Humanitarian Intervention with Respect to R2P

Humanitarian Intervention is military intervention that is carried out in pursuit of humanitarian rather than strategic objectives. This term is controversial and therefore often debated, as it is an evaluative and subjective term. The common use of the term itself is the desire to come in help to other people, however according to some other opinions, it is the outcome of the intervention that defines it. Firstly, it is essential to define what is meant by the word abandoned in this context. As HI has been happening throughout history, abandoned would imply an on-going lack or diminishing numbers of interventions.

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 United Nations have now been focusing their resources on humanitarian efforts and the protection of human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, like

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

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

The process of reforming the United Nations (UN) has been a highly debatable issue among the international community. Since the initial signing of the UN Charter in 1945, the world has changed dramatically as the UN is trying to regulate a forum that assesses and deals with global issues while also struggling to unite all 193 member states of the UN when some states have been seen to have conflicting ideas and personal agendas (Teng, 2003, pp. 2-3). This essay is targeted to highlight what I feel are the most pressing arguments for UN reform amongst the international community. This will be done by highlighting the problems and ongoing issues surrounding the lack of representation and P5 power of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC),

The United Nations has been effective to a certain extent in providing resolutions to threats of world order. Its structure and functioning was designed to curtail the negative effects of globalisation, such as the spread of transnational threats, and to grant peace and security. The Charter of the United Nations with a purpose to strive for peace and security and act in a manner that reduces threats established the UN in 1945. Specifically through the establishment of the UN refugee agency it has been effective in responding to the threat of increasing refugees in Syria by providing humanitarian assistance. Additionally, it is the strongest, wide reaching and well respected global peace initiative as it retains support and commitment from

The topic of the United Nations’ (UN) interventions has been a source of heated dispute by scholars since their intervention in the Korea War in 1951. However there are interventions that garner more controversy than others. The tragedies of the Rwandan Genocide and the Bosnian Genocide have been hailed as some of the greatest failures in the United Nations peacekeeping and intervention missions. The Rwandan and Bosnian genocides brought around a deep, introspective critique within the UN on its role in the prevention of genocides and the protection of citizens at risk that has ultimately proved inconsequential in effectively addressing more contemporary cases of genocide. After these genocidal incidents, the United Nations published reports

Articles 1, 55, and 56 are the center pieces for promoting and protecting human rights. During the cold war humanitarian intervention went stagnant because the two superpowers who were facing off (US & Russia) were at odds about ideology and this caused world peace to be thrown into turmoil. The UN was very new and did not have the international legal clout to stop either superpower from promoting its system of governance through invasion or indirect military support. The Cold War caused social, economic, and political upheaval globally which allowed for the UN to revise its interpretation of humanitarian intervention. This allowed for a larger consensus among nations about which circumstances required intervention. From 1945 to 1976 five major human rights documents were adopted; The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Genocide Convention, Geneva Convention, Laws of War, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Cultural Economic Civil Rights. The end of the Cold War “liberated the UN which had established 20 new peace keeping missions from 1988-1993, more than it had taken in its entire 40 year history.” (Taha, 14) The major developments of the 1990‘s for international humanitarian

The numerous and continuing violations of International Humanitarian Law can only be stopped and reduced if both parties to the conflict commit to implementing practical measures for protecting civilians and especially civilians with disabilities. The responsible authorities of both conflicting parties must implement training, regular supervision and the ongoing evaluation of the conduct of all persons under their command towards the protection of civilians. Specific orders for the protection of all civilians, including civilians with disabilities, must be given by the superior officers of both conflicting parties in order to stop any illegal actions by their Armed Forces or militia and they must suppress any violations against civilians and

1. Introduction Gross human rights violations and increased violence against civilians during armed conflicts has become widespread and is a persistent problem that the international community is faced with. The protection of civilians and the promotion for the respect of human rights is articulated in several international declarations and conventions. In fact, the responsibility to protect has emerged as one major principle aiming to protect and intervene in cases of severe human rights violations, such as war crimes, ethnic cleansing, genocide, and crimes against humanity.

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

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and internal law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

The purpose of this paper is to examine the six chapters assigned for this week. First, in Weiss et al.’s first chapter entitled The Theory of UN Collective Security, the authors elaborate on the foundation and purpose of the United Nations serves on a global scale by means of collectivity. Second, chapter four entitled Evolving Security Operations: Kosovo, East Timor, Sierra Leone, Lebanon, Sudan, Cote d’Ivoire, Libya, and Syria, provides specific examples of relations between the United Nations and individual nation-states, the progress the UN has made in developing countries, and how the resistance the UN faces affect the organization as well as the population they serve. Third, chapter ten of Weiss et al.’s book, Sustainable Development as Process: UN Organizations and Norms focuses on the humanitarian efforts of the UN, especially in the focus of establishing self-sufficiency in developing countries. Then the three chapters in Pease’s book, Security, The Environment, and Human Rights and Humanitarian Issues, focus on three key issues facing the international organizations today.

The United Nations is widely regarded and respected as the most powerful institution that promotes international cooperation and human rights action. In theory, actions implemented by and within the United Nations are based on the mutual global goal of protecting international human rights and preventing human sufferings. These actions are constituted through three main mechanisms: the Treaty-based system, the Human Rights Council, and Security Council and Humanitarian Interventions, with the level of confrontation and seriousness in each mechanism increases respectively. While aimed to serve the mutual goal of protecting human rights over the world and have shown some successes, in a world of sovereignty, actions when implemented are in fact grounded by the national interests of each state, including embracing its national sovereignty, concreting its strategic relationships with other states, and enhancing its reputation in the international community. This paper will analyze the successes and failures of each of the three mechanisms of the United Nations regime, through which it aims to prove that when it comes to actions, states focus more on their national, and in some cases, regional interests than on the mutual goal of strengthening human rights throughout the world, thus diminishing the legitimacy of the whole United Nations system.