Effectiveness of Humanitarian Intervention - Essay Example

?Effectiveness of Humanitarian Intervention The use of military force or an armed effort against a to end gross human rights violations in thatparticular state or region is called Humanitarian Intervention. The definition of humanitarian intervention depends upon the way the action is taken against a state and a general perception against that action. In most of the cases the military action is taken against the established government of a particular state and that is the reason there is a divide between scholars, leaders and general public on the legality and legitimacy of the humanitarian intervention. Humanitarian intervention is primarily motivated by humanitarian objectives but in most of the cases there are strategic motives attached to the military action and the integrity and sovereignty of the state against which the action is taken is challenged which is totally against the UN charter and international law. There are no criteria established for humanitarian intervention to decide when, how and under what circumstances it becomes inevitable to intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. The issue of humanitarian intervention has become the most debatable one ever since the end of the Cold War period because there are two schools of thoughts, one which considers it to be very legitimate, legal and essential for the establishment of UN human rights charter in each and every country of the world while others challenge its legality on the grounds of being against the sovereignty of a state (Murphy, 1996). The essay discusses the legality and effectiveness of the humanitarian intervention with reference to various incidents of humanitarian intervention and peace operations in different regions of the world. Various different definitions have been presented by scholars from different schools of thoughts. According to Teson (2003) the humanitarian intervention is the proportionate use of military force by the selected members of the international community to end tyranny and anarchy and this intervention is welcomed by the victims of the violation of human rights. Holzgrefe (2003) perceives humanitarian intervention as the use of military force against a state without the consent of its government to restore fundamental human rights of the citizens of that particular state. The supporters of humanitarian intervention make the objective of provision of fundamental human rights to each and every individual in this world the basis of their support of external interference in the affairs of a state. The scholars and debaters who do not support the idea of humanitarian intervention argue on the basis of the Article 2(4) of the UN Charter which restricts the use of force against any sovereign state. They further argue that humanitarian intervention for the restoration of fundamental human rights can be used as a way of achieving the political and strategic goals by the countries that are imposing a military expedition on a country and this kind of abuse of humanitarian intervention is very easy to carry out. Under such circumstances the humanitarian intervention can never be effective enough to achieve the primary goals of the protection of human rights (Jokic, 2003). There are incidents in which humanitarian intervention has aggravated the violation of human rights in the affected areas. The military personnel of the peace keeping forces are sometimes involved in the violation of human rights. The deciding authority, the UN Security Council in most of the cases is a big question on the legitimacy and efficacy of the humanitarian intervention because certain states have political and strategic motives associated with the governments of certain states. For example recent scenario in Sudan where most of the states in the United Nations Security Council were in favor of a military intervention by UN forces, China had other plans because of its ties with the Sudanese government based on oil supply contracts between the two. In the following pages the effectiveness of humanitarian intervention and peace keeping operations is discussed with reference to various examples taken from the recent past where military intervened in the internal affairs of a state for the protection and restoration of fundamental human rights. The history of humanitarian intervention dates back to the Russian, French and British intervention in the Greek War of Independence in 1824 against the Ottoman Empire. The objectives of this intervention were more of a political nature than humanitarian because the Greek uprising was deemed as a chance of weakening the Ottoman Empire in Europe. After the foundation and establishment of the United Nations following the Second World War, the humanitarian intervention was considered as a very effective way of stopping the violation of human rights in various regions of the world. The United Nations established a Department of Peacekeeping Operations which is charged with the planning, preparation, management and direction of UN peacekeeping operations. The Department was formally created in 1992 however it traces its roots to 1948 because the peacekeeping operations were initiated immediately after the creation of the United Nations. The objective of establishment of this department is to ensure the use of military where required to eradicate human rights violation in the World and this is done through the UN peacekeeping forces also known as the Blue Berets which consists of soldiers, doctors, engineers, police officers and also civil servants (Newman, 2009). United Nations however do not have a standing army and a coalition force is formed which consists of armed forces and civil servants from the UN member countries which are brought together to form a force to fight against the violators of human rights. Most of the time the operations are carried out by the troops which are serving under the UN operational control however in some of the cases the United Nations can direct regional organizations to carry out military operations under the recommendations of the United Nations committees and bodies. