|Published online: January 23, 2015||$US5.00|
This paper, drawing on the ethics of legally valid humanitarian interventions as an important aspect of globalization which refer to the military operations originating in and conducted within the UN Security Council framework since the end of the Cold War in cases when, first and foremost, massive human rights violations are committed by a state against its people. The whole debate centres on the main ethical principles on which humanitarian intervention should be based. It argues that UN authorised military action on grounds of "humanitarian intervention" is justifiable when a humanitarian crisis within a state is, first, morally abhorrent; second, politically undesirable; third, legally untenable; and, fourth, damaging to the fabric of international society and public order. To speak of "humanitarian intervention" as a well-established doctrine of international law, military operations anchored in humanitarian intervention should meet the following requirements which are indispensable from both legal and ethical stand points: first, the resolution enjoining military action should not be obtained as a result of intensive bargaining among UN Security Council member states reflecting "high" national interests; second, such military action should be consistent with the Security Council’s handling of previous crisis; third, there has to be a reliable congruence between the goals of humanitarian intervention and the means deployed for that purpose. This paper will look into a selection of cases, commonly referred to as "humanitarian intervention," such as the military action in Haiti in 1994 and the military intervention of 2011 in Libya.
|Keywords:||Humanitarian Intervention, Global Ethics, UN Security Council|
Lecturer, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Şehir University, Istanbul, Turkey
There are currently no reviews of this product.Write a Review