Over the past decade it has witnessed a resurgence of the interest in the regulation, and politics of the military, particularly whenever undertaken for which was acknowledged to be the humanitarian functions. Nevertheless, the issue of when, or previously, outside the parties could possibly be legitimately intercede in the sovereign state to address on the massive suffering of the state populace, that is definitely contentions ones. The humanitarian rationale for the utilization of the force that dates going back to the outset of modern state system has continued to come across the resistance, regardless of the apparent appeal. This seminar explores the possibility of the humanitarian intervention as the frame-work for the human security. The paper will certainly objectify the humanitarian intervention that is the element which will make the human security autonomous and will not standalone nor entirely independent from the conventional security. There have been numerous literatures which confuses the two terms as the synonymous with one another, in which others differentiate them explicitly. Consequently, the essay will certainly address on the ambiguity of each of the conceptions in addition to discuss the humanitarian intervention significantly less diverse concept from the information security but instead claims that it could be part and parcel of it, and a potential frame-work to be able to explain the paradigm of the human security autonomous to the non-traditional security.
This involvement desires for the sound, simple and clear element with regards to the human intervention and concerns which are in the middle way for both human security and the non-traditional security with regards to meeting the tangency point. This really is a re-conceptualized model of the human rights.
The essay aims to discuss the ambiguity of the conceptions and address the human intervention especially on the aspects to the human security. There will be a feasible frame-work which can describe the paradigm of the human security autonomous to the non-traditional security. This contribution may also address the unambiguous interpretation of the human security particularly to evolving field of the security particularly in the sub-discipline of the international relations.
Purpose and hypothetical questions
The hypothetical question to highlight is why there is certainly a necessity to separate the human security from the non-traditional security? Within this inquiry there is should consider the aim of the seminar paper as stated before, consequently the question need to fit to the construction of the essay. The proponent may want to emphasize there is not necessary of separating the human security from the non-traditional security since the second hypothesis look at the middle way for the ideas that are conceived. The related literatures have confused on the autonomous of the security from the conception and the increased in the ambiguity that has directed the scholars as well as the practioners in formulating their own interpretations when it comes to the human security and the non-traditional security.
This essay will use case study and text analysis in the collecting of the information. One of the case study which will be used is the Kosovo case study which will focus on the study on the US government perspective in regards to the humanitarian intervention. This example is interesting in that it strongly supported and led the NATO countries relative to the scale of the atrocities which are revealed. The case study is also interesting in that it shows the primary reasons for the importance of the humanitarian intervention from the perspective of US policymakers. One of the thing that the case study discuss is on the ethical consideration, and the moral necessity to protect the innocent civilian from the persecution and the ethnic cleansing. Second is on the perspective that it was significant for the US security to maintain the stability of European. This case study will help in learning of the government perspective, as to why humanitarian intervention could be pursued as the foreign policy objective, when the humanitarian intervention could be regarded justified, and from this analysis could study the status of the current conflicts.
Arguments, critics, comparison and analysis
The predicament of the humanitarian intervention attracted a substantial attention after the Cold War had come to an end. There are numerous people who considered that the new probabilities of the cooperation were opening between the main powers, and the humanitarian intervention was among the items that were near the top of the agenda. It might be morally desirable to legitimize the practice of the humanitarian intervention, which could be completed in the awareness of the dangers which are inherent in this kind of type of the practices. Depending on the argument of some authors is the fact there is an important battery argument as it pertains realist tradition which are not always appreciated, and this count against the sanctioning to the humanitarian intervention unless this continues to be constrained and regulated properly.
According to the argument by Aristotle highlights that the quest for the security continues to be connected with the ideas of the fullness of becoming and also the ideal nature. This has leased out the form of the instinctive striving after the perfection since it is embodied when it comes to the species. When it comes to the Confucius security that is associated to the commitments to various universal principles of the conduct, it can be argued that the ultimate aim all along is to bring about the condition of the universal social harmony as well as the stability. The goodness of the human nature was assumed, and in the event it was damaged could have been restored through proper education. According to critics of Rousseau, is that the quest to the security diverts from the man aim to go back to the natural condition was portrayed as the natural goodness of the man, and his quest to the political legitimacy. Security continues to be the recognition to the rational potential for the universal peace. Nevertheless, this continues to be critized by the Indian thinker Kautilya who contends to contain the opinion that the universal egoism helps make permanent security to be feasible. He has developed a structure of the security in which this continues to be treated as diverse strategies wherein given, the egoist nature of the man social living or perhaps the security could be made manageable and relative security could be attained. The Italian philosopher by the name Cicero, was the first individual to have come close to identify security as the human security in which has described it as absence to the anxiety upon to which the fulfilment to life might depend on.
The arguments of Hobbes on the organized society where the security has prevailed to take place lies in the shadows of the Leviathan ruler, who was ever prepared in using his sword in order to enforce all his conditions to the social contract, and this was the origin choice of the anarchic individuals. This argument has been criticized by Buzan and Waever who have pointed that the premises of Hobbes are very individualistic.
Humanitarian intervention framework.
The expression to the humanitarian sentiments when it comes to the world of politics is the product to the changing historical as well as the social processes. The world or even the domestic events usually alters or impact various sentiments which individual’s experiences. This has been left to the international community to address the graved humanitarian crisis such as what was experienced in country like Rwanda in 199 or Sbrenica in 1995. Currently, Sudan Darfur which is facing this kind of the tragic and the worst problem that could ever occur to a state or a community of individuals.
