Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:57:40Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Daniela Norcia Goncalves.pdf: 572704 bytes, checksum: 526e0796ca6ae2f67df796ac73702c55 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-05-22 / The process of disintegration of the Yugoslavia has immensely attracted international attention as by its violent character and for showing that the hopes of peace and international stability of the post-Cold War were an illusion as by the reflections around the conflict itself and about themes co-related to the limits of both International Order and System and the function of the states. Studying this experience is very relevant for evaluating the meaning of international interventions and its consequences. The present research analyses the question f the sovereignty having as a case study the Balkans crisis during de 1990´s as a result to Tito´s death and the collapse of the region after the Cold War. It talks about the history of the region, the interventions occurred in the 1990´s, the creation of the International Criminal Court and OTAN´s action in Kosovo. It will rises two important points: the practice of humanitarian intervention that, undoubtedly, imply in a reinterpretation of the sovereignty as a society´s central regulator principle; and the problems resulted from the processes of (re) construction of the states during the post- Cold War / O processo desintegração da ex-Federação Iugoslava atraiu intensamente a atenção internacional tanto pelo seu caráter violento e por demonstrar a ilusão das esperanças de paz e estabilidade internacionais no pós-Guerra Fria quanto pelas reflexões que foram geradas em torno do conflito em si e sobre temas correlacionados aos limites e alcances do Sistema Internacional, da Ordem Internacional e sobre o papel dos Estados. Estudar esta experiência é de grande relevância para avaliar o significado das intervenções internacionais e suas conseqüências. O presente trabalho analisa, portanto, a questão da soberania, tendo como estudo de caso a crise ocorrida nos Bálcãs na década de 1990 em decorrência da morte do marechal Tito e do colapso da península depois do fim da Guerra Fria. Aborda o histórico da península, as intervenções ocorridas na região na década de 1990, a instituição de um Tribunal Penal Internacional e a ação da OTAN no Kosovo. A preocupação é levantar dois importantes pontos: a prática da intervenção humanitária, que inegavelmente, implica uma reinterpretação da regra da soberania como princípio regulador central da sociedade internacional; e os problemas resultantes dos processos de (re) construção dos Estados no pós-Guerra Fria

This thesis addresses primary concepts in the humanitarian intervention debates. I argue that humanitarian intervention is a perfect duty. The global community has a moral obligation to act decisively in the face of extreme human rights abuses. There are two contrasting theoretical perspectives regarding international relations and humanitarian intervention: statism and cosmopolitanism. These contrasting perspectives contest the relative value of state sovereignty and human rights. Some of the most prominent ethicists in the debate have determined states have a “right” to intervene militarily in the internal affairs of other states to halt severe human rights abuses but there is no “duty”to intervene. These conclusions are largely based upon consequentialist considerations. This thesis argues a deontological perspective is essential. References to events Rwanda, Darfur, and Kosovo are made. There is a critical role for preemptive actions to play in addressing humanitarian crises and calls for global justice.

This study addressed the question: “Does Western media framing of different actors in ethnic conflict influence the likelihood of intervention being advocated in the media?” In order to answer this question, this study used a content analysis of USA, UK and Australian print media, and explored the media framing of conflicts in Rwanda, Kosovo, and East Timor. The study examined newspaper articles prior to intervention and, using Piers Robinson’s media framing model (2000), measured the quantity of “empathetic” and “distancing” coverage in relation to suggestions for intervention. The results of this study show that simplified representations of these complex conflicts often lead to a dangerous polarisation in Western media. Ethnic conflicts are discussed either within a “barbaric” frame, where readers are presented with well-defined heroes, victims and villains and are encouraged to support intervention; or with a “native” narrative, where the situation is reported as a distant problem between “squabbling tribes”, and the media consumer is encouraged to support non-intervention.

