chapter 5: human rights global governance Flashcards
Timeline: What was the first instance of international law over HRs? Why is this significant?
-Nuremberg Trials, 1945-6.
-Traditionally, the rights of individuals were relative to the government that they lived under.
-This was the first time that these Westphalian principles had been challenged, and set the precedent for an international standard of HRs.
Timeline: What legislation/charters came into place after WW2?
-UN Charter, 1945. This established the UN as a forum through which dispures can be resolved, and HRs affirmed.
-UDHR, 1948. This was the first international, and universal set of human rights. This provided the basis for future International Covenants (ie 1951 Refugee Convention).
-Genocide Convention, 1948. Outline what a genocide is, and how it should be tried in courts.
Timeline: List some later UN legislation, 1979+.
-1979: Discrimination Against Women Convention.
-1984: Convention on Torture.
-1989: Children’s convention + Indigenous People’s Convention.
-1990: Convention on Migrant Workers.
-2006: Convention on Persons with Disabilities.
Timeline: When was the UN Commissioner established?
-The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was created in 1993. This position was created with the aime of promoting & securing HRs.
-It has strong moral power, but little coercive.
-From 2018-2022, Michelle Bachelet, former president of Chile, held this position. In 2019, she said, “A world with diminished human rights is a world that is stepping backwards into a darker past.”
Timeline: What have NGOs done?
-Groups like Amnesty International, HR Watch, & Save The Children work to raise awareness of HRs abuses.
-In 2020, HRW’s annual report critiqued China’s disregard for human rights, saying that it “Poses an existential threat to the international human rights system.”
-In 2021, Human Rights Watch called for an immediate investigation into the way that Trump supporters had been able to storm Congress. They argued that Trump should be held to account for his ‘reckless campaign’ to ‘undermine the democratic process and rule of law’.
ICJ: What is it? What’s its purpose?
-Judicial agency of the UN. They settle disputes between member states. It is based in the Hague.
-Made up of 15 judges who represent the “main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world.”
-States submit legal disputes, and the ICJ provides advisory opinions on legal questions submitted by organisations.
-All UN member should ‘comply’ with the ICJ’s decision, and the UNSC can be used to enforece decisions if they don’t.
-Mainly deals with territorial disputes, rather than human rights abuses.
ICJ: Name some successes.
-1992: Settles border dispute between El Salvador & Honduras.
-2002: Settles dispute over an oil-rich penninsula between Nigeria & Cameroon.
-2012: ICJ decided that Senegal should put former president of Chad, Hissene Habre, on trial for crimes against humanity and torture. He was imprisoned for life in 2016.
-2019: India accused Pakistan of breaking international law by not allowing consular access to Kulbhushan Jadhav, and Indian naval officer, convicted of spying in Pakistan. India won, and Pakistan agreed that “as a responsible state, Pakistan will grant consular access.
ICJ: Why has the ICJ been undermined?
-Liberal principles often conflict with state egoism.
-Cannot initiate cases and can only try cases that are presented to it.
-States are able to choose whether or not they are subject to the decisions of the court by signing an optional clause (in 2021, only 74/193 ICJ members had signed up to it).
-UNSC Veto means that, while there is a threat of intervention, it is unlikely to actually take place.
ICJ: List some ICJ failures.
-1980: Iran refused to acknowledge ICJ sovereignty when the US brought a case against it for seizing the US embassy in Tehran in 1979.
-2010: ICJ delivered the advisory opinion that Kosovo had been legitimately able to declare independence from Serbia in 2008. This decision was not welcomed by Russia/Serbia.
-2019: ICJ issues the ruling that the UK should return the Chagos Islands to Mauritus. The UK refuses this ruling, and no further action was taken until 2024 (still not fully returned).
-2020: ICJ ordered the government of Myanmar to take all necessary measures to stop genocide against the Rohingya Muslims. Ayun San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s leader, stated that the issue was an “internal armed conflict.”
UN Tribunals: What are they? What are their purpose?
-After growing concern about how we should deal with genocides/war crimes, these tribunals were established.
-They are a UN agency that tries heads of state for war crimes, they set the precedent for the establishment of the ICC.
-Aims to punish and bring justice to those guilty of HRs abuses.
-Develop liberal principle of global community, that will no longer tolerate abuse of citizens. Establish legal principle that international courts can try heads of states for cimes in their country.
UN Tribunals: When was the first? Where was it? What happened?
-First UN Special Tribunal was for former Yugoslavia, and took place in 1993. This was the first international court since the Nuremberg Trials.
-By the time it closed in 2017, 90 war criminals, from soldiers to senior figures, had been convicted and sentenced.
