Amazon.com Widgets

Should humanitarian intervention be an obligation for the International community because of violations of human rights, even without the consent of the sovereign states government?

Asked by: gaffapparel
Should humanitarian intervention be an obligation for the International community because of violations of human rights, even without the consent of the sovereign states government?
  • The Sovereignty lies with the people not the government.

    Intervention due to widespread violations of human rights by a government on its own people I feel legitimizes Intervention even without that states approval. The whole premise of non-intervention and a states sovereignty relies on its basic ability to protect the lives,liberty and security of its people. If a state will not or cannot uphold this basic right then it forfeits its position of political autonomy. Of course instances of violations would have to be on a large scale, as if allowed to intervene on any nominal matter could potentially lead to abuse. But when such instances do occur I feel that the international community is obligated to intervene to protect those individuals. While all other measures before force should be exhausted first, such as mediation, relief, political reconciliation, the world cannot stand by while hundreds of thousands are allowed to die at the hands of their government, like in cases of Kosovo, Pakistan, Rwanda, and countless more.

  • This can lead to deadly situations

    We have seen that what humanitarian intervention has done in recent past. You take the Rwandan genocide or Mali or Kosovo. In an intervention the intervening state takes away the sovereignty and its basic aim is regime change. Thus there needs to be no unauthorized interventions to prevent the brutal situations they may produce.........

    Posted by: sant

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.