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has carried out various humanitarian intervention and peacekeeping operations in different regions of the world under the directions from the United Nations. In some cases, a coalition of regional states is formed and the coalition forces carryout the peacekeeping operations. For the establishment of coalition force and carrying out peacekeeping operations in any country or state, the United Nations Security Council passes a resolution thereby giving legitimacy to the military intervention for restoration of human rights according to the international law(Carey, Gibney & Poe, 2010). Congo gained independence in June 1960 but the majority of armed forces remained Belgian resulting in uprising and mutinies against the military (Harris, 1994). The Belgian government started a military operation in Congo on which the government of Congo requested the United Nations to intervene. A resolution was passed in the United Nations Security Council and a peacekeeping force was formulated which stayed in Congo from 1960-1964 to help the government in restoration of peace and in establishment of a stronghold and writ of government in the country. The United Nations Operation in Congo was successful in contributing to the International peace and security and stabilizing Central Africa. This operation was the first major humanitarian intervention by the United Nations and it established the efficacy of the use of military to restore peace and secure human rights in a particular region of the world. Moreover it also depicted the sense of responsibility in the International Community for establishment of peace and security in the world under the United Nations Charter through a prompt response by various states on the call of the United Nations. The most remarkable achievement was the swiftness by which the nations of the world committed to the cause of restoring peace in Congo by volunteering and deploying troops to the UN force. The Security Council Resolution was passed on 15th July and within just 3 days the UN peacekeeping forces started arriving in Congo. The operation achieved its primary objectives of restoring peace and ending tribal violence in Congo but the secondary objectives which included the training and organization of the Congolese army. Majority of the army in Congo was Belgian and the local population had a very less number of professionally trained soldiers moreover the army was not technologically advanced either. The UN peacekeeping forces during their 4 year stay failed to train the Congolese soldiers and as a result long and sustainable peace in Congo always remained unachievable. Another major example of humanitarian intervention is the Operation Provide Comfort which was initiated by the United Nations to assist the Iraqi Kurds to fight against the human rights violations by the Iraqi military under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. United Nations passed a resolution on 5th April 1991 in which the Iraqi government was called to end the tyranny and despotism against its own people. A coalition force consisting of troops from the United States, United Kingdom, France, Netherlands, Australia and Turkey was formed for a humanitarian intervention to provide relief to the Iraqi Kurds. The Operation Provide Comfort undertook from April to July 1991, the objectives of the operation were to provide comfort to the Kurdish community in Northern Iraq by stopping the human rights violations against them, to create a security zone while rebuilding the infrastructure in northern Iraq and to return the Iraqi people who have taken refuge in Turkey and other neighboring countries to their homes. The operation had very far reaching consequences and the experiences of this operation served as guidelines in the humanitarian interventions and peacekeeping operations in Somalia, Haiti and Balkans later in the decade. During the operation a new examples of cooperation and coordination between the military and the Non Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) were set because the NGO’s did not trusted the military for their humanitarian activities in the beginning but later as they had to take help from the military because of the difficult conditions in the mountainous border between Iraq and Turkey where most of the refugee camps were established, this experience of coordination between military and NGO’s was used in the later humanitarian interventions. The operation was considered as a success in provision of fundamental human rights to the Kurd community of Iraq and if a timely operation would not have been taken, the scenario of the Iraqi War of 2003, the success of which was very important for the International peace and security would have been totally different because the Kurds provided considerable support in overthrowing Saddam Hussein (Rudd, 1993). The operation also highlighted the importance of the training of the armed forces for carrying out operation like the Operation Provide Comfort in which the military personnel have to carry out various other tasks besides combating the enemy in the battle field. The humanitarian intervention in Northern Iraq successfully ensured provision of human rights to the Iraqi people, it was also successful in reestablishing the destroyed infrastructure but again, the objective of nation building could not be achieved (Meggle, 2004). The subsequent objective of the humanitarian intervention is the nation building, training and empowering of the people of the country in which the military intervention is carried out because sustainable security, peace and development can only be insured if the local population is empowered with knowledge, awareness and means of self-defense which can only be achieved through a civil-military partnership. The UN should not only focus on immediate relief but strategies should also be devised during the operation to ensure the continuity of a peaceful and stable environment. The former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia contained six republics, including Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia. Each republic had one major ethnic group except Bosnia where Muslims were in a simple majority (44%) followed by the Serbs (31%) and Croats (18%). The Bosnians voted for independence in 1992, the Bosnian Serbs were not happy with this and started an armed struggle against the Bosnian government. In such a situation UN intervened through humanitarian intervention and this peace keeping operation is considered as one of the most effective in provision of fundamental human rights to the people in Bosnia. The UN forces along with UN humanitarian agencies helped in preventing the Bosnian people from starvation for two winters. The relief operation was delayed very often in many areas due to the fighting between different groups under these circumstances the blue berets had to play their role. A total of 174000 metric tons of aid was delivered to the Bosnian people during this operation