and that states will defend their sovereignty regardless of its

Humanitarian intervention is the act when states intervene in the affairs of another state because that state is violating the basic human rights of its civilians or because it is in the intervening state’s self interest to get involved. (Humanitarian, 2008) These interventions are not specifically aimed at violating the sovereignty of a state, but rather their purpose is to protect the basic human rights of civilians during civil wars and during crime against humanity. (Humanitarian, 2008) Realism explains that humanitarian intervention came about during the genocide in Bosnia but not in Rwanda because even though it might have been the correct moral action to take, intervention in Rwanda was not in the national interest of other

Building a nation… Slavery, Independence, Constitution, Military coups to Presidential elections! Senior Enlisted leaders, it is important to know that the freedoms we all prefer comes with a cost of sacrifice, bloodshed, and for some, nation before self for democracy. This essay will discuss the background, government, strategic importance, and future direction of Sierra Leone.

Much recent discourse surrounding humanitarian intervention has focused on the responsibility to protect (R2P). Prevention is a key component for good international relations and few would say it is not important, but as evidence to date would show prevention is very ineffective, the legality of military intervention still needs to be debated, as to date there is no consensus. For any intervention to be legitimate, whether unilateral or multilateral, it must comply with international law. So as not to cause any confusion, any situation in which an “intervention” is done with the permission or by request of the state being intervened, should be considered humanitarian assistance as state sovereignty is not breached. This paper will