Firstly, we must understand, under what circumstances the general institute – regulating international relations and constituting international norms – intends humanitarian intervention and what operations it allows in such cases. However, along with the mentioned principle, we often hear the “humanitarian intervention”concept, which is controversial and raises a number of questions. Well-known principles and goals of the United Nations are the protection of human rights, the right of people’s self-determination, non-use of force in international relations and also non-interference and non-intervention in the internal affairs of the States (Article 2/7). He emphasizes that it is done without the agreement of the target state.
McKinley defines intervention as an intentional act of a state, grouping of states or international agency, which aims to influence the internal politics of another country.
There is no legal definition for humanitarian intervention, and different authors describe this phenomenon in different ways. And what the humanitarian intervention actually is? What are its goals and motivations? The purpose of this analysis is to understand the nature and objectives of humanitarian intervention, to consider some examples and to draw conclusions, in which case may the interference be considered as “humanitarian” and “justified”. In some cases, when there has indeed been a need to intervene and help the UN and other powerful countries haven’t done anything and many crimes have been made in front of their eyes, such as in Rwanda and Somali. However, there have also been successful interventions, such as the overthrow of the dictatorial regime of Idi Amin in Uganda by Tanzanian armed forces, which had destroyed more than 300.000 citizens of his country. The case of Iraq is not the only one: in recent years, in succession to each other, crisis began in Egypt, Libya, Yemen and other Arabic countries. In the case of the USA, discontentment appeared in the country, also because of the huge costs that the war demanded: on the Iraq war, the US has spent $ 2 trillion. However, it is not always that initiatives pursuing such good intentions have a positive effect: it is enough to remember the US-Britain-initiated intervention of coalition forces in Iraq, as a result of which, according to many sources, more than 165 civilians have been killed, not counting the fact, that after that incidents the civil war began in the country, state infrastructures were disturbed and Iraq appeared in a deeper crisis. Nevertheless, the cases of putting troops in any country is being officially explained in such way.
Recently, we often hear about the “humanitarian interventions” which are often done to put an end to the violations of human rights or to protect people fighting against dictatorial regimes in such countries.
0 kommentar(er)