-This included Radovan Karadzic, the former president of Bosnian Serb Republic, who was sentenced to 40 years for the Srebrenica Massacre. When he appealed in 2019, it was increased to life.
-This Tribunal was also important as it helped publicise the atrocities of the conflict, so people are unable to deny them.
UN Tribunals: What happened with Cambodia? When was it?
-Took place in 1997, with both Cambodian and international judges. It was set up to try the surviving members of the Khmer Rouge government, who had been responsible for the deaths of 2million.
-Life sentences were given to Nuon Chea (chief political ideologist), Kaing Guek Eav (head of the S21 mass killing centre), and Khieu Samphan (former head of state).
-The trial helped young Cambodians understand what had happened under their government (1975-9), and almost 100,000 people attended the hearings.
UN Tribunals: What happeed with Rwanda? When was it?
-Opened its first case in 1997, to try those involved in the Rwandan genocide that led to the deaths of 800,000 Tutsi.
-61 people were convicted as complicit in genoide, including former PM, Jean Kambanda.
-The tribunal was almost important as it developed international law by setting the precedent that rape could be used to perpetrate genocide.
UN Tribunals: What happened with Sierra Leone? When was it?
-Held in 2002, to try those involved in atrocities during the 10-year Civil War.
-50,000 had died in the conflict, by the time Britain intervened in 1999.
-In 2012, Liberian president, Charles Taylor, was sentenced to 50 years’ imprisonment for complicity in the civil war’s atrocities.
-14 others were also imprisoned, including Issa Sesay, the commander of the Revolutionary United Front, who was sentenced to 52 years in prison.
UN Tribunals: What are some limitations?
-Tribunals have often been accused of pursuing ‘Victor’s Justice’.
-The Tokyo Tribunal, after WW2, was led by the US, who were just as complicit in war crimes as Japan had been, due to their use of atomic bombs. The British destruction of Dresden, too, faced no repurcussions.
-More recently, NATO-bombing of Serbia has been criticised during the 1999 Kosovo War. The deliberate bombing of Serb Radio/Television led to deaths of 16 civillians, yet they faced no consequence.
-Saddam Hussein was not tried by an international court. Instead, Iraq, who were able to give the death penalty, were permitted to lead his investigation.
ICC: What is its purpose?
-Post-Cold War, many, including Kofi Annan, agreed that a permanently-sitting HRs court was necessary, as a reminder of the permanance of international justice.
-In 1998, the Rome Statute created the ICC, which would try heads of state, when nation governments would not.
-In 2002, ICC was established at the Hague, for the “most serious crimes of concern to the international community.”
ICC: What are some successes?
-By 2021, they had had 8 convictions.
-2012, Thomas Lubanga Dyilo was conviction for HRs abuses in the DRC, particularly the use of child soldiers. He was released in 2020.
-2014, Germain Katanga, a Congolese warlord, was sentenced to 12 years for crimes during Congo’s civil war.
-2016, Ahmad Al-Madhi was sentenced to 9 years for destroying historic sites & artifacts in Mali. This was important for the development of the concept of ‘cultural terrorism’.
-ICC has also launched investigations into Afghanistan & the Gaza Strip.
ICC: What are some of their failures?
-3/5 UNSC members are not signed up to the Rome Statute. India also aren’t, which means 70% of the world’s population are not under their jurisdiction.
-In 2021, only 123 states had ratified it.
-Had to drop the 2007 prosecution of Kenyan president, Uhuru Kenyatta.
-ICC has only ever convicted Africans.
-2017, Burundi withdrew from ICC.
-2016, Putin withdrew his signature after criticisms over Crimea.
-The Philippenes withdrew in 2019 after the ICC began to investigate deaths associated with President Duerte’s War on Drugs.
ECtHR: What is the purpose of the ECtHR? When was it established?
-1949, Council of Europe established, aiming to promote human rights, & rule of law in Europe. In 1950, it was responsible for the ECHR.
-1959, ECtHR was established, aiming to uphold the ECHR.
-It is made up of 47 judges, one for each council member, and sits in Strasbourg.
-European states and individuals can apply to the court in cases where they feel that human rights have been abused.
ECtHR: What are some of their successes?
-Beizaras and Levickas v Lithuania (2020). 2 gay men posted a picture of them kissing on facebook, which provoked violent criticism. Lithuanian authorities decided not to launch an investigation, as the men’s actions had been “eccentric.” ECtHR declared that they were in violation of article 14.
-Buturuga v Romania (2020). Ms Buturuga claimed that she had suffered domestic violence from her husband, which was dismissed by Romanian courts. ECtHR stated that Romania had failed to recognise Buturuga’s right to not be subject to Article 3.
