Politics of Int. Law - humanitarian intervention and human rights - Essay Example

Politics of Int. Law - humanitarian intervention and human rights Augusto Pinochet Ugarte s that the sovereign ity of s at present does not have an absolute character as the international atmosphere is gaining supremacy in the world. When super-states and global organizations appeared, States power gradually got limited. Multiple compulsions and restrictions that nations contracted with each other and with global organizations have left them almost without sovereign liberty (Byers, 2000). The interference in an independent state by another with the aim of ending or decreasing affliction within the first state is considered as humanitarian intervention. The suffering may be of civil war, hunger or genocide. Humanitarian intervention should not invade the state, nor change the states territorial integrity but with the intention to reduce the suffering of civilians in that state. The humanitarian intervention is justified primarily by its moral and ethical approach towards human sufferings such as civil war, hunger or genocide. This idea is emphasized in the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ written in 1948 and empowered United Nations Security Council, a super-national body, to act and protect the human rights (Wikipedia, 2007). The United Nations Charter forbids nations from attacking other independent states in the pretext of solving the human rights violations. Such incidences of humanitarian military interventions by strong powers or coalitions with the intentions of their own geopolitical interests are not uncommon in the world history. It is important for the Security Council to authorize any use of power to protect human rights for the maintenance of world peace and also to avoid the abuse of power by super powers. Some argue that when a nation is committing gross human rights violations against its people, other nations or multilateral coalitions have the right to interfere militarily, without the consent of UN Security Council to stop those abuses on human rights. For example the 1999 U.S.-led NATO air assault against Yugoslavia with the aim of stopping human rights abuses in Kosovo was interpreted by some as a new model of humanitarian intervention. But, the United Nations charter very clearly forbid nations from attacking other states for the reason of violations of human rights. The charter authorizes the Security Council to intervene militarily to counter threats to or violations of global peace. Some intellectuals argue that the global concern in countering serious human rights abuses should not be blocked by the veto of a permanent Security Council member. In such instances where the Security Council is silent, they would legitimize unilateral military action, where it has condemned the human rights record of an affected state. But this argument is outweighed by the serious outcome that may arise from weakening the international restraints on the use of force. The Kosovo crisis demonstrates the danger of bypassing the Security Council and gives credibility to those who argue that intervention was not for humanitarian purposes. It was possible that a settlement similar to the one that ended the air war could have been reached without the use of force if the UN Security Council intervened and destructiveness of war and its after effects could have avoided (Lobel and Ratner, 2000). In 1990s many regions in the world faced civil war, human atrocities and genocide, like what happened in Rwanda, more than 500,000 people were killed and large number of people oppressed and tortured. But the international community could do little to stop it. Such large scale violations on human rights led Secretary General Kofi Annan to suggest that the international community has the right to intervene--and should intervene--to protect susceptible groups. Such an intervention should have the backing of Security Council resolution. The NATO intervention in Kosovo was without such a resolution. The Independent International Commission on Kosovo on its report concluded that the NATO action was illegal because it did not have the consent from Security Council but the action considered legitimate because it was essential to put an end to the Serbian atrocities and oppression of the Albanian Kosovo’s. These reports, and the statement of the Secretary General, stressed that a military intervention can be legitimate only if there is a severe human rights disaster and if all tactful efforts have failed (Global Policy Forum, 2003). There is too much enthusiasm in the human rights movement, especially in the US, for military intervention on humanitarian grounds says Former Amnesty International Secretary-General Ian Martin. He highlights that such international responsibility can be properly exercised only by a multilateral decision of the international community through the UN (Lobel and Ratner, 2000). According the report of International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), it is the responsibility of sovereign states to protect their own people from atrocities, oppression and genocide – and about the need for the larger international community to exercise that task if states are unwilling or unable to do so. Commission explains that they have found less opposition between these principles than expected but broad willingness to accept the idea. But it is more important to get the required political commitment. The most important task now is to ensure that when the call goes out to the community of states for action, that call must be answered. There must never again be mass killing or ethnic cleansing (Evans and Sahnoun, 2001). The Global Policy Forum endorse that there is a collective global responsibility to protect, take action by the Security Council, authorizing military intervention as a last resort, in the event of genocide and other large scale killing, ethnic cleansing or serious violations of international humanitarian law which sovereign Governments have proved powerless or unwilling to prevent (Global Policy Forum, 2004). The growth of world public support for humanitarian intervention seems certain, since it is driven by changes in information technology and transportation. There is a need to act quickly and strongly to establish new rules for humanitarian intervention to stay ahead of present trend. It is suggested that the guidelines to be considered about the circumstances under which humanitarian intervention should be authorized, and the actions that should be taken. The international community has the right and the responsibility to intervene in massive humanitarian crises, even if such intervention constitutes a breach on state sovereignty. Security Council authorization should be sought in all cases of humanitarian intervention. The United Nations should have primary responsibility for assigning a situation as a massive humanitarian crisis. The military action should be the last resort in humanitarian intervention. Decisions on where and when to intervene should be impartial, guided only by concern for the easing of human suffering. Governments which undertake a humanitarian intervention should take the responsibility for reconstruction and rehabilitation. And finally the international community must provide the United Nations with the resources necessary for fact-finding, protection of relief workers and, in extreme circumstances, coercive military action (Stuart, 2001). Kofi Annans Report on UN Reform urge Heads of State and Government to recommit to the rule of law, human rights and democracy — principles at the heart of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For this they should hold the “responsibility to protect” as a base for joint action against genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. They must agree to act on this task, identifying that this responsibility lies with each individual State, whose duty it is to protect its people. But if the national authorities are unwilling or unable to protect their citizens, then the responsibility shifts to the international community to use diplomatic, humanitarian and other methods to help protect civilian populations, and that if such methods appear inadequate the Security Council may out of necessity decide to take action under the Charter, including enforcement action, if so required (Global Policy Forum, 2005). International institutions have a significant role in modern International Relations. As humanity enters the contemporary phase of civilization, some scientists and political theorists see a global hierarchy of institutions replacing the existing system of sovereign nation-states as the primary political community.The United Nations is a global organization facilitating co-operation in international law, international security, economic development, and social equity. It needs urgent reforms to make it more democratic and effective to handle the human welfare and protect human rights in a global atmosphere. References Byers, M. (2000) The Law and Politics of the Pinochet Case [Online] Available From: [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Evans, G and Sahnoun, M. (2001) The Responsibility to Protect, Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. [Online] Available From: [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Global Policy Forum, (2003) Humanitarian Intervention: A Forum. [Online] 14 July 2003, Nation, Available From: [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Global Policy Forum, (2004) Excerpt of High Level Panels Report on Threats, Challenges and Change. [Online] 2 December 2004, Available From: [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Global Policy Forum, (2005) Excerpt of Kofi Annans Report on UN Reform: In Larger Freedom. [Online] 21 March 2005, Available From: [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Lobel, J. and Ratner, M. (2000) Humanitarian Military Intervention. [Online] Foreign Policy In Focus, Volume 5, Number 1, Available From: & [Accessed 3 February 2007]. Stuart, D.T. (2001) Rights Watch: Reconciling Non-intervention and Human Rights. [Online] Chronicle Online edition, Volume XXXVIII     Number 2 2001    Department of Public Information. Available From: [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Wikipedia, (2007) Humanitarian intervention [Online] Available From: < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanitarian_intervention> [Accessed 2 February 2007]. Read More