Name : Christian Powlohtee Troh
Number : 840725-4179
University : Linnaeus University
: November 27, 2017
Professor : Mirza
Table of Contents
and hypothetical questions 2
critics, comparison and analysis 3-5
intervention framework 5-6
Over the past decade it has
witnessed a resurgence of the interest in the law, and politics of the
military, especially when undertaken for what was declared to be the
humanitarian purposes. Nonetheless, the question of when, or ever, outside the
parties could be legitimately intervene in the sovereign state to address on
the massive suffering of the state population, which is highly contentions
ones.1 The humanitarian rationale
for the use of the force that dates back to the beginning of modern state
system has continued to encounter the resistance, despite the apparent appeal.
This seminar explores the probability of the humanitarian intervention as the
framework for the human security. The paper will objectify the humanitarian
intervention which is the element that will make the human security autonomous
but will not separate nor fully independent from the traditional security. 2There has been several
literatures which confuses the two terms as the synonymous with each other,
where others differentiate them explicitly. Therefore, the essay will address
on the ambiguity of both of the conceptions as well as discuss the humanitarian
intervention not as different concept from the information security but rather
argues that it could be part and parcel of it, and even a possible framework in
order to explain the paradigm of the human security autonomous to the
This contribution aspires for
the sound, simple and clear aspect in relation to the human intervention and issues
that are in the middle way for both human security and the non-
traditional security when it
comes to meeting the tangency point. This is a re-conceptualized version of the
The essay aims to discuss the
ambiguity of the conceptions and address the human intervention especially on
the aspects to the human security. 3There will be a possible
framework which will explain the paradigm of the human security autonomous to
the non-traditional security. This contribution will also address the
unambiguous interpretation of the human security specially to evolving field of
the security particularly in the sub-discipline of the international relations.
Purpose and hypothetical questions
The hypothetical question to
highlight is why there is a need to separate the human security from the
non-traditional security? In this inquiry, there is need to consider the aim of
the seminar paper as mentioned above, thus the question should fit to the
construction of the essay. 4The proponent would want to
emphasize that there is no need of separating the human security from the
non-traditional security since the second hypothesis look at the middle way for
the ideas that are conceived. The related literatures have confused on the autonomous
of the security from the conception and the increased in the ambiguity that has
directed the scholars as well as the practioners in formulating their own
interpretations when it comes to the human security and the non-traditional
This essay will use case study
and text analysis in the collecting of the information. One of the case study
which will be used is the Kosovo case study which will focus on the study on
the US government perspective in regard to the humanitarian intervention. This
example is interesting in that it strongly supported and led the NATO countries
relative to the scale of the atrocities which are revealed. 5The case study is also
interesting in that it shows the primary reasons for the importance of the
humanitarian intervention from the perspective of US policymakers. One of the
thing that the case study discuss is on the ethical consideration, and the
moral necessity to protect the innocent civilian from the persecution and the
ethnic cleansing. Second is on the perspective that it was significant for the
US security to maintain the stability of European. This case study will help in
learning of the government perspective, as to why humanitarian intervention
could be pursued as the foreign policy objective, when the humanitarian
intervention could be regarded justified, and from this analysis could study
the status of the current conflicts.
Arguments, critics, comparison and analysis
The issue of the humanitarian
intervention attracted a considerable attention after the Cold War had come to
an end. There are many individuals who believed that the new possibilities of
the cooperation were opening between the major powers, and the humanitarian
intervention was one of the items which were near the top of the agenda. It
would be morally desirable to legitimize
the practice of the
humanitarian intervention, and this might be done in the awareness of the
dangers that are inherent in such kind of the practices. Based on the argument
of some authors is that there is a significant battery argument when it comes
realist tradition that are not always appreciated, and this count against the
sanctioning to the humanitarian intervention unless this has been constrained
and regulated properly.
According to the argument by
Aristotle highlights that the quest for the security has been connected with
the ideas of the fullness of being and also the ideal nature. 6This has taken the form of
the instinctive striving after the perfection as it is embodied when it comes
to the species. When it comes to the Confucius security that is associated to
the commitments to various universal principles of the conduct, it can be
argued that the ultimate aim all along is to bring about the condition of the
universal social harmony as well as the stability. The goodness of the human
nature was assumed, and in the event, it was damaged could have been restored
through proper education. According to critics of Rousseau, is that the quest
to the security diverts from the man attempt to return to the natural condition
was portrayed as the natural goodness of the man, and his quest to the
political legitimacy. Security has been the recognition to the rational
possibility of the universal peace. Nonetheless, this has been criticized by
the Indian thinker Kautilya who contends to hold the opinion that the universal
egoism has made permanent security to be possible. 7He has developed a system
of the security where this has been treated as diverse strategies in which
given, the egoist nature of the man social living or even the security
might be made manageable and
relative security could be attained. The Italian philosopher by the name
Cicero, was the first individual to have come close to identify security as the
human security in which has described it as absence to the anxiety upon to
which the fulfilment to life might depend on.
The arguments of Hobbes on the organized
society where the security has prevailed to take place lies in the shadows of
the Leviathan ruler, who was ever prepared in using his sword in order to
enforce all his conditions to the social contract, and this was the origin
choice of the anarchic individuals. This argument has been criticized by Buzan
and Waever who have pointed that the premises of Hobbes are very
Humanitarian intervention framework.