-2020, Azerbaijan Supreme Court quashed the 2014 conviction of opposition politician, Ilgar Mammadov, after ECtHR declared it was based soley on his criticisms of the government.
ECtHR: What are some of their failures?
-Sejdic-Finci case (2009), the ECtHR ruled that Bosnia-Herzegovina’s constitution was discriminatory, as it stated that only Croats, Bosniaks, and Serbs could be elected to public office. This has not been changed.
-2017, ECtHR stated that the conviction of Alexei Navalny for money laundering and fraud was “arbitrary and unfair.” Navalny died in prison in February 2024.
-2020, Council of Europe expressed “profound concern” that the UK had not reopened cases involving killings carried out by the security services in Northern Ireland.
-2021, 2 ECtHR judgements declared that Russia had committed war crimes in its 2008 war with Georgia, and that 2014 Crimea was illegal. Moscow has ignored this
ECtHR: Why has ECtHR been unsuccessful?
-Nils Muiznieks, former Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, said that “Our work is based on cooperation and good faith. When you don’t have that, it’s very difficult to have an impact.”
-Essentially, they lack coercive power, so cannot enforce their judgements.
Enforcement: What three factors make it difficult to enforce an international standard of human rights?
-State sovereignty.
-Different culture (and therefore cultural attitudes to what is a human right).
-Problems with powerful states.
Enforcement: What is the issue with state sovereignty? Give some examples.
-Values of universal human rights conflict with ideas of states sovereignty, which dictate that states determine the legality of everything that happens within their borders.
-This means that international law, like the UDHR, is purely soft. The fact that states are not equally accountable, implies that a universal standard of HRs cannot be achieved.
-UNSC resolution censures Israel in 2016 for building settlements in occupied territories. Netanyahu responded saying that they would continue.
-Saudi Arabia has faced lots of criticism. In 2015, Raif Badawi, a blogger, was sentenced to 1,000 lashes and 10 years in jail for ‘insulting Islam’. They also legally equate atheism with terrorism. Saudia Arabian ambassador to the UN said, “if that doesn’t please someone here or there, that’s their problem, not ours.”
Enforcement: What is the problem with different cultural attitudes? Give some examples.
-Western powers have dictated what is thought of as the universal standard of human rights. These powers have been criticsed for over-emphasising the importance of individual’s right to self-expression, and being too euro-centric.
-Cultural relativists argue that each culture has a different ideas of human rights. Imposing universal standards is simply Western cultural imperialism.
-In 69 countries, primarily Asia/Africa, same-sex activity is illegal, and in at least 6 UN member states, it is punishable by death. Kenyan president, Kenyatta said, in 2015, that, “for Kenyans today the issue of gay rights is really a non-issue.”
-In many Muslim countries, standards of human rights are determined by the ‘higher law’ of Islam. Iran, for example, is an Islamic theocracy, where the Qur’an is the highest authority, which sets them at odds with many of the UDHR’s enlightenment principles.
Enforcement: What is the problem with powerful states? Give some examples.
-For an international standard to be upheld and legitimate, all states must be held equally accountable to it. However, this has been undermined by powerful states who ignore international law, when it suits national interest.
-War on Terror in the US, shows how they are prepared to infringe on human rights when it suits them. US Senate inquiry revealed that the CIA used ‘abhorrent techniques’ like waterboarding.
-At Biden’s inauguration in 2021, the United Nations urged them to shut the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, which still holds 40 prisoners.
-In 2019, India provided amnesty for non-Muslim illegal immigrants which provides them with the opportunity to claim citizenship. This was widely viewed as discriminatory against Muslims, and undermined India’s claims of being a secular state.
Enforcement: Discuss case study of difference in treatment of Iran & Saudi?
-2019, US State Department expressed outrage that Iran had executed two teenagers who had been convicted of rape. According to the State Department, the reports were appalling but “consistent with Iran’s egregious overall human rights record.”
-However, Saudi Arabia beheaded 37 people on the same day for terrorist-related offences. Three of the people executed were under 18, and they have been accused of securing confessions under torture. One of the bodies was also publicly crucified, but there was no response from the US State Department.
-Demonstrates how powerful states, or states with powerful allies, are able to avoid international law.
Enforcement: Discuss an example of a state speaking up against a powerful state.
-2018, Canada publicly called for the release of human rights activists being held in Saudi Arabia, including Samar Badawi.
-Saudi Arabia condemned Canada’s ‘blatant interference in the kingdom’s domestic affairs’ and expelled the Canadian Ambassador, as well as freezing all trade links.
-Trudeau responded that he would not be stopped from standing up for “Canadian values and humans rights.”
-Trudeau’s stance did not garner much support, and Western powers made no attempt to back them up.
