Humanitarian intervention

African countries. This can be witnessed in the military intervention by western countries which is to some authors is done for humanitarian purposes or to expand neo-colonialism. “Neo-colonialism entails the domination in social, economic and culture of countries from the developed world that is the western countries in the respective internal affairs of the countries of the developing world that is African countries” (jean Paul: 2001). Intervention is a term which covers a wide variety of situations

´Responsibility to Protect´ (R2P) concept first came about in a 2001 report from the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), which was set up after, then Secretary General, Kofi Annan, said there needed to be some a change in the United Nations charter regarding military forces in humanitarian interventions. This came following the criticism of the NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1999. The report further evolved into the concept that was approved in the UN’s General Assembly

there certainly are situations where a violation of territorial integrity or political sovereignty is justified, namely in humanitarian intervention, “the use of military force against another state when the chief declared aim of that action is ending human-rights violations being perpetrated by the state against which it is directed.” The issue of humanitarian intervention has been at the forefront of international relations discourse, particularly after the end of the Cold War. It has been a

Non-intervention has always been a commonly understood principle in international relations. However, a problem arises when a nation cannot protect the wellbeing of its own citizens against either internal or external forces. That is when the question of whether our ethical duties to others transcend the community of the nation-state arises. It is indeed difficult to answer as history has shown there often is no obvious benefit that comes from humanitarian intervention. This partly has something

The history of humanitarian intervention was born in 1967 in West Africa. The Nigerian province of Biafra was going through a civil war. The separatist biafran rebels were fighting against the Nigerian federal army. The biafran rebels were fighting for a separate state while the other was fighting to keep Nigeria as one. The violence lead to deaths of civilians and this inspired the doctors from aid organizations to come and check on the people of Biafra. The army blocked the roads in the province

The Infancy of Humanitarian Intervention As breaking news is more easily communicated across the globe, the U.N. and other states led forces are more inclined to intervene more then ever before but sometimes they are faced with the problem of protecting a states sovereignty. There is a growing skepticism that is facing humanitarian intervention when a sovereign state fails to protect it’s own population. The question arises when humanitarian intervention supersedes the sovereignty of a state.

Humanitarian intervention is a multifaceted issue that has been a topic of concern within international political and legal realms for many decades. It is often defined as “[…] the threat or use of force across state borders by a state (or group of states) aimed at preventing or ending widespread and grave violations of the fundamental human rights of individuals other than its own citizens, without the permission of the state within whose territory force is applied” (Keohane 1). After the

debates that surround the issues of humanitarian intervention and just war theory on the basis of international scale. One article by Holzgrefe is completely focused on the debate, stating the many ethical theories of many different theorists: from "utilitarianism; natural law; social contractrianism; communitarianism; and legal postivism" (7). Holzgrefe goes on to define what each ethical theorist is and their understanding of the debate on humanitarian intervention. However, there is the idea of when

Although non-militant humanitarian intervention holds many superior traits to military intervention, sometimes global powers have no alternative except to demonstrate military force. Humanitarian military intervention must only be utilized in a limited set of circumstances. First, global powers must only employ military force to combat extreme catastrophes such as ethnic cleansing, genocide, and crimes against humanity. Second, global powers may use military intervention as a last resort, having

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