The United Nations Charter clearly forbids the use of force by one state against the territorial integrity of another state. The only two exceptions are self-defense or actions authorized by the United Nations Security Council. The 2003 intervention of Iraq by Coalition forces testes the resolve of the Charter and the United Nations system as a whole. The need to assess the legality and the effect of the Coalition’s intervention became a matter of interest to international relations scholars. This study uses the Just War Theory to make this assessment, with particular emphasis on the somewhat neglected jus in bello and jus post bellum elements. This study argues that the intervention by Coalition forces did not meet the requirements of a justified intervention as set out in the Just War Theory. This study has also found that the main reason for unlawful interventions is the existence of the veto in the SC. To limit unsanctioned interventions the veto should be scraped and there should be an attitude change within the Security Council, they should not view the democratization of the SC as an enemy, they should view it as an opportunity to save the UN system. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2013.

This dissertation explores a family of theoretical models of humanitarian military intervention. A number of recent theorists, including Tesón, Caney, Buchanan, Orend, Moellendorf, and Wheeler, build their models from a perspective called ‘cosmopolitanism.’ They offer arguments based on the moral supremacy of human rights, the arbitrary character of territorial boundaries, and the duty to protect individual human beings exposed to serious and systematic violence by their own governments. I develop a model of intervention that recognizes the moral significance of political self-government. To the extent that international society should countenance a ‘duty to protect’ human rights, the duty ought to be constrained by a commitment to the values of self-government. The model developed in this dissertation also recognizes the significance of international law enforcement. Insofar as we should permit a role of enforcement for international human rights, that role should be constrained by formally accepted global principles and in particular by positive obligations to prevent and punish actions regarded as international crimes. These other global values are viewed with suspicion by cosmopolitan theorists, who tend to construe them in stark contrast to the vision of global responsibility for human rights protection. But I will show how these other values emerged simultaneously with cosmopolitanism and share many of its underlying intuitions. Because self-government and law enforcement are linked politically to the cosmopolitan vision, these two distinctive global values can be utilized as tools to fortify or expand cosmopolitanism by enlarging the global sense of responsibility for human rights. The aim of this project is to explain how these other values came to be neglected by cosmopolitan theorists, and why they should not be forgotten. / Thesis (Ph.D, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2013-09-25 12:11:55.056

This thesis examines the theory and practice of humanitarian intervention in the early post-Cold War era. Taking as its basis US policy towards Somalia, Rwanda and Haiti between 1992 and 1994, it develops a theory of humanitarian intervention based on constructivist and scientific realist principles. Using identity as the organising concept, the thesis examines the meta-theoretical precepts of constructivism and scientific realism, which are developed into a methodology for analysing questions of foreign policy. Incorporating critical insights from sequential path analysis, morphogenetic social analysis - the notion of a dynamic mutual constitution of structure and agency - and constructivist social theory, the case studies provide a useful new means of conceptualising humanitarian intervention as a foreign policy practice through an identity-driven analysis. The findings of the research shed much light on this practice and its future prospects. They also suggest new directions for a scientific realist/constructivist research agenda.

No description available.

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Law, Commerce and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, in 50% fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Management (in the field of Security). June, 2016 / This study explores civilians’ perceptions on the impartiality of the international humanitarian organization (IHO) Médecins sans Frontières (MSF). This is done through engaging participants from countries where MSF operates and has experienced different challenges in delivering humanitarian aid to civilians. The countries include the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia and Somalia. A basic interpretive approach was used to explore and interpret participants’ perceptions. Interviews were conducted with groups of participants based on their respective countries of origin. The interview questions and guide were developed using indicators of impartiality which the researcher formulated based on varying literature and definition of impartiality, independence and neutrality as the core humanitarian principles that guide the work of MSF together with many other IHOs. Participants expressed their perceptions on the impartiality of MSF through reflecting on associations they made between the IHO and parties they considered to have vested interests in humanitarian crises. These parties included Western countries, the military and persons perceived to have discriminatory and colonial intentions. Upon analysis of these perceptions, it becomes clear that MSF, as an IHO that holds itself to operate according to the humanitarian principles of independence, neutrality and impartiality, needs to reflect on how it builds its identity in order to mitigate perceptions that may have potential to hinder its ability to access and assist civilians affected by humanitarian crises. / MT2016

Master's thesis. / Format: PDF. Bibl.

Thesis (M.A. in International Security and Civil-Military Relations)--Naval Postgraduate School, March 2003. / Thesis advisor(s): Donald Abenheim, Karen Guttieri. Includes bibliographical references. Also available online.

This thesis is an analysis based on the problem of defining a humanitarian intervention and argues when or not, it is appropriate to operate it. The interest lies in finding out whether the argument itself is justifiable,not whether the act of interference was justifiable. My hypothesis is that both private and international operatios misuse the definition "humanitarian interventions" as an excuse to trespass the laws of war. Behind the idea of protecting human rights, freedom and democracy, is the liberalist idea of all individuals being equal. The respect for their freedom and rights drives outside actors to intervene when crimes are comitted against them. I wished to discuss Nato's argument for "the Right to Intervene" in order to avoid ahumanitarian crises in Kosovo 1999. I intended to try the intellectual validity and reasoning behind their argument but it was more difficult than I'd expected. Because the sources to their statements were inconclusive, the conclusion turned out to be difficult to assess, though there is a vague idea of Nato's point of view being unreasonable in comparison to their actions.

This dissertation explores the complex relationship between state identity, foreign policy, and systemic norm diffusion. Based on an empirical examination of the international military response to the humanitarian crises associated with the Yugoslav wars of secession (1991--1995), Somali civil war and famine (1991--1993), Rwandan genocide (1994), and Zairian refugee crisis (1996), I contend that a state's foreign policy is primarily a product of its international identity. The country case studies (Canada, France, and the United States) are not merely isolated narratives. Drawing on the logic of 'system effects' analysis, with its emphasis on the role of feedback and indirect effects, I then situate each state within the larger systemic narrative, highlighting the systemic normative consequences of each state's policy choices. In addition to demonstrating that states from outside the great power club can exert significant international normative influence (a heretofore unexplored phenomenon), the study paints a much clearer picture than presently exists about the possibilities for, and limits to, ethical normative evolution in world politics.

In taking into account the vast body of literature that exists on the topic of international humanitarianism, this thesis aims to provide a contribution to the field by way of an analysis of the dubious manner in which states apply the principles of humanitarianism. It derives conclusions around the level of commitment and sincerity of the international humanitarian regime to the principles of humanitarianism by exploring the dynamic relationship between the two of the main areas of humanitarianism: humanitarian intervention and refugee protection. From this analysis stems the argument is that while the governments of the wealthy Western states are often amongst the loudest trumpeters of humanitarian principles, they fail to live up to their humanitarian obligations. For, rather than committing to humanitarian action on the basis of need, they are only willing to commit to humanitarian action in cases that serve in their own national interests; cases of human suffering from which they do not stand to benefit remain caught in the margins of the international humanitarian regime.