Enforcement: Give some arguments that human rights ARE effectively protected.
-Establishment of internationsl courts shows willingness to protect human rights through legal means.
-UN Tribunals & ICC had secured the arrests of leading war criminals.
-Principle that heads of government can be tried for crimes within their state has been established.
-2005 R2P & principle that state sovereignty is ‘provisional’ present the message that states that abuse their own citizens forfeit their sovereignty.
-Internet has made human rights abuses more globally known, and this allows states & MNCs to be held to account.
-NGOs increasingly work to publicise and prevent HRs abuses.
Enforcement: Give some arguments that human rights are NOT effectively protected.
-International human rights law is soft law. This is because Westphalian principles of state sovereignty undermine liberal principles.
-Nation-states are unprepared to sacrifice their realist self-interest to liberal cosmopolitanism.
-Powerful states, including China, Russia, and the US do not accept the ICC’s authority, while state sovereignty limits ECtHR jurisdiction.
-Emerging powers like China are less committed to human rights protection than Western powers, and as China’s global influence increases it will become more difficult to enforce a global standard of human rights protection.
Timeline: Why did the Cold War lead to an increase in intervention?
-Optimism after the USSR’s fall generated huge international support for liberal principles of global governance and international justice. People therefore embraced Bush’s ‘New World Order’.
-This positive world order was illustrated during the 1991 First Gulf War, where states cooperated to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. When Hussein then went on to brutally suppress Kurdish uprisings in northern Iraq, this was too much for the UNSC.
-No-fly zones were established within Iraqi borders by France, US & UK, signalling that the state would no longer be all powerful if it sought to persecute its own people.
Timeline: How did Bosnia/Rwanda change intervention?
-Rwandan genocide took place from April to June 1994, and as many as 800,000/6.3m Rwandans were killed in the conflict. UN intervention was simply too little & too late.
-In Bosnia, the biggest mass murder in Europe since WW2 took place, when Bosnian Serbs murdered 7,000 Bosnian Muslims, when they overran UN ‘safe haven’ of Srebrenica. Both the UN & NATO had been unwilling and slow in their repsonses to their conflict and, with little resolve, they were unable to stop the massacre.
-These two failures taught the international community that if intervention took place, it had to be decisive, and with enough support to have a real impact.
Timeline: How did Blair view intervention? How was Kosovo a turning point?
-Blair’s government was intensely committed to promoting human rights, and his foreign policy was dedicated to promoting a more liberal cosmopolitan.
-In 1999, Balkan conflict became a matter of international interest again, in Serbia. Slobodan Milosevic, Serbian President, launched a military offensive to crush separatist movement from Kosovar Albanians.
-Blair had learnt from failures in Bosnia, and was eager to intervene. In March, NATO began aerial bombardment, and, in April, Blair attempted to persuade Clinton to a full-scale land invasion. The threat of a full NATO offensive forced Milosevic to hand Kosovo to NATO administration.
-Kosovo was arguably a high point, where Blair’s ‘Chicago Speech’ reinforced principles about intervention.
Timeline: What was the Clinton Doctrine?
-Clinton, in 1999, announced that, when mass human rights violations were taking place, the US should be prepared to intervene.
-Clinton accepted Blair’s claim that “genocide is never a purely internal matter.”
-He believed that a world governed by the principles would be safer and more secure for US interests.
Timeline: What was R2P?
-Responsibility to Protect, introduced in 2005.
-Kofi Annan, as UN Sec-Gen, argued that states could now no longer claim absolute authority over their citizens.
-Instead, sovereignty was conditional upon a state’s ability to protect its citizens’ human rights.
-This principle asserts that states have a ‘responsibility’ to protect its citizens from harm, and if it fails at this, that responsibility passes on to the global community.
-All UN members voted to promote R2P at the UN World Summit in 2005, to prevent genocide.
Successes: Detail the Balkans, 1992-5
-Initially, it was unsuccessful as UN peacekeepers acted without a mandate, and were acting in a war zone, without the means to even defend themselves. This led to events like the Srebrenica Massacre, where lightly armed UN-Dutch forces handed control to the stronger Serbs.
-However, when NATO launched Operation Deliberate Force in 1995, conditions for lasting peace were established.
-A peace deal was agreed at Dayton, Ohio, and NATO forces were to rebuild Bosnia. At its peak, 60,000 troops were deployed in, largely, a policing role. They also had operational legitimacy from a UN mandate.
-This model was followed in Kosovo in 1999, where 50,000 troops were deployed in order to provide the conditions for peace & stability. Here, NATO troops were active in the community, going from disarming militias to accompanying children to school.
Successes: Detail Sierra Leone, 2000.
