Humanitarian Intervention

'War-war when jaw-jaw fails?', On Line Opinion, 18 May 2012.

by Benjamin Herscovitch

Finding Civil Society in Darfur

by Hagar Taha

Think Africa Press, 11 May 2012

Understood differently by international actors, the state and locals, Darfur's civil society is in a state of... more Understood differently by international actors, the state and locals, Darfur's civil society is in a state of continuous re-invention.

Review of ‘War Games: The Story of Aid and War in Modern Times’ by Linda Polman.

by Kirsten Ainley

Review of ‘War Games: The Story of Aid and War in Modern Times’ by Linda Polman. London: Penguin, 2010. 218pp. £12.99. ISBN: 978 0 670 91896 6. Review published in International Affairs 2010, 86(5), pp1218-1221

A Fatal Attraction? The UN Security Council and the Relationship between R2P and the International Criminal Court

by Mark Kersten

Darfur: Koruma Yükümlülüğü ve İnsancıl Müdahale Kavramları Çerçevesinde Bir İnceleme

by Uluslararası İlişkiler

Funda Keskin, " Darfur: Koruma Yükümlülüğü ve İnsancıl Müdahale Kavramları Çerçevesinde Bir İnceleme ", Uluslararası İlişkiler, Cilt 6, Sayı 21 (Bahar), 2009

Darfur’daki ağır insan hakları ihlallerinin uluslararası toplumun koruma yükümlülüğünün sınırlarını aştığı konusunda... more Darfur’daki ağır insan hakları ihlallerinin uluslararası toplumun koruma yükümlülüğünün sınırlarını aştığı konusunda kuşku yoktur. Darfur’a askeri güç içeren bir müdahale seçeneği 2005’ten beri Güvenlik Konseyi’nde tartışılmışsa da bir sonuca ulaşmamıştır. Bu tartışmalarda, özellikle Çin, Rusya ve Orta Doğu devletleri devlet egemenliği ilkesini ileri sürmektedirler. BM Antlaşması 39 madde çerçevesinde alınmış bir Güvenlik Konseyi kararı varsa, devlet egemenliği itirazı geçerliliğini yitirir ancak bu konuda Konsey’de yapılacak bir oylamada veto hakkı kullanılacağından müdahale kararı çıkması beklenmemektedir. Bölgesel örgüt Afrika Birliği’nin zorlayıcı bir müdahale bulunması, kapasitesinin yetersizliği ve siyasi irade olmaması nedeniyle mümkün değildir. Ağır ihlallerde tek tek devletlerin ya da devletler grubunun bu nitelikte müdahale bulunabileceğini savunan görüşe göre, koruma yükümlülüğünü kabul eden ABD, Avrupa Birliği, NATO gibi birimler müdahale edebilirler. Ancak bu birimlerde de, sebebi devlet egemenliği itirazını kabul etmeleri olmasa da, tek-taraflı bir müdahale için gerekli siyasi irade bulunmamaktadır. Dolayısıyla, yerleşmiş bir kurallar dizisi olmadan insancıl müdahalenin öznel değerlendirmelere bağlı olduğu eleştirisi, koruma yükümlülüğü anlayışı açısından da devam etmektedir.

Potential Lives, Impossible Deaths: Afghanistan, Civilian Casualties and the Politics of Intelligibility

by Thomas Gregory

The number of civilian casualties in Afghanistan has increased dramatically in recent years as the International... more The number of civilian casualties in Afghanistan has increased dramatically in recent years as the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has tried to put down the Taliban insurgency. Reports of civilian casualties are, however, frequently dismissed as being examples of Taliban propaganda or blamed on the actions of enemy fighters, while the tragic loss of civilians is rarely marked or even acknowledged within the dominant frames of war. At first glance, the fact that civilians are so easily expendable appears to be at odds with the humanitarian intentions underpinning the war. However, I argue that the rhetoric of humanitarianism operates to preclude Afghans from appearing as recognizable human beings, foreclosing the possibility that they possess a life worthy of protection. Drawing on the work of Judith Butler, I will trace the ways in which Afghans have been reduced to the status of absolute victims, denied the very essence of their humanity and therefore a publically grievable death. By effectively constructing them as the living-dead, existing in a state of abeyance, Afghans have been exposed to a deathly logic in which their lives are expendable in the quest to make them liveable once again.

