To what extent, if at all, can the invasion of Iraq in 2003 be characterised as an example of humanitarian intervention?
The invasion and occupation of Iraq began in March 2003 and is now a highly focused debate as to whether it can be characterised as an example of humanitarian intervention. Iraq represents a nemesis, a point that states should perhaps intervene elsewhere, as we are living amongst the consequences caused by ‘humanitarian intervention’. The social fabric of Iraqi society today, is spread with sectarian civil war, the rise of violent political movements and the rise of extremist movements such as ISIS.
Humanitarian Intervention can be defined as, “military force by a state (or group of states) within another state for the …show more content…
This is highly problematic as it suggests the use of state force was for their own economic gain, not to protect the sovereign Iraqi civilians. The U.S undoubtedly had interests in gaining access to oil reserves such as the Persian Gulf.
“Thus, the primary motive of the war - mobilising Iraqi oil production to sustain global oil flows and moderate global oil prices”. Ahmed, N (2014). Further, displaying how the invasion of Iraq cannot be an example of humanitarian intervention.
There are central increasing tensions between international Law and the United Nations, as the UN revolves around a dual responsibility, to uphold human rights of the persons and to uphold the sovereign rights of the state. It has caused issues surrounding humanitarian intervention, which creates a question, to whether the UN security council, including; the U.K, USA, France, Russia and China, should be the final decider to whether one state can use force on another state. By definition, humanitarian intervention overrides the responsibility to promote and defend sovereignty. So the regime in the state is no longer sovereign, once that state has begun mass human rights …show more content…
Beck states that, “ modern society has become a risk society in the sense that it is increasingly occupied with debating, preventing and managing risks that itself has produced.” Beck, U. (2006:332). These presumed ‘risks’ in western society portray the Muslim community, and other ethnic minorities as ‘deviant’s’ in society. “Justifications for the deviance are seen as valid by the delinquent but not by the legal system or society at large.” Becker, H.
The invasion and occupation of Iraq began in March 2003 and is now a highly focused debate as to whether it can be characterised as an example of humanitarian intervention. Iraq represents a nemesis, a point that states should perhaps intervene elsewhere, as we are living amongst the consequences caused by ‘humanitarian intervention’. The social fabric of Iraqi society today, is spread with sectarian civil war, the rise of violent political movements and the rise of extremist movements such as ISIS.
Humanitarian Intervention can be defined as, “military force by a state (or group of states) within another state for the …show more content…
This is highly problematic as it suggests the use of state force was for their own economic gain, not to protect the sovereign Iraqi civilians. The U.S undoubtedly had interests in gaining access to oil reserves such as the Persian Gulf.
“Thus, the primary motive of the war - mobilising Iraqi oil production to sustain global oil flows and moderate global oil prices”. Ahmed, N (2014). Further, displaying how the invasion of Iraq cannot be an example of humanitarian intervention.
There are central increasing tensions between international Law and the United Nations, as the UN revolves around a dual responsibility, to uphold human rights of the persons and to uphold the sovereign rights of the state. It has caused issues surrounding humanitarian intervention, which creates a question, to whether the UN security council, including; the U.K, USA, France, Russia and China, should be the final decider to whether one state can use force on another state. By definition, humanitarian intervention overrides the responsibility to promote and defend sovereignty. So the regime in the state is no longer sovereign, once that state has begun mass human rights …show more content…
Beck states that, “ modern society has become a risk society in the sense that it is increasingly occupied with debating, preventing and managing risks that itself has produced.” Beck, U. (2006:332). These presumed ‘risks’ in western society portray the Muslim community, and other ethnic minorities as ‘deviant’s’ in society. “Justifications for the deviance are seen as valid by the delinquent but not by the legal system or society at large.” Becker, H.