-Sierra Leone’s civil war during the 1990s had been particularly brutal, and the RUF had been backed by Liberian President, Charles Taylor, in return for ‘blood diamonds.
-In May 2000, the Blair government sent a military force to help evacuate foreign nationals. Elite British troops them began to engage in highly mobile operations against the RUF, and rebels were effectively crushed.
-British troops then remained to train & advise Sierra Leone’s armed forces and, in 2001, the RUF agreed to disarm. In 2003, as a result of pressure Taylor stood down.
-In 2006 he was charged by the UN Tribunal.
Successes: Detail East Timor, 1999-2001.
-Indonesia annexed East Timor in 1975, but their key cultural differences led to separatist resistance and, in 1999, the Indonesian government reluctantly allowed them an independence referendum.
-Those in favour won 78%, and this led to violent backlash from pro-Indonesia militias.
-During the crisis, 500,000 East Timorese were driven from their homes and John Howard, Aus PM, declared that Australia, who feared the effects of a refugee crisis, declared that they would lead any UN force deployed.
-Clinton put economic pressure on Indonesia & UN Resolution 1264 authorised a multinational force to enter.
-Stability was restored & elections held in 2001, and by May 2003, they had formal independence.
Successes: Detail Cote D’Ivorie, 2011.
-In 2011, President Gbago refused to accept defeat in general election. This pushed the country towards civil war, and the UNSC mandated the destruction of Gbago’s military capacity.
-France, as the former colonial power, promptly intervened with both air & ground forces, made easier by the fact that Cote D’Ivorie is on the West coast.
-This intervention had very clear legitimacy, as Gbago had unequivocally lost the election.
-Gbago was arrested, and the legitimate government took office.
Failures: Detail Somalia, 1992-3.
-Bush sent 28,000 troops into Somalia, with the aim to “end the starvation” of the million Somalis threatened by it.
-However, troops were unable to distinguish between rival clans, militias, and civilians.
-Also, Somalia had no legitimate government to defend, and the US could not cooperate with Somali forces, being seen as an alien occupying force.
-The US people also quickly turned against the action, particularly after the Battle of Mogadishu, and Clinton withdrew all forces by 1994.
-This failure demonstrated how important it is for intervention to have a real chance of success, and the political will for it to be carried through.
Failures: Detail Afghanistan, 2001-2021.
-Western intervention had been primarily launched as a reaction to 9/11, and to eliminate the threat of Al-Qaeda, but was also a reaction to the Taliban’s cruel rule and human rights abuses.
-Even though NATO made a huge military presence, they were unable to overcome the effects of Fundamental Islamism, and the cultural divide was too severe, and attempts to build trust were undermined.
-In August 2021, the failure of intervention was demonstrated when the Taliban entered Kabul as Western ambassies & the airport were besieged by desperate & terrified Afghans.
Failures: Detail Iraq 2003-Pres.
-Iraq = another post-9/11 liberal intervention, that aimed to stabilise the region. The US hoped that overthrowing Saddam Hussein would lead to greater stability.
-While Hussein was quickly overthrown, almost no attention was paid to post-war reconstruction, and Bush said, “We don’t do police work.”
-They instead hoped that Iraq would simply move towards democracy, without interference. However, chaos ensued very quickly.
-Sunni Muslims launched an insurgency, provoking widespread killing and occupying forces. The brutal spread of ISIL was a direct result of failure to achieve nation-building in post-war Iraq.
-While ISIL was removed in 2019, by 2021 2m Iraqis had been internally displaced. An ISIL suicide bomb attack in Baghdad in January 2021 killed 32 people - showing the lack of progress.
Relative: Detail Libya, 2011.
-In 2011, there was an uprising aggainst Gaddafi’s regime in Libya. Civil war broke out and Gaddafi said “There won’t be any mercy,” as forces approached rebel strongholds.
-NATO, with UNSC approval, focused on destroying Gaddafi’s air force & artillery. Gaddafi was killed and Libyan National Transitional Council took control of the country.
-NATO Sec-Gen called this “one of the most successful in NATO history.”
-However, there was no committment to nation-building, and armed gangs soon seized control of large parts of the country.
-In 2020, France & Russia back General Khalifa Hafta’s Libyan Arab Armed Forces against the Turkish-supported Government of National Accord. Both of these groups had been responsible for human rights abuses, according to HRW.
Relative: Detail Darfur, 2007-2021.
-Darfur claims independence from Sudan, and, as separatist demands grew, the government sent in Arab militia, known as Janjaweed, who pillaged the region.
-Colin Powell, 2004 US Secretary of State, said that this amounted to “genocide.” It estimated that 300,000 people have died during the conflict & 2.5m people had been made homeless from it.