Positive Energy: A Review of the Role of Artistic Activities in Refugee Camps

by Awet Andemicael

published by the United Nations High Commisisoner for Refugees Policy Development and Evaluation Service (UNHCR PDES)

Reconstructing Responsibility and Moral Agency in World Politics

by Joe Hoover

Draft version of article published in 'International Theory', Volume 4, Issue 2 (2012), 1-36.

Assigning responsibility is increasingly common in world politics, from the United Nation’s assertion that sovereignty... more Assigning responsibility is increasingly common in world politics, from the United Nation’s assertion that sovereignty entails a “responsibility to protect” to the International Criminal Court’s attempts to hold individuals responsible for international crimes. This development is welcome but problematic as the model of moral agency that our contemporary practices of responsibility are based on leads to a number of problematic consequences that impede efforts to make world politics more just. In particular, our contemporary practices of responsibility are excessively focused on the obligations of individual and collective actors, at the expense of enabling conditions, and on holding specific perpetrators accountable, neglecting the need for wider social transformations in response to mass violence and suffering. Alternative understandings of moral agency, which better serve international/global practices of responsibility, are possible and here I defend an understanding of moral agency based on the philosophy of John Dewey. The critical insights and practical possibilities of this alternative understanding of moral agency are explored with reference to international interventions in Sierra Leone and Uganda.

Asimetrik Saldırı Savaşları, Siyaset ve Uluslararası Hukuk

by Uluslararası İlişkiler

Berdal Aral, " Asimetrik Saldırı Savaşları, Siyaset ve Uluslararası Hukuk ", Uluslararası İlişkiler, Cilt 4, Sayı 14 (Yaz), 2007

Bu makalede, öncelikle, savaşların yol açtığı insanî felâketlerin savaşa ilişkin literatürde genelde göz ardı edildiği... more Bu makalede, öncelikle, savaşların yol açtığı insanî felâketlerin savaşa ilişkin literatürde genelde göz ardı edildiği vurgulanmaktadır. Batı-dışı dünyaya II. Dünya Savaşı sonrasında büyük yıkım getiren ülke-içi ve uluslararası savaşların esas itibariyle iki sebebe bağlanabileceği belirtilmektedir: birincisi, “ulus”un âli çıkarlarını ve yüce ideallerini temsil eden ulus-devletçi yapılanma, ve bununla bağlantılı olarak, azınlıkları genel olarak dışlayan ulusçu söylem; ikincisi, emperyalist müdahaleler. Modern dönemde, ve hususiyetle 11 Eylül (2001) sonrasında, dünya barışına en fazla zarar veren gelişmenin “asimetrik saldırı savaşları” olduğu bu çalışma boyunca vurgulanmaktadır. Afganistan (2001), Irak (2003-) ve Lübnan’ı (Temmuz/Ağustos
2006) hedef alan işgal amaçlı askeri müdahalelerde gözlendiği üzere, bu tür savaşlarda hasım güçler arasında kuvvet muvazenesi bulunmadığı gibi, modern teknoloji sayesinde savaş ve onun yol açtığı korkunç yıkım “görünmez” kılınmıştır.

İnsancıl Müdahale: 1999 Kosova ve 2003 Irak Sonrası Durum

by Uluslararası İlişkiler

Funda Keskin, " İnsancıl Müdahale: 1999 Kosova ve 2003 Irak Sonrası Durum ", Uluslararası İlişkiler, Cilt 3, Sayı 12 (Kış), 2006-2007

1999′da Kosova müdahalesi ile gündeme bir kez daha giren insancıl müdahale uygulaması, BM Antlaşması’nın kuvvet... more 1999′da Kosova müdahalesi ile gündeme bir kez daha giren insancıl müdahale uygulaması, BM Antlaşması’nın kuvvet kullanma yasağına getirdiği istisnalardan değildir. Önce 1970′lerde, sonra 1990′larda insancıl müdahaleyi istisna olarak tanımlama yönündeki tüm çabalara karşın, ne devletlerin tutumları ne de yazarların çoğunun görüşleri, insancıl müdahaleyi bir istisna olarak kabul etmektedir. Kosova müdahalesini gerçekleştiren devletler dahi insancıl müdahaleyi hukuksal bir istisna olarak değerlendirmemektedir. 2003 yılında Irak’ın işgal edilmesinin ardından, insancıl müdahale kavramı önce gündemden düşmüş, sonra bu işgalin gerekçeleri çerçevesinde tekrar konu edilmeye başlanmıştır. Ancak işgali insancıl müdahale olarak değerlendiren çok küçük bir azınlık vardır ve onların düşünceleri de özellikle Irak’taki mevcut güvenliksiz ortam nedeniyle inandırıcı olamamaktadır.