ABSTRACT PEACE BUILDING AFTER HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION: THE CASE OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA Latif, Dilek Ph.D., Department of International Relations Supervisor: Prof. Dr. ihsan D. Dagi August 2005, 379 pages. This dissertation analyzes peace building process after humanitarian intervention. It conceptualizes peace building through questioning the feasibility of peace building following a humanitarian intervention. Addressing the deficiency of contemporary peace building approach, this thesis indicates the shortcomings of the various instruments of peace building in contributing peace and reconciliation on the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Besides, it shows the drawbacks of the current practice that peace building is a learning process, which employs the lessons learnt to advance the efficiency of peace building process. There is a lack of comprehensive approach to peace building, based on case studies, evaluating the shortcomings and merits of all the instruments of peace building that provides a general strategy. Despite abundancy of policy oriented research to contribute policy making, academic work to analyze such a complicated phenomena has been frail. Within this context, contribution of the dissertation is to demonstrate the entire picture and question viability of the peace building process in war-torn societies. Therefore, it is enriching the study on the peace building operations. Failure of institutionalization of peace in BiH after almost a decade of rigorous peace building efforts of the international community shows the fault of the mainstream understanding of peace building. The dissertation also unveils that engagement in Kosovo is the product of a similar strategy, which in practice either repeated the same fruitless methods or tried to build on the experience obtained in Bosnia but failed to heal up the troubles and challenges faced in Kosovo. Overall, the study points out the inevitability of a novel approach and an alternative peace building strategy beyond the policy-related focus.

This thesis argues that the Australian military intervention in East Timor in 1999 was motivated primarily by the need to defend Australia’s own strategic interests. It was an act of Australian imperialism understood from a Marxist perspective, and was consistent with longstanding strategic policy in the region.¶ Australian policy makers have long been concerned about the security threat posed by a small and weak neighbouring state in the territory of East Timor. This led to the deployment of Australian troops to the territory in World War Two. In 1974 Australia supported Indonesia’s invasion of the territory in order to prevent it from becoming a strategic liability in the context of Cold War geopolitics. But, as an indirect result of the Asian financial crisis, by September 1999 the Indonesian government’s control over the territory had become untenable. Indonesia’s political upheaval also raised the spectre of the ‘Balkanisation’ of the Indonesian archipelago, and East Timor thus became the focal point for Australian fears about an ‘arc of instability’ that arose in this period.¶ Australia’s insertion of military forces into East Timor in 1999 served its own strategic priorities by ensuring an orderly transfer of sovereignty took place, avoiding a destabilising power vacuum as the country transitioned to independence. It also guaranteed that Australia’s economic and strategic interests in the new nation could not be ignored by the United Nations or the East Timorese themselves. There are therefore underlying consistencies in Australia’s policy on East Timor stretching back several decades. Despite changing contexts, and hence radically different policy responses, Australia acted throughout this time to prevent political and strategic instability in East Timor.¶ In addition, the intervention reinforced Australia’s standing as a major power in Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific. The 1999 deployment therefore helped facilitate a string of subsequent Australian interventions in Pacific island nations, both by providing a model for action and by building a public consensus in favour of the use of military intervention as a policy tool.¶ This interpretation of events challenges the consensus among existing academic accounts. Australia’s support of Indonesia’s invasion and occupation of East Timor from 1974 was frequently criticised as favouring realpolitik over ethical considerations. But the 1999 intervention, which ostensibly ended severe violence and secured national independence for the territory, drew widespread support, both from the public and academic commentators. It has generally been seen as a break with previous Australian policy, and as driven by political forces outside the normal foreign policy process. Moreover, it has been almost universally regarded as a triumph for moral conduct in international affairs, and even as a redemptive moment for the Australian national conscience. Viewing the intervention as part of the longstanding strategy of Australian imperialism casts doubt on such positive evaluations.