-The UNSC, though, dithered about intervention, and China as wary of condemning Sudan for genocide.
-In 2007, when most of the killing had already taken place, Sudan’s president allowed a UN/AU peacekeeping mission. They had 24,000 personnel in field, but work was difficult
Factors: What are some factors that determine whether or not humanitarian intervention is successful?
-Feasibility.
-A commitment to nation-building.
-Robust mandate & commitment to success.
-A legitimate government.
Factors: How does feasibility affect it? Give some examples of it leading to failure.
-Interventions must have achievable objects, and if they do not, they are bound to fail, “you may with a bleeding heart have to let it go.” (Kissinger).
-Somalia was already a failed state by the time that the US intervened, and they were dragged into clan fighting that they didn’t understand.
-Tribal warfare, which is incredibly difficult for outsiders to understand, DRC caused deaths of 6m. Success here was not particularly feasible.
-1979, Russian attempt to occupt Afghanistan was a disaster, and NATO-led nation building wasn’t likely to work due to the Taliban & cultural differences.
Factors: Give some examples of feasibility leading to successes.
-In Kosovo, intervention was very feasible, as the knew the Serb resistors would be unable to last long, especially as they relied on support from Russia.
-Sierra Leone was also feasible, as its geographic position made it easily accessible for French forces.
-Similarly, Cote D’Ivorie was easily accessible as a country on the West Coast of Africa. Also, this was strengthened by the fact that Gbago’s power was already massively in decline.
Factors: How does a commitment to nation-building affect success? Give some examples of it leading to success.
-States that have been under the control of dictators don’t have viable organs of government to ensure the rule of law. Without a commitment to nation-building, intervention can do more harm than good.
-In Bosnia & Kosovo, UN protectorates were established, encouraging political stability. Their policing role in the Balkans enabled a return to normal life and, in Kosovo, there was one peacekeeper for every 48 people.
-In East Timor, UN forces adopted an assertive policing role, crushing criminal gangs & militias that threatened anarchy once Indonesian troops had withdrawn.
Factors: Give some examples of a lack of commitment to nation-building leading to failure.
-The absence of nation-building in Libya allowed the country to descend into anarchy. Western leaders took the glory of taking down Gaddafi, without considering what would happen next. Libya lacked democratic tradition, leaving a vaccum of power.
-In Somalia, US troops had not been trained in principles of police work, and were soon overcome by the anarchic conditions that they encountered. They lacked strategy and Clinton withdrew fores in 1994.
-In Iraq, US forces gradually understood the need to nation-build & in the early stages their lack of appreciation for Iraqi culture made it easy for them to be portrayed as an alien influence.
Factors: How does a Robust mandate & commitment to success affect intervention? Give some examples of it leading to success.
-An unmandated intervention has limited potential for success as it lacks legitimacy.
-In East Timor, Australian-led forces were able to operate under more robust terms of engagement. They were trained in counter-insurgency, and were able to police aggressive gangs.
-Bosnia, 1995, NATO was able to take offensive military action, leading to the signing of Peace Accords. Also, in Kosovo in 1999, Blair’s commitment to upholding NATO promises ensured the aims were achieved.
Factors: Give some examples of the lack of mandate/commitment to success leading to failure.
-Rwanda, they were only mandated to “monitor” the situation. They could therefore only protect a small number of Tutsis in the capital, Kigali.
-In Afghanistan & Iraq, military disengagement from America led to ultimate failure. Obama scaled back troops in Afghanistan from 100,000 to just 8,400 by 2017. Trump then reduced it to just 4,000.
-Peacekeeping in Bosnia in the early 1990s was restricted by the offensive action that they were able to take. They were too passive in the face of aggression, as was seen by the surrender of Srebrenica “safe haven.”
Factors: How can a legitimate government impact intervention?
-Corrupt government significantly undermine humanitarian interventions.
-In Libya, NATO forces withdrew before a new government was established.
-In Afghanistan/Iraq, there were elected governments (though many questioned their legitimacy) which arguably undermined intervention.
-When Britain intervened in Sierra Leone & Cote D’Ivorie, they were not failing states, and they intervened on behalf of Alassane Outarra, who was recognised as President of Cote D’Ivorie.
Selective: Outline some reasons why humanitarian intervention is selective.
-Legitimacy (ie states will not act if their actions would not be legitimate, particularly in cases where there would be loss of lives).
-Leadership. Intervention is more likely to take place when powerful states openly support it.
-Public interest (CNN factor). If the media can shock the public by covering stories about human rights abuses, intervention is more likely to take place.
-National Self-Interest. Humanitarian disasters that might impact a state’s own security are treated with particular urgency.
-Likelihood of success.
Selective: Give some examples where legitimacy has helped intervention.