Traditionally, the interventions had been highlighted as the forcible breach of the sovereignty which interferes to the state internal affairs. The legality in regards to the forcible humanitarian intervention is a matter of the dispute between the restrictions as well as the counter-restrictions. The perspective usually pointed out that the states would not intervene to the predominately humanitarian reasons, states not permitted to risk their own soldiers’ lives on the basis of the humanitarian crusades, claims would certainly abuse their right to the humanitarian intervention utilizing it as the cloak in promoting the national requirements. Additionally, the state would apply the principles of the human intervention selectively.
Humanitarians have found scant supports when it comes to the international law. Nonetheless, it is very important observe that the legislation of the international law happens formally as well as informally. The United Nations has increased in playing a more robust role with regards to sustaining the standards of the human security and the justice. Yet, dealing with the humanitarian intervention problem there has been problems for the UN. Nonetheless, UN charter does not assert to the rights of states. The number of the occasions the UN has warranted the interventions due to the gross human rights violation continues to be limited. Moreover, the charter as well upholds to the rights of the people. There are numerous references to which the UN charter has justified the look at that the extreme violations to the human rights offers the basis to justify humanitarian intervention.
Humanitarian interventions has been an issue for the discussion for a decade now. After the Holocaust the international community that swore they would not admit to such crimes against the humanity any more. Nonetheless, countries such as Bosnia, Somalia, Rwanda and even Darfur has highlighted that the problem has not been solved. It is reasonable to find that individuals should understand the humanitarian intervention. The outcome of the humanitarian intervention, and ignorance by the world community could be quite different in either case. The question of the USA and the UK credibility level are among the international community which is disputable one.
Every violation of the human rights is not justification when it comes to intervention. It all depends upon the nature, scope in addition to the significance of the issue. The circumstances needs to be extreme and life as well as the liberty should be a stake when they were to require the usage of the force, across the international boundary. Numerous situation of the violation should be managed locally, but the local stakeholders. There are merely cases for example the genocide, ethnic cleansing or the systematic massacre of the religious or the natural community that could validate the international response. Even though the issues are continuing to arise there is absolutely no effective mechanisms for the internal influence on the states that are involved. The international sanctions could be ignored and the world community requirement could be neglected. The military sanctions may not be the best way out. There are various major considerations in regards to the humanitarian intervention that could be adopted. Initially, it is important to ask ourselves if we are sure of the case. The aspect of insecurity and war could be an imperfect instrument when it comes to righting the humanitarian distress. The second issue to ask is if all the aspect of the diplomatic options have been exhausted.
The rationale of the humanitarian intervention usually pulls into directions. One hand, is from the realistic point of view, the inviolability of the sovereign rights of the state that is provided supremacy. The states usually are prohibited to utilize the armed forces against territorial integrity of another state, aside from the self defence. Hence, the intervention is not permissible. Alternatively, the intervention is just justified from more liberal method to punish the wrong and to safeguard the innocent.
The concern of the humanitarian intervention has attracted substantial attention after the cold war that have arrived at an end. There are numerous people who believed that the new likelihood of cooperation which were opening up between the major powers. This seminar paper has studied the probability of the humanitarian intervention as the framework for the human security. The papers has objectified the humanitarian intervention that is the element that has made the human security autonomous
Bellamy, Alex J, Humanitarian intervention (Routledge, 2017)
Benhabib, Seyla, Dignity in adversity: Human rights in troubled times. (John Wiley & Sons, 2013)
Donnelly, Jack, Universal human rights in theory and practice (Cornell University Press, 2013)
Forsythe, David P, Human rights in international relations (Cambridge University Press, 2017)
Goodhart, Michael, Human rights: politics and practice (Oxford University Press, 2016)
Hehir, Aidan, Humanitarian intervention: an introduction (algrave macmillan, 2013)
Kent, Ann, China, the United Nations, and human rights: The limits of compliance (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013)
Kuperman, Alan J, "A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO's Libya campaign." International Security 38, no. 1 (2013): 105-136.
Murdie, Amanda, and Dursun Peksen. "The impact of human rights INGO shaming on humanitarian interventions." The Journal of Politics 76, no. 1 (2013): 215-228.
Paris, Roland, "The ‘Responsibility to Protect’and the structural problems of preventive humanitarian intervention." International Peacekeeping 21, no. 5 (2014): 569-603.
Pieterse, Jan Nederveen, ed, World orders in the making: humanitarian intervention and beyond (Springer, 2016)
Smith, Rhona KM. Textbook on international human rights (Oxford University Press, 2016)
Tomuschat, Christian, Human rights: between idealism and realism (OUP Oxford, 2014)
Weiss, Thomas G, Humanitarian intervention (John Wiley & Sons, 2016)
Christian, Tomuschat and Christian, Human rights: between idealism and realism (OUP Oxford, 2014).
Michael, Goodhart, Human rights: politics and practice (Oxford University Press, 2016).
Jack, Donnelly, Universal human rights in theory and practice (Cornell University Press, 2013).
Thomas, Weiss, Thomas, Humanitarian intervention (John Wiley & Sons, 2016).
Michael, Goodhart, Human rights: politics and practice (Oxford University Press, 2016)
Aidan, Hehir, Aidan Humanitarian intervention: an introduction (algrave macmillan, 2013).
Ann, Kent. China, the United Nations, and human rights: The limits of compliance (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013).
Alan Kuperman, "A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO's Libya campaign." International Security 38, no. 1 (2013): 105-136.
Jan Nederveen, Pieterse, World orders in the making: humanitarian intervention and beyond (Springer, 2016).
Rhona Smith, Textbook on international human rights (Oxford University Press, 2016).