L'action humanitaire a connu un développement exponentiel au sein de la société internationale au cours de ces dernières années. Multiplication des résolutions humanitaires votées par les Nations unies, mise en place d'une justice pénale internationale chargée de réprimer les violations du droit international humanitaire, émergence de la responsabilité de protéger impliquant un recours à la force à des fins humanitaires, développement des organisations non gouvernementales en sont les manifestations majeures. Toutefois, la portée de ces évolutions récentes de l'action humanitaire tant sur le plan de la normativité que de l'opérationnalité est à relativiser. Si les insuffisances du droit de Genève ont pleinement justifié l'émergence d'un droit de New York, ce droit de nature essentiellement déclaratoire éprouve de réelles difficultés à palier les lacunes du droit de Genève. En outre, la mise en oeuvre contemporaine de l'action humanitaire, soulève de nombreux questionnements juridiques liés aux modalités et aux conditions de mise en oeuvre. La présente étude a pour objet d'analyser les évolutions et les limites du cadre juridique de l'action humanitaire afin de faire des propositions pour améliorer la condition juridique des victimes des catastrophes humanitaires. / Humanitarian action has seen such an exponential growth in international society in recent years that humanitarianism seems to be carrying increasing weight in international relations. Some of the main examples of this phenomenon are the increased number of humanitarian resolutions passed by the United Nations, the creation of an international court of justice to reprimand violations of international humanitarian law, the emergence of a sense of responsibility to ensure protection by means of force for humanitarian purposes, and the development of non-governmental organizations. However, the scope of these recent developments in humanitarianism, on both the normative and operational levels, needs to be put into perspective. Indeed, while the shortcomings of Geneva law fully justify the emergence of New York law, this essentially declaratory law faces real challenges in overcoming the short comings in Geneva law. Further more, humanitarian action as it has been carried out in recent years gives rise to a number of legal questions relating to the conditions under which such action is taken. This study aims at analyzing the developments and limits of the humanitarian action legal framework, in order to put forward proposals for improving the legal position of the victims of humanitarian disasters.

La question principale de la présente thèse est celle de l’existence de « concepts moraux » – concepts poursuivant des fins altruistes plutôt qu’intéressées – en tant que droit non conventionnel, c’est à dire en tant que droit international coutumier ou principes généraux du droit. La question sera examinée en particulier dans le contexte du discours doctrinal afin de questionner le phénomène du constat trop rapide de leur existence.Le raisonnement se décline en trois étapes. Une série de questions préliminaires relatives à la Charte de l’ONU seront tout d’abord énoncées, elles serviront de cadre à la discussion. Ensuite suivront les sources du droit international non conventionnelles. Et enfin sera discuté l’élément essentiel des relations internationales qui sous-tend la question principale de cette thèse : l’intérêt de l’État. Cette dernière discussion sera illustrée par les exemples des droits de l’homme et de l’usage de la force pour raisons humanitaires. / The main question of the thesis is whether ‘non-treaty’ law – that is customary international law and general principles of law – may exist for ‘moral concepts’ – ideas that follow an altruistic as opposed to a self-interested motivation. In particular, this possibility is discussed against the background of doctrinal discourse on the issue, in order to confront the casual assessment that this is the case. The argument is advanced in three steps. First, a row of preliminary questions under the UN-CHARTER is set out for further discussion. Second follow the ‘non-treaty’ sources of international law. Third stands the essential element of international relations underlying the main question of this thesis: state interest. The latter discussion is complemented by two case studies, one on human rights and one on humanitarian use of force. / Die Forschungsfrage bezieht sich auf die Existenz von „moralischen Konzepten“ – also solchen, die einer altruistischen anstelle einer eigennützigen Motivation folgen – als Völkergewohnheitsrecht oder allgemeine Rechtsgrundsätze. Dabei wird die Frage insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund des Diskurses betrachtet, um der beiläufigen Feststellung deren Existenz entgegenzutreten.Die Argumentation folgt drei Schritten. Zu Beginn steht eine Reihe von Vorfragen in Bezug auf die Satzung der Vereinten Nationen als Rahmen für die weitere Diskussion. Zweitens werden das Völkergewohnheitsrecht und die allgemeinen Rechtsgrundsätze erläutert. Drittens wird das Staatsinteresse als essentielles Element der internationalen Beziehungen, das der Forschungsfrage zugrunde liegt, diskutiert. Abgerundet wird die Analyse durch zwei Fallstudien, eine zu Menschenrechten und eine zu humanitären Ausnahmen zum Gewaltverbot.