The expression to the
humanitarian sentiments when it comes to the world of politics is the product
to the changing historical as well as the social processes. 8The world or even the
domestic events usually alters or impact various sentiments which individual’s
experiences. This has been left to the international community to address the
graved humanitarian crisis such as what was experienced in country like Rwanda
in 1994 or Srebrenica in 1995. Currently, Sudan Darfur which is facing this
kind of the tragic and the worst problem that could ever occur to a state or a
community of individuals.
interventions had been highlighted as the forcible breach of the sovereignty
which interferes to the state internal affairs.9 The legality in regard to
the forcible humanitarian intervention is a matter of the dispute between the
restrictions as well as the counter-restrictions. The perspective usually
pointed out that the states would not intervene to the primarily humanitarian
reasons, states not allowed to risk their own soldiers’ lives on the basis of
the humanitarian crusades, states would abuse their right to the humanitarian
intervention using it as the cloak in promoting the national interests.
Additionally, the state would apply the principles of the human intervention
Humanitarians have found scant
supports when it comes to the international law. Nevertheless, it is important
to note that the legislation of the international law occurs formally and
informally. The United Nations has increased in playing a stronger role when it
comes to maintaining the standards of the human security and the justice. Yet,
when dealing with the humanitarian intervention issue there have been
challenges for the UN.10 Nonetheless, UN charter
does not assert to the rights of states. The number of the occasions the UN has
justified the interventions due to the gross human rights violation has been
limited. Moreover, the charter also upholds to the rights of the people. There
are also various references to which the UN charter has justified the view that
the extreme violations to the human rights offers the basis to justify
Humanitarian interventions has
been an issue for the discussion for a decade now. After the Holocaust, the
international community that swore they would not admit to such crimes against
the humanity any more. Nonetheless, countries such as Bosnia, Somalia, Rwanda
and even Darfur has highlighted that the problem has not been solved. It is
reasonable to find that individuals should understand the humanitarian
intervention. The outcome of the humanitarian intervention, and ignorance by
the world community could be quite different in either case. The question of the USA and the UK
credibility level are among the international community which is disputable
Every violation of the human
rights is not justification when it comes to intervention. It all depends on
the nature, scope as well as the magnitude of the issue. The circumstances
should be extreme and the life as well as the liberty should be a stake if they
were to require the use of the force, across the international boundary.
Various situation of the violation need to be dealt with locally, but the local
stakeholders. There are only cases such as the genocide, ethnic cleansing or
the systematic massacre of the religious or the natural community which could
justify the international response.11 Although the problems are
continuing to arise there is no effective mechanisms for the internal influence
on the states that are involved. The international sanctions might be ignored
and the world community requirement could be neglected. The military
sanctions may not be the best
way out. There are various major considerations in regard to the humanitarian
intervention that could be adopted. Initially, it is important to ask ourselves
are sure of the case. The
aspect of insecurity and war could be an imperfect instrument when it comes to
righting the humanitarian distress. 12The second issue to ask is
if all the aspect of the diplomatic options have been exhausted.
The rationale of the
humanitarian intervention usually pulls into directions. One hand, is from the
realistic perspective, the inviolability of the sovereign rights of the state
which is given supremacy. The states are usually forbidden in using the armed
forces against territorial integrity of another state, except for the self-defense.
Thus, the intervention is not permissible. On the other hand, the intervention
is just justified from more liberal approach to punish the wrong and to protect
The issue of the humanitarian
intervention has attracted considerable attention after the cold war which had
come to an end. There are many individuals who believed that the new
possibilities of cooperation that were opening up between the major powers.
This seminar paper has explored the probability of the humanitarian
intervention as the framework for the human security. The papers has
objectified the humanitarian intervention that is the element that has made the
human security autonomous.
Alex J. Humanitarian intervention. Routledge, 2017.
Seyla. Dignity in adversity: Human rights in troubled times. John Wiley
& Sons, 2013.
Donnelly, Jack. Universal human rights in theory and
practice. Cornell University Press, 2013.
Forsythe, David P. Human rights in international
relations. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Goodhart, Michael. Human rights: politics and practice.
Oxford University Press, 2016.
Hehir, Aidan. Humanitarian intervention: an introduction.
Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Ann. China, the United Nations, and human rights: The limits of compliance.
University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013.
Alan J. “A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO’s Libya
campaign.” International Security 38, no. 1 (2013): 105-136.
Amanda, and Dursun Peksen. “The impact of human rights INGO shaming on
humanitarian interventions.” The Journal of Politics 76, no. 1
Roland. “The ‘Responsibility to Protect’and the structural problems of
preventive humanitarian intervention.” International Peacekeeping
21, no. 5 (2014): 569-603.
Jan Nederveen, ed. World orders in the making: humanitarian intervention and
beyond. Springer, 2016.
Smith, Rhona KM. Textbook on international human rights.
Oxford University Press, 2016.
Tomuschat, Christian. Human rights: between idealism and
realism. OUP Oxford, 2014.
Weiss, Thomas G. Humanitarian intervention. John
Wiley & Sons, 2016.
J. Bellamy. Humanitarian intervention.
2 Seyla, Benhabib. Dignity in adversity: Human rights in
troubled times. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
Donnelly. Universal human rights in
theory and practice. Cornell University Press, 2013.
4 David P. Forsythe. Human rights in international relations.
Cambridge University Press, 2017.
5 Michael, Goodhart. Human rights: politics and practice.
Oxford University Press, 2016.
Humanitarian intervention: an
introduction. Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
7 Thomas G. Weiss. Humanitarian intervention. John Wiley
& Sons, 2016.
Kent. China, the United Nations, and
human rights: The limits of compliance. University of Pennsylvania
9, Alan J. Kuperman.
“A model humanitarian intervention? Reassessing NATO’s Libya
campaign.” International Security
38, no. 1 (2013): 105-136.
Tomuschat. Human rights: between
idealism and realism. OUP Oxford, 2014.
Nederveen, ed. Pieterse. World orders
in the making: humanitarian intervention and beyond. Springer, 2016.
KM. Smith. Textbook on international
human rights. Oxford University Press, 2016.