2011•Oxford University Press eBooksRequires access

11. Humanitarian Intervention

David I. Fisher

Open publisher page 9 citations

Abstract

Just‐war teaching historically recognized that force could be used to protect strangers. But, from Treaty of Westphalia through to the establishment of the UN in 1945, a norm of non‐intervention gradually prevailed. This was increasingly questioned during the 1990s as atrocities took place in Europe, despite failure to intervene in Rwanda. This culminated in the 1999 NATO operation in Kosovo and the endorsement by the 2005 UN Summit of a ‘Responsibility to Protect’. But Kosovo was the last such operation. Intervention in Darfur was late and ineffective. Growing unease with humanitarian intervention is fuelled by concerns prompted by the Iraq War. This chapter considers whether and how the case for humanitarian intervention can be rewon, with occasions for intervention carefully delimited by the just‐war criteria. The chapter concludes that just‐war teaching would permit and may even require humanitarian intervention where the threat to the lives of innocents is sufficiently grave.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Just‐war teaching historically recognized that force could be used to protect strangers. But, from Treaty of Westphalia through to the establishment of the UN in 1945, a norm of non‐intervention gradually prevailed. This was increasingly questioned during the 1990s as atrocities took place in Europe, despite failure to intervene in Rwanda. This culminated in the 1999 NATO operation in Kosovo and the endorsement by the 2005 UN Summit of a ‘Responsibility to Protect’. But Kosovo was the last such operation. Intervention in Darfur was late and ineffective. Growing unease with humanitarian intervention is fuelled by concerns prompted by the Iraq War. This chapter considers whether and how the case for humanitarian intervention can be rewon, with occasions for intervention carefully delimited by the just‐war criteria. The chapter concludes that just‐war teaching would permit and may even require humanitarian intervention where the threat to the lives of innocents is sufficiently grave.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Just‐war teaching historically recognized that force could be used to protect strangers. But, from Treaty of Westphalia through to the establishment of the UN in 1945, a norm of non‐intervention gradually prevailed. This was increasingly questioned during the 1990s as atrocities took place in Europe, despite failure to intervene in Rwanda. This culminated in the 1999 NATO operation in Kosovo and the endorsement by the 2005 UN Summit of a ‘Responsibility to Protect’. But Kosovo was the last such operation. Intervention in Darfur was late and ineffective. Growing unease with humanitarian intervention is fuelled by concerns prompted by the Iraq War. This chapter considers whether and how the case for humanitarian intervention can be rewon, with occasions for intervention carefully delimited by the just‐war criteria. The chapter concludes that just‐war teaching would permit and may even require humanitarian intervention where the threat to the lives of innocents is sufficiently grave.

Key concepts: Intervention (counseling), Humanitarian intervention, Political science, Medicine, Nursing, Law, International law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
11. Humanitarian Intervention — Research Paper | ScholarLens