March 23, 1999 marked the beginning of the NATO bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia lasting three months. The rationale for the campaign was on the basis of “humanitarian intervention.” It was said to be in prevention of the ethnic cleansing of the Kosovar Albanians of Siberia by the authoritative regime of Slobodan Milosevic. The moral justification of this conflict has since been contested with the validity debated by a variety of theoretical schools of thought. This essay will use the revisions to the Legalist Paradigm presented by Walzer in conjunction with the conditions of jus ad bellum to prove the moral impermissibility of NATOs intervention in Kosovo.
To assess the moral justification of the intervention, …show more content…
The exception of intervention in other conflicts is categorized into three main subfields. Primarily, war is justified when a set of boundaries contains two or more political communities, one of whom is engaged in the struggle for independence. This is the issue of secession or “national liberation.” Subsequently, the next revision is that of counter-intervention stating when the boundaries have already been crossed by the military force of another foreign power, intervention is justified. The last revision to the Legalist Paradigm deems a just intervention when there are large scale violations of human rights within a set of boundaries. In regards to NATOs intervention in Kosovo, the first and third revision apply and the armed conflict can thus be assessed with such principles in …show more content…
The resolution ceased the hostilities between NATO’s Kosovo Force and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The results of the conflict included the UN Security Resolution 1244 which authorized international and civil military presence in Kosovo to ensure peaceful relations. This resolution to the conflict was initially seen as a success of NATO by the international community but has since caused controversy.
The essay served to prove the unjust humanitarian intervention of NATO in the Kosovo conflict using Walzers revisions to the Legalist Paradigm. Despite the adherence to Walzers revisions, stating that a war can be initiated as an intervention on humanitarian grounds and in defense of “national liberation”, the ulterior motives by the United States, in conjunction with the unbalanced response towards the Siberian military defense, this thus degrade the validity of the intervention making it unjust by Walzers
To assess the moral justification of the intervention, …show more content…
The exception of intervention in other conflicts is categorized into three main subfields. Primarily, war is justified when a set of boundaries contains two or more political communities, one of whom is engaged in the struggle for independence. This is the issue of secession or “national liberation.” Subsequently, the next revision is that of counter-intervention stating when the boundaries have already been crossed by the military force of another foreign power, intervention is justified. The last revision to the Legalist Paradigm deems a just intervention when there are large scale violations of human rights within a set of boundaries. In regards to NATOs intervention in Kosovo, the first and third revision apply and the armed conflict can thus be assessed with such principles in …show more content…
The resolution ceased the hostilities between NATO’s Kosovo Force and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The results of the conflict included the UN Security Resolution 1244 which authorized international and civil military presence in Kosovo to ensure peaceful relations. This resolution to the conflict was initially seen as a success of NATO by the international community but has since caused controversy.
The essay served to prove the unjust humanitarian intervention of NATO in the Kosovo conflict using Walzers revisions to the Legalist Paradigm. Despite the adherence to Walzers revisions, stating that a war can be initiated as an intervention on humanitarian grounds and in defense of “national liberation”, the ulterior motives by the United States, in conjunction with the unbalanced response towards the Siberian military defense, this thus degrade the validity of the intervention making it unjust by Walzers