Beyond absolutism: guiding principles needed for humanitarian medicine

by Ira Leeds

Die Humanitäre militärische Intervention und die Diskrepanz zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit

by Jorrik Fulda

UNO-Generalsekretär Ban Ki-Moon, wie auch seine Vorgänger, nannte die Kodifizierung der R2P eine der vorrangigen... more UNO-Generalsekretär Ban Ki-Moon, wie auch seine Vorgänger, nannte die Kodifizierung der R2P eine der vorrangigen Aufgaben der UNO. Seit 2001 bis heute wurde versucht die R2P im Völkerrecht zu verankern. Ich untersuche, ob und in welchem Ausmaß dies schon gelungen ist. Sowohl auf der formalen Ebenen der Zustimmung oder Ablehnung der R2P durch die Staatengemeinschaft als auch durch die Staatenpraxis im Spannungsfeld von Erwartungsäußerung und Verhalten.

Humanitarian projects can benefit students and universities

by Tom Vickers

Co-authored with Lena Dominelli, published on University World News website

In search of a solution for Syria: the risky safe haven

by Jelena Petrovic

Op-ed, co-authored with Sophie Roborgh, published in Aspenia Online, Aspen Institute Italy

Every failing step in the diplomatic process of convincing Assad to lay down arms and agree to a regime transition has... more Every failing step in the diplomatic process of convincing Assad to lay down arms and agree to a regime transition has brought more attention to the option of creating a so-called ‘safe haven’ in Syria. However, this debate suffers from ambiguity. Concepts of a ‘safe haven’ range from a humanitarian zone – with or without consent of the Syrian regime, aimed at humanitarian relief and protection of civilians – to the creation of a Syrian ‘Benghazi’, a springboard for the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and others to intensify armed struggle, often envisaged in the northern Idlib area.

The debate on policy options focuses mostly on conditions for the presence of multinational troops. Meanwhile, a number of other issues hampering the creation of any kind of safe haven are neglected.

Roadmap for the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) in Asia: Personalities, Institutions and Processes

by Alistair Cook

Recommended citation: Cook, Alistair D.B., 2012, ‘Roadmap for the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) in Asia: Personalities, institutions and processes’, NTS Perspectives, No. 8, Singapore: RSIS Centre for Non-Traditional Security (NTS) Studies.

It is over six years since the 2005 UN World Summit endorsed the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP), thus recognising an... more It is over six years since the 2005 UN World Summit endorsed the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP), thus recognising an individual state's responsibility to protect its citizens from four mass atrocities – genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. While the 2005 World Summit Outcome document passed by consensus, regional differences have emerged as individual states and regional organisations sought to translate word into deed. This NTS Perspectives investigates the RtoP's traction in Asia (focusing on Southeast Asia), identifies key stakeholders in the region and offers pathways forward.

Responsibility to Protect and the Coercive Enforcement of Human Rights

by Par Engstrom

(with Thomas Pegram), Annual Conference International Studies Association, Montreal, 16-19 March 2011

The more overtly coercive dimensions of human rights enforcement have emerged front and center in contemporary debates... more The more overtly coercive dimensions of human rights enforcement have emerged front and center in contemporary debates on the appropriate response of the international community to massive human rights violations. Movement towards politically legitimating humanitarian intervention based on collective action – including the use of force – is embodied in the principle of “Responsibility to Protect” or RtoP, and associated efforts to redefine threats to international peace and security that have pushed human rights compliance onto the agenda of the UN Security Council (UNSC). This development reflects three broad trends that inform and, in turn, are informed by RtoP: (1) the broadening of interpretations of threats to international peace and security, including mass atrocities; (2) the reality of constant renegotiations of state sovereignty in matters of human rights, and the legitimate form and scope of international intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign countries; and (3) the increased acceptability of the use of force for a broad range of policy objectives and associated beliefs in the utility of coercive/military power.

This paper examines some of the key underlying norms that inform contemporary debate on RtoP. In the process, it also highlights some of the broader implications of a trend towards securitizing human rights. It begins by historically tracing the role of the UN Security Council (UNSC) and General Assembly (UNGA) in situating human rights within the framework of threats to international peace and security. Notwithstanding the primary responsibility of the Council in matters of international peace and security, this paper is intended to act as a corrective to a discussion which, with some notable exceptions, often underspecifies or neglects altogether the role of the UNGA in this arena.

