Humanitarian Intervention Into The Affairs Of Another State Ever Be Justified

1797 Words8 Pages
Since the end of the Cold War, there are highly debated issues in regards to Humanitarian Intervention in the field of International Relations. It has been the legal right of external states to militarily intervene into the affairs of another state, when massive violations of fundamental human rights and genocide are violated, resulting in mass loss of life. The problem that arises with Humanitarian intervention is that it conflicts with the principle of Sovereignty. Although there has been numerous Humanitarian military interventions not all of these were with the legal consent of the United Nations (UN). The Realist and Liberalist have different views in regards to the matter of the right to intervene in relation to humanitarian issues. Cases such as Rwanada, Srebrenica and Libya highlighted the need for intervention for the protection of civilians and their right to protection. This essay will investigate whether forcible humanitarian intervention into the affairs of another state ever be justified.

Humanitarian intervention is difficult to define, but it is often conceptualised as military intervention which is carried out by a state, group of states or an international organisation into the affairs of another state without their permission (Moravcova 2014, p.66, Heywood 2014, pp.325 & 326). Although humanitarian intervention has happened numerous times it still remains a highly controversial topic within International Law. Humanitarian Intervention conflicts with the
Get Access