and the military had a very significant role to play while providing this aid as most of the relief goods had to be dropped from air or supplied through helicopters, therefore a military intervention was inevitable. Another example of the humanitarian intervention is the military intervention by India into East Pakistan in 1971 and it is perhaps the most controversial one because it was not supported by any United Nations Resolution. In 1947, when British left the Indian subcontinent two states were formed, India and Pakistan on the basis of Muslim and non Muslim majority areas, as a result the Pakistan had two wings, one consisting of the North Western provinces of India and other consisting of the South Eastern province of Bengal. The two wings of were separated by the Indian Territory and there was a communication lag between the two wings. The people of East and West Pakistan despite having the same religion had different ethnic backgrounds and the country was never united (Rais, 1987). After the general election of 1970, civil war broke out in East Pakistan and the Pakistani military was involved in gross misconduct and violation of fundamental human rights. India who has already fought two wars with Pakistan in 1948 and 1965 considered this as an opportunity of weakening the power of the Pakistani state in the region and started sending troops in East Pakistan. Although the elected representatives in the general election of 1970 in East Pakistan invited India for a humanitarian intervention but the action was not legitimized by a UN resolution. The Indian forces captured Decca and handed the control over to the East Pakistani (Bengali) people and restored peace in the region but the action was considered as a political and strategic tactic by the Indian government rather than being a humanitarian one (Sisson & Rose, 1991). After the division of Pakistan into Bangladesh and Pakistan, India appeared as the only emerging super power in the Indian subcontinent and the proofs of Indian involvement in destabilizing Bangladesh later confirmed the political motivation of India behind the military intervention in East Pakistan. The current military action against Libya has been legitimized by the UN Security Council resolution 1973 and the actions taken by Qaddafi recently have clearly depicted the circumstances under which the use of force against a sovereign country becomes inevitable for the protection of human rights. He has clearly stated that anyone who will protest against his government, even peacefully will be dealt with force. Under such circumstances the use of humanitarian intervention becomes inevitable and is the most effective and the only way to bring peace to the suffering people. The effectiveness and failure of a humanitarian intervention depends upon the initially set objectives to be achieved from the operation. In most of the cases the operations were successful in bringing peace to the region and for the restoration of fundamental human rights in the region where the military action is taken but almost all the interventions and peace keeping operations failed to provide a political base which could sustain the stability in the region. The use of military force is very important for the eradication of human rights violation in the world but the efficacy of the humanitarian intervention and peacekeeping operations can only be ensured if the principle motivation behind the use of force is humanitarian and the action must be taken according to the international law and should be legitimized and authorized by the United Nations. Humanitarian intervention way more complicated than a war because it involves stabilization, state-building and socio-economic construction in addition to the provision of fundamental human rights and the countries that are involved in the intervention hold responsibility for the failure to achieve any of these objectives therefore a detailed strategy and game plan should be devised before carrying out such operations (Wheeler, 2002). The use of military force in the form of humanitarian intervention and peace keeping operations can only be said to be effective if the objectives of provision of fundamental human rights and sustained stability are achieved, based on the examples and incidents mentioned in the essay, it can be easily established that most of the interventions failed to achieve long term stability but were very effective in restoring peace, stability and fundamental human rights. References Rudd G. W. (1996), Humanitarian Intervention, Government Printing Office. Murphy S. D. (1996), Humanitarian Intervention: United Nations in an evolving world order, University of Pennsylvania Press. Jokic A. (2003), Humanitarian Intervention: moral and philosophical issues, Broadview Press. Weiss T. G. (2007), Humanitarian Intervention: ideas in action, Polity. Simms B., Trim D. J. B. (2011), Humanitarian Intervention: a history, Cambridge University Press. Teson F. R. (2005), Humanitarian Intervention: an enquiry into law and morality, Transnational Publishers. Diane Publishing Company (1994), Humanitarian Intervention: effectiveness of UN operations in Bosnia, Diane Publishing Newman M. (2009), Humanitarian Interventions: confronting the contradictions, Columbia University Press. Alsip B. W., et al (1998), Operation Provide Comfort, Diane Publishing Rudd G. W. (1993), Operation Provide Comfort: Humanitarian Intervention in Northern Iraq 1991, Duke University. Watanabe K., Senta N. K. K. (2003), Humanitarian Intervention: the evolving Asian debate, Japan Center for International Exchange. Gantzel K. J., Schwinghammer T. (2000), Warfare since the Second World War, Transaction Publishers. Wheeler N. J. (2002), Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society, Oxford University Press. Harris G. (1994), Organization of African Unity, Transaction Publishers. Kulke H., Rothermund D. (2004), A History of India, Routledge Sisson R., Rose L. E. (1991), War and Secession: Pakistan, India and the creation of Bangladesh, University of California Press. Rais R. B. (1987), The Indian Ocean and the Superpowers: economic, political and strategic perspectives, Rowman and Littlefield Carey S. C., Gibney M., Poe S. C. (2010), The Politics of Human Rights: the quest for dignity, Cambridge University Press Meggle G. (2004), Ethics of Humanitarian Intervention, ontos verlag Teson F. R. (2003), The Liberal Case for Humanitarian Intervention, New York: Cambridge University Press Holzgrefe L.J. (2003), The Humanitarian Intervention Debate, New York: Cambridge University Press. Read More