Secondly, despite precedent within UN structures for framing massive violations of human rights as a threat to international peace and security, the more coercive dimensions of human rights enforcement has prompted significant pushback by certain groups of states previously willing to endorse the 2005 World Summit Outcome document. The paper proceeds to unpack some of these contentious dynamics by focusing on first order principles of legitimacy and jurisdiction within and outside UN structures.

Thirdly, current debate surrounding implementation has increasingly focused on RtoP as a doctrine of prevention as much as enforcement under the rubric of the ‘Three Pillar System’ devised by the UN Secretary General in his 2009 report to the UNGA: (1) the protection responsibilities of the State; (2) international assistance and capacity-building; and (3) timely and decisive response. This has raised questions regarding the relative emphasis between the pillars, particularly concerning the specific responsibilities that may be entailed for prevention and enforcement. This debate is being conducted in the context of contemporary developments that are testing the relevance of RtoP to diverse situational crises and the notable reluctance of the Security Council to apply RtoP to ongoing crisis situations. Observers, such as Nicholas Wheeler, criticized the 2005 World Summit Outcome document for failing to address two fundamental questions: what should happen if the UNSC is unable or unwilling to authorize the use of force to prevent or end a humanitarian tragedy? And second, how could better implementation of this norm save strangers in the future? Issues of legitimacy, authority, and implementation raised by these questions and explored in this paper remain of central concern. The UNSC and UNGA historical record of activity in the area of human rights enforcement provides valuable historical context to a fuller understanding of the contours of this contemporary debate.

Melville's Benito Cereno and the Politics of Humanitarian Intervention

by Paul Downes

Is Walzer's Position on Iraqi Containment in Need of Humanitarian Intervention?

by Robert Sivulka

Journal of the Utah Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters, Vol. 83, 2006 (139-56)

I evaluate the limitation on war in situations that seem to call for humanitarian intervention.  I begin with... more I evaluate the limitation on war in situations that seem to call for humanitarian intervention.  I begin with Walzer’s position on jus ad bellum (the justice of going to war).  This involves a discussion of his views on the sovereignty of states and the commitment to non-intervention.  I will also summarize Walzer’s view on when humanitarian interventions are justified.  I will examine his position on the Iraq war as an example of his general jus ad bellum views.  I will then critique Walzer’s position on humanitarian intervention.  I argue that a case may still be made for the permissibility of humanitarian intervention using Walzer’s own principles.  This will turn on empirical claims concerning the gravity of the Iraqi situation and the real life inadequacy of his proposal.  I also argue that he minimizes the objectivity of justice, and puts state rights above individual human rights.  Finally, I examine utilitarian concerns, which seem to motivate much of his limited war theory.

It is not my intent to argue for or against jus ad bellum regarding the intervention of Iraq beginning in March 2003.  Weighing all the empirical issues to provide material content for the formal principles of just war theory is simply beyond the scope of this paper.  Rather, my primary purpose is to demonstrate that Walzer’s position for Iraqi containment and against this humanitarian intervention is inadequately grounded.  I argue that humanitarian intervention is justified in a greater number of cases than Walzer’s criteria allow.

Good Fences Make Good Neighbours: Australia's Intervention In the Solomon Islands

by James Stratford

Humanitarian Action in Pakistan 2005-2010 - Challenges, Principles and Politics

by Marion Pechayre

Over the past five years, Pakistan has witnessed three major crises affecting up to 18 million people. The nature and... more Over the past five years, Pakistan has witnessed three major crises affecting up to 18 million people. The nature and scale of these crises were different. Two were disasters caused by natural hazards: the 2005 earthquake (affecting 3.5 million people) and the 2010 floods (affecting more than 20 million people). The 2008-2010 Internally Displaced People (IDP) crisis was triggered by an internal conflict and displaced 4.2 million people from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Facing these different and significant crises in such a short period of time, humanitarian actors had to adapt rapidly and faced dilemmas that were new to them in the context of Pakistan.

This paper examines the impact of the three above-mentioned crises on the evolution of the humanitarian system and its ability to respond to emergencies in Pakistan since 2005. It follows a chronological order, looking first at the legacy of the 2005 earthquake response on the humanitarian system, and second at the influence it had on its ability to respond to the 2008-2010 IDP crisis, and finally it explores the challenges humanitarians had to face at the onset of the flood crisis.

The paper is one of several being produced for a major research project on Humanitarian Action and Politics.