In this thesis, the concepts of Sovereignty, non-intervention and Humanitarian Intervention will gradually be unveiled, especially in subsequent chapters. The cases of Syria and Libya will serve as watershed for the theoretically unveiled concepts.
The principle of State Sovereignty plays a great role in the formation of international law as it sets a basic foundation on which the international society is built. The natural supposition is that international order is best maintained if states respect one another’s sovereignty by adhering to the norms of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states. The modern idea of Sovereignty dates back to Ancient Rome in which all sovereign powers were bestowed on the Emperor. It was deemed an absolute, unified, inalienable power based upon a voluntary but irrevocable contract.
At a glance
- Examines three proposed conditions for intervention using Libya as a case study
- 186 sources in the bibliography
Table of Contents
CHAPTER ONE: STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-INTERVENTION
1.1 LAW ON THE USE OF FORCE
1.2 AUTHORIZATION BY THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL
1.3 THE CONCEPT OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
1.4 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
1.5 HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION UNDER CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW
1.6 HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER
CHAPTER TWO: LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER
2.1 TEXTUAL ARGUMENTS
2.2 CLASSICISTS VIEW
2.3 NON-RESTRICTIONISTS VIEW
2.4 THE EMERGENCE OF RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT
CHAPTER THREE: REACTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TOWARDS INTERVENTION
3.1 THE PROBLEM WITH UNILATERAL AND REGIONAL HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
3.2 CASE STUDIES OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTIONS
3.2.1 KOSOVO
3.2.2 SOMALIA AND RWANDA
3.2.3 BOSNIA
3.2.4 PANAMA
3.2.5 LIBERIA
3.3 LIBYA AND SYRIA: TWO DIFFERENT CASES?
CHAPTER FOUR: MORAL JUSTIFICATION FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
4.1 HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION: A NEW PARADIGM; THE WAY FORWARD
4.2 OBSERVATIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
5. CONCLUSION
Objectives and Themes
This thesis examines the contested legal and moral status of humanitarian intervention, focusing on the tension between state sovereignty and the protection of human rights. It asks why international intervention was authorized in Libya while the Syrian crisis did not produce a comparable decision, and considers whether clearer international rules are needed.
- State sovereignty, non-intervention and the prohibition of force
- Competing interpretations of the United Nations Charter
- Customary international law and the responsibility to protect
- Unilateral, regional and Security Council-authorized interventions
- Historical cases and the comparison between Libya and Syria
- Moral arguments and proposals for legal reform
Excerpt from the Book
THE CONCEPT OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION
The issue of Intervention by one state in the affairs of another is a basic source of concern which has confronted the international community for ages. External interference in the relationship between the ruler and the ruled has remained an enduring and persistent feature of the western society since inception.
The nature and scope of this right as Sousa reiterates, is a mixed question of academic and political controversy. While some commentators argue that the concept of a war waged in defence of human rights is inimical to the principle of non-intervention, others assert that humanitarian catastrophes give rise to a moral imperative to respond.
The theory of Humanitarian Intervention, Ganji notes, is based on the assumption that States in their relation with their own nationals have an international obligation to guarantee them certain fundamental rights which are considered necessary for existence, and for maintenance of friendly relations amongst nations. These guaranteed rights are fundamental to the human person so much that any derogation or violation by the state cannot go unnoticed by other states. As such, this assumption alone could create leverage for other states to intervene, in event of flagrant disrespect or abuse of human rights by any state to her citizens.
On a slightly different note, Pattison maintains that intervention is frequently employed to denote a wide array of international actions; from the distribution of humanitarian aid to virtually any form of military intervention, regardless of whether it is in response to a serious humanitarian crisis or not.
Humanitarian Intervention is viewed as a proportionate trans-boundary help, including forcible help provided by governments to individuals in another state who are being denied basic human rights and who themselves would be rationally willing to revolt against their oppressive government. The word ‘Intervention’ on its own denotes ‘dictatorial interference by one state into the affairs of another’; this interference could come in various forms ranging from political or economic coercion to the actual use of armed force.
In addition, Murphy projects that Interventions come in various forms, hence, any working definition of Intervention should not be so rigid that it fails to take account of the differences. He notes that although it may be viewed as a sort of trans-boundary projection of military units into a target state, one may also recognize the possibility of humanitarian intervention where force used is not armed force and where it does not fall within the class of force prohibited by Article 2(4).
Chapter Summaries
CHAPTER ONE: STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-INTERVENTION: The chapter introduces sovereignty, the prohibition of force and Security Council authorization. It traces the historical development of humanitarian intervention and considers its status under customary law and the UN Charter.
CHAPTER TWO: LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION UNDER THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER: The chapter contrasts restrictionist and non-restrictionist interpretations of the Charter. It also explains the emergence of the responsibility to protect.
CHAPTER THREE: REACTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TOWARDS INTERVENTION: The chapter considers unilateral and regional interventions through historical cases. It compares the response to Libya with the situation in Syria and discusses political, legal and practical factors.
CHAPTER FOUR: MORAL JUSTIFICATION FOR HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION: The chapter examines moral arguments for and against intervention, including duties to protect and risks of abuse. It presents proposals concerning legal rules, Security Council decision-making and cooperation with regional organizations.
CONCLUSION: The thesis returns to the tension between sovereignty and human rights and proposes clearer conditions for intervention and changes to international legal institutions.
Keywords
humanitarian intervention, state sovereignty, non-intervention, use of force, United Nations Charter, Security Council, customary international law, responsibility to protect, human rights, unilateral intervention, Libya, Syria, international law, intervention ethics
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this thesis about?
It examines the legal and moral justification for humanitarian intervention and the tension between protecting populations and respecting state sovereignty.
What are its central themes?
Its themes include the use of force, Security Council authority, customary international law, the responsibility to protect and the risks associated with intervention.
What is the main research question?
A central question is why the international response to Syria differed from the authorized intervention in Libya, and what that difference reveals about the rules governing humanitarian intervention.
What research method does the author use?
The thesis uses legal and doctrinal analysis of the UN Charter, international legal arguments, scholarly literature and historical cases, including a comparison of Libya and Syria.
What does the main body cover?
It examines sovereignty and the history of intervention, competing legal interpretations, international reactions to particular cases, moral arguments and proposals for reform.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include humanitarian intervention, sovereignty, non-intervention, the UN Charter, the Security Council, responsibility to protect, Libya and Syria.
How are restrictionist and non-restrictionist views distinguished?
Restrictionists emphasize the Charter’s prohibition of force and the dangers of unilateral action; non-restrictionists advance alternative interpretations and arguments for intervention under certain conditions.
Which earlier intervention cases are discussed?
The thesis discusses Kosovo, Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Panama and Liberia, considering different forms of international, unilateral and regional action.
What role does the responsibility to protect play in the thesis?
The author traces its emergence and discusses its relationship to sovereignty, mass atrocities and collective action through the Security Council.
- Quote paper
- Yewande Abiodun (Author), 2014, The Current Status of Humanitarian Intervention in Need of Legal Clarification. Analysis of the Legal and Humanitarian Justifications for Intervening In Libya and the Inaction in Syria, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/584787
