Military Intervention And Cessation Of Gross Violations Of Human Rights

1421 Words Jan 8th, 2015 null Page
The international community appears to believe that there is a direct correlation between military intervention and cessation of gross violations of human rights that are being committed by the government of a state, supposing that there will be an improvement in the conditions for those against whom these violations are being committed if there is a legal humanitarian intervention. This assumption is largely based on the concept that if an intervention is legal, it will be controlled, carefully planned, and done to an international legal standard. NATO has intervened in both Kosovo and Libya over the past 16 years, however only one of these interventions was deemed to be “legal” by the UN Security Council (UNSC). The UNSC found in 1999 that NATO’s intervention in Kosovo was contrary to the Charter of the United Nations. Twelve years later, following significant development in the area of the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect, the same Council found NATO’s intervention in Libya in 2011 to be proper. Yet each of these scenarios had very different results independent of the legality of the intervention.
The hypothesis examined by this paper is the assertion that even though a legal humanitarian intervention will allegedly ensure that the intervention itself is conservative and compliant with international norms, in the long term the legality of humanitarian intervention has no bearing on the outcome. Because legality does not actually demand a subsequent…

Related Documents