-1995, NATO mandated military intervention in Bosnia, which was vital to ensuring that the Serbs were defeated. The 1999 bombing campaign in Serbia was legitimate, & ensured President Milosevic would withdraw troops.
-In 1999, UN oversaw East Timor’s referendum, which was approved. This then led to Aus-led, UNSC-authorised, action.
-2013, AU endorsed French intervention in Mali, giving legitimacy, and meaning that AU forces cooperated with France.
Selective: How has lack of legitimacy impacted the likelihood of intervention?
-When there is not legitimacy to the possible intervention, or when other states are less likely to aid, it can invite counter-military action, deterring states.
-The Assad regime had legitimacy over governing Syria, having won 177/250 Parliamentary seats in 2020. Russia, China, and Iran all recognise the legitimacy of this regime, and so Western intervention would be uncertain.
-In 2020, the ICJ ordered Myanmar to stop the genocide of Rohingya Muslims. As the government is wholly legitimate, and has support from China, intervention is unlikely.
Selective: Give some examples where strong leadership has strengthened the likelihood of intervention.
- 1991, Saddam Hussein’s actions against Kurds provoked US, UK, and Fr to establish safe havens in Northern Iraq. John Major then declared that it would be “ill-advised” to attack these.
-In 1999, Blair persuaded NATO & EU leaders to intervene in Kosovo, after his ‘Chicago Speech’. This was directly after he had won the Charlemagne Prize for European Achievement, for his work in Northern Ireland. This provided him with a sense of moral authority, and led the US to intervening.
Selective: Give some examples where a lack of leadership has led to inaction.
-In 2013, Cameron’s calls for military intervention in Syria were rejected by Parliament, and this meant that Obama, and other powers, were discouraged from acting.
-Trump Administration’s unwillingness to act in idealistic humanitarian intervention meant that there was little action during his presidency. In 2021, Biden’s Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, said that his Administration would, “place democracy and human rights back at the centre of American foreign policy.” (Though the withdrawal of troops in Afghanistan 8 moths later suggests otherwise).
Selective: Give some examples where the ‘CNN Factor’ has impacted intervention.
-The publication of shocking images from Somalia, and the public response that ensued, led to Bush’s decision to send troops. However, the images of dead US servicemen, being dragged naked through the streets of Mogadishu persuaded Clinton to withdraw.
-In 1999, ethnic cleansing in Kosovo generated media coverage, and, especially in the EU, this led to intervention.
-The media, though, has had less of a focus on conflicts & atrocities in DRC & Myanmar, perhaps illustrating why there has not been intervention there.
Selective: Give some examples where national self-interest has impacted the likelihood of intervention.
-Blair’s argument for intervention in Kosovo was built on the fact that the conflict might spread through the rest of the Balkans.
-2000, John Howard commited troops in East Timor, as he feared the impact that a refugee crisis might have on Aus.
-Since 2013, French military has, at the request of the Malian government been combatting Islamist insurgencies. France has sustained this intervention, so as to prevent it being a refuge for terrorists who might threaten Europe. Macron said, “we aren’t there for neo-colonial or imperialistic goals we’re there for collective security of their region, and ours.”
-Civil War in DRC, though posses no threat to Western states, (arguably why they haven’t intervened).
Selective: Give some examples where the likelihood of success has impacted the likelihood of intervention.
-Action was taken in East Timor, Sierra Leone, Cote D’Ivorie, Libya, and Mali, as there was a very high likelihood of success.
-However, after failures of Afghanistan and Iraq, western powers have been less prepared to involve themselves in intervention, ie DRC, Myanmar, Syria, and Yemen.
Hypocrisy: How does the US present itself in terms of humanitarian intervention? Does this always hold up?
-US is often viewed as a ‘beacon’ of human rights in a world which ruthless rulers trampled on the rights of their citizens.
-During the Cold War, Reagan promoted the idea of American exceptionalism, where the liberties of Americans were contrasted with the repression under communism.
-Huntingdon, though, argues that America often claim the moral high ground, but are incredibly selective & hypocritical in their intervention.
-When FDR was asked how he could condone human rights abuses in Nicaragua, he states that President Anasrasio Garcia “a bitch, but he is our son of a bitch.” This illustrates that the US condemn some abuses, but condone others.
Hypocrisy: How does the case study of Uighur Muslims reflect this hypocrisy?
-Around 11m Uighur Muslims like in the Xinjiang province of China, and the government regards them as a threat to the People’s Republic.
-In 2017, Uighur Muslims have been forbidden from growing long beards, and from wearing veils. Since 2017, at least 1 million have been interned in detention camps, which the Chinese government accepts are for “re-education” purposes.
-In 2019, 22 (mostly) Western countries wrote to the UN HRs Council expressing their concern. This provoked 37 countries to write back, in their support of China’s “incredible achievements in human rights.”
-In 2021, Blinken stated that this re-education & detention “speaks to an effort to commit genocide.”
-Yet, from fear of China’s influecene, no actual action has been taken.
Hypocrisy: What evidence is there that intervention has been motivated by something other than ‘saving strangers’?
-In the 1990s, intervention in Bosnia & Kosovo undermined Serbia, an ally of Russia. Critics aregue that, by challenging Serbian influence in the region, it could be replaced by the economic & political influence of the EU.
-In Afghanistan, intervention was primarily concerned with destroying Al-Qaeda. This suggests that, despite the Taliban’s human rights abuses the US wouldn’t’ve intervened without 9/11.
-Geostrategic interests played a large role in action in Iraq, and Saddam Hussein was only viewed as a threat to regional stability after his invasion of Kuwait. In the 1980s, despite his human rights abuses, like the 1988 chemical attack on the town of Halabja that killed 5,000, he was viewed as an ally.
-In the 1990s, intervention in Bosnia & Kosovo undermined Serbia, an ally of Russia. Critics aregue that, by challenging Serbian influence in the region, it could be replaced by the economic & political influence of the EU.
-In Afghanistan, intervention was primarily concerned with destroying Al-Qaeda. This suggests that, despite the Taliban’s human rights abuses the US wouldn’t’ve intervened without 9/11.
-Geostrategic interests played a large role in action in Iraq, and Saddam Hussein was only viewed as a threat to regional stability after his invasion of Kuwait. In the 1980s, despite his human rights abuses, like the 1988 chemical attack on the town of Halabja that killed 5,000, he was viewed as an ally.
-Russia, as a UNSC member w/ a large nuclear arsenal, has not been held accountable for their actions. The repression of Chechen separatism in the 90s caused the deaths of 1000s. Grozny, the Chechen capital, was razed making it, according to the UN, the most destroyed city on Earth.
-In 2020, UN report held Russia accountable for ‘indiscriminate attacks in civillian areas’ in Syria. Save The Children condemned the government’s use of cluster bombs, which are banned by international law.
-Turkey has been accused of commiting crimes against humanity on Kurds in Idlib, a province of Syria in 2018. As a NATO member, Turkey has faced massive criticism.
Hypocrisy: Provide some evidence against this cynical view.
-Intervention in Somalia/Sierra Leone had very little geostrategic benefit for states involved, suggesting that it’s not wholly selfishly motivated. Though, there are many cases where human rights abuses have been ignored, ie DRC/Rwanda.
-States also recognise that, while the West may not always like what China/Russia do, military action would do little to make them change their ways.
-Also, if a government can claim legitimacy, would Western intervention make things better at all.
-Perhaps it is not double standards, but simply states being realistic. Douglas Hurd, UK foreign secretary, said, “We should do good where we can, but not pretend that we can do good everywhere.”
Hypocrisy: What does Mary Kaldor argue about New wars?
-The inevitability of war is different now, as the rise of failed states means soldiers need to be trained for nation-building, as well as conflict.
-Military intervention is no longer used soley to defeat an adversary, or to secure a peace treaty.
-Military engagements are now a precursor to long, drawn-out occupations.
-However, the US has been slow to adapt to these principles, and Defence Sec, Donald Rumsfield, advised that, “we don’t do nation-building,” as was evident during Iraq.
Hypocrisy: What arguments are there that responsibility to protect outweighs state sovereignty?
-Under the liberal harm principle, state sovereignty is conditional, and there is a responsibility for states to protect their citizens.
-Failures to intervene have led to appalling, and avoidable, losses of life (ie Yemen, Darfur).
-‘Zones of Conflict’ threaten stability, and can only be reduced if military action is taken promptly, to stop it spiralling. Action in Mali, for example, aimed to stop terrorism spreading through North Africa.
-Regional and global stability are threatened if mass murder & human rights abuses are not punished (ie migrant crisis caused by Syrian Civil War threatened European stability).
Hypocrisy: What arguments are there the state sovereignty outweighs the responsibility to protect?
-Westphalian principles of state sovereignty provide the key foundations of global stability. Undermining these undermines the whole system.
-Humanitarian intervention, according realists, are often an excuse to advance self-interest, and so lack moral legitimacy.
-Russia justified its war in Georgia in 2008 by the claim that people in South Ossetia viewed themselves as Russians.
-Humanitarian missions can simply raise false hope and worsen a situation. In Somalia & Bosnia, warring factions often hijacked UN aid convoys.
-Humanitarian intervention is undermined by it becoming selective.