With the seemingly infinite existence of complex emergencies and the overwhelming presence of humanitarian organizations responding to such crises, it is essential that the assumptions, precepts, and actions of humanitarian organizations be critically examined and understood. The aim of this thesis is to explore differing traditions within humanitarian thought: neutrality and solidarity. In the process, this thesis will determine whether it is possible to maintain clear ideologies in the context of a complex emergency and whether the existence of different humanitarian ideologies results in a dichotomy or polarization of humanitarian action. This study is of great import as it delves into the contemporary literature claiming that humanitarianism is currently in a state of crisis – the unsustainability of competing humanitarian ideologies operating together in a complex emergency. Primary documents from both the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) regarding their operations in the 1994 Rwandan complex emergency were examined in order to provide a foundation for the theoretical investigation. Although the ICRC and MSF occupy seemingly polarized positions in the neutrality – solidarity debate, the investigation into their humanitarian activities during the 1994 genocide and the resulting refugee crisis reflected the difficulties of providing relief based upon humanitarian ideals. Due to the complex realities of the 1994 Rwandan crisis, the ideological notions dividing the ICRC and MSF were overshadowed by the simple humanitarian desire to aid those in need.

The issue of humanitarian intervention presents a perennial conundrum and is one of the hottest topics in contemporary international relations. It contains aspects of both idealism and realism and is largely an issue born out of the end of the Cold War. This paper provides a theoretical and empirical evaluation of this normative shift in interstate affairs. The vast growing body of human rights law serves as one indication that international law is changing in terms of a shift of focus, away from states, and towards the international community made up of individuals. However, in absence of a formal agreement on how and to what scope international law has changed, conclusions can only be made based on the emerging, limited and fragile body of state and UN practices. If such a shift were to be accompanied by a corresponding empirical transformation, it would undoubtedly represent a huge leap forward towards a more solidarist underpinned world order. The present trends within international relations represent at least an aspiration towards some more clearly envisioned solidarity. As international actors interact, they generate new norms, but one must remember that the actors and their practices are themselves products of older norms. The present structures of international society are not ready to accommodate such change. Human rights are important, not only because they become embedded in institutions and create new coalitions between actors, but also because they help states redefine their national interests and identities, as well as help them to choose among conflicting priorities such as sovereignty and humanity. Under the present global system, any discussion of the international protection of human rights and humanitarian intervention implies changes in both norms and practices. The theoretical part of this paper provides a framework for assessing these recent developments by determining first, how and why values are shared, and what these values need to be in order for international society to be categorized as solidarist. The empirical part, then moves on to assess state and UN practice in order to conclude if solidarism is a reality in today’s international society. In this paper, I argue that there is an international consensus in terms of a right to humanitarian intervention in cases of threats against international peace and security and where the UN S.C has given its authorization. Furthermore, even though not clearly establishing any such right to intervention, cases like East Timor, northern Iraq and Kosovo points to a normative shift where the redefinition of the concept of sovereignty might become a reality. This new consensus is a product of mainly three recent developments: a more expansive interpretation of the S.C on what constitutes a threat to international peace and security, the revolution of information technology that has heightened awareness of conflict and suffering, and the increased robustness of international human rights norms. While diversity continues to characterize the 21st century, there is a greater degree of consensus on the meaning of sovereignty and human rights today than most pluralists suggest. Nevertheless, the practical behaviour of the international community shows that the commitment to solidarism remains minimal.

La responsabilité de protéger est un concept issu des travaux de la Commission internationale de l’intervention et de la souveraineté des États (CIISE). Établie en 2000 à l’initiative du CANADA, elle a recherché à dépasser les controverses inhérentes aux débats relatifs au « droit d’intervention humanitaire ». Aux fins d’atteindre cet objectif, la Commission a forgé un nouveau concept, la « responsabilité de protéger », qui permît de concilier, plutôt qu’opposer, les notions de souveraineté et d’intervention.<p>Depuis lors, la responsabilité de protéger a fait l’objet de vives controverses en droit international. Intégrée dans une résolution de l’Assemblée générale de l’ONU en septembre 2005, appliquée par le Conseil de sécurité lors de la crise en LIBYE de mars 2011, le concept se trouve, aujourd’hui, au centre des débats se rapportant au cadre juridique de la protection des populations civiles.<p>La présente thèse entend examiner les différentes implications juridiques de la responsabilité de protéger, en optant pour une démarche résolument positiviste. La réflexion proposée tente d’en embrasser les différents aspects, tant conceptuels qu’opérationnels, aux fins d’aboutir à une étude globale, synthétique et actualisée du concept. Partant, une interrogation commandera l’ensemble de notre réflexion: l’émergence de la responsabilité de protéger a-t-elle, en droit international, permis une amélioration de la protection des populations civiles ? / Doctorat en Sciences juridiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished