Humanitarian Intervention

Question 1

Two main ideas of what sovereignty meant before R2P and what did the UNSC Article 2 implement to concrete this?

Answer 1

• Territorial dominace
• Non-intervention

Article 2: Prohibits the threat or use of force, except in self-defence or with UNSC approval.

Question 2

What are the implications of the original idea of sovereignty?

Answer 2

Non-interference became accepted as a norm… So - how do we then deal with states abusing/killing its own citizens? E.G. Rwanda

Question 3

Definitions of Humanitarian and Intervention

Answer 3

Humanitarian: an activity aimed at preventing abuses of HR

Intervention: an activity which allows other states/IO’s to intervene in domestic state affairs without consent of the government (can involve force)

Question 4

What is Just War Theory? And what does it aim to do?

Answer 4

Seeks to understand when war is justifiable and legitimate.

By doing this, it aims to protect state sovereignty whilst at the same time seeks to justify intervention when a state’s actions are inhumane.

Question 5

What are the criteria for JWT?

Answer 5

Jus ad Bellum: Whether you have the right to go to war
Right intention: to protect civilians they must displace a states government
Just Cause: A movement that people can get behind e.g. Taliban were bad for women (Afghanistan vs. US)
Last Resort
Probability of success

Just in Bello: Justice of war (During war)
Discrimination: Non-combatants must be given immunity and protected
Proportionality: Military actions must do more good than harm

Question 6

How does JWT relate to HI? 5 Powers

Answer 6

3 of the 5 UNSC members are western states and so arguably mould the decision the Council makes on intervening to their will

Question 7

How do HI’s and Non-intervention clash?

Answer 7

Non-intervention and deeply engrained idea of sovereignty VS. Human Rights

Question 8

HI’s and Realism

Answer 8

Realism:

• Often opposed to intervention (Iraq)
• Views HI as costly and ineffective
• Intervention complete when state is ‘secured’ (fight stops)

Question 9

HI’s and liberalism

Answer 9

• Must have clear laws to show intervention is legitimate
• Intervention must be sanctioned by multilateral forces (UN)
• Must protect civilian lives
• Intervention complete when HRs acknowledge by government

Question 10

The 3 Elements to R2P

Answer 10

Prevent, React, Rebuild

Question 11

How do the principles of Non-intervention and sovereignty affect the international realm? Which theories agree?

Answer 11

• Accepted by Realists and Liberalists alike.

- Gives all states an understanding of territories and borders which allows for a basic degree of peace.

Question 12

What is the critique to Non-intervention and the idea of ‘sovereignty’ before R2P

Answer 12

• Westphilian ideology

- presumes states are the best actors to protect their citizens.

Question 13

What are the 3 Pillars of R2P

Answer 13

• States must protect their civilians
• Int. Community must assist them to do so
• If a state fails, the int. community have the responsibility to act, whether peacefully or with force in accordance with UN charter

Question 14

How has the idea of sovereignty changed over the centuries? (E.G. 16th century answered to..) and during WW2 what happened?

Answer 14

16th Century: Answer to God only

19th Century: By consent of the governed

(Holocaust and fascist movements brought about idea of HRs but unable to be realised during Cold War) -> (Humanitarian Intervention later deemed necessary after ordeals in Somalia and Rwanda)

Question 15

What was Kosovo’s role in the creation of the ICISS and what question was raised?

Answer 15

• NATO acted without UN permission
• Is it legitimate for states to act without UN authority? And at how many deaths does it become justifiable to intervene without legitimacy?
• Introduction of Deng and Anna’s interlinking of sovereignty and responsibility

Question 16

What was Annan and Deng’s idea of sovereignty and R2P interlink?

Answer 16

• State as a servant to its citizens
• Good governance = legitimacy of a state’s sovereignty
• If states are unable to protect their civilians, the idea of non-interference in sovereign affairs yields to R2P

Question 17

What was the original scrutiny of ICISS/R2P

Answer 17

• Diminished sovereignty
• powerful states having right to act against any state if deemed necessary
  – neo imperialism through other means

Question 18

How was R2P/ICISS perceived in International Politics?

Answer 18

• Post-colonial states rejected it
• Developing states did not agree with its wording
• Russia stated it undermined the UN Charter

Question 19

What happened in 2005 that changed R2P perception? And what do states now do?

Answer 19

• Use of force taken out

- All states seem to now regularly attempt to implement R2P in their national policies

Question 20

Kenya

Answer 20

• Excellent early example of R2P implementation
• Ended successfully with President and opposing group agreeing on power share
• Brought crackdown on mobs
• Prevented what many believed would be worse mass atrocities
• AU President raised question: where does the threshold lay to have R2P implemented and why Kenya?

Question 21

Libya

Answer 21

• Began through Arab Spring Revolutions
• Case with highest profile and most significant use of R2P to date
• Qaddafi reclaimed much land from rebels and branded them as ‘cockroaches’ - echoes of Rwanda
• UNSC implemented resolution 1973: use of force to protect civilians without state permission
• Confliction as NATO bombings harmed civilians that they are meant to protect
• Raises questions of R2P future: much is to be done