Humanitarian Intervention - Coursework Example

Introduction Humanitarian intervention refers to the undertaking of military responsibility by a state in another, with the purpose of protecting civilians from oppression and atrocities (Nye 2008 p 12). Such actions are necessitated by occurrences such as civil wars and greater crimes against humanity such as genocide among others. However, it is important to note that this principle is different from humanitarian aid which means administering help to civilians without engaging in political or military activities. The US government has in the past participated from the front, with examples such as liberation of Iraq from dictatorial rule, which was successful after the US military managed to apprehend the then president Saddam Hussein (Chomsky 2007 p 30). It has also been in the forefront to restore democracy as well as suppressing armed militia for example in Somalia during the first battle of Mogadishu, invasion in Afghanistan among others. As it is today, the global economy depends highly on peace especially due to the various international trade organizations in place and hence, any country which may seem to jeopardize growth as a result of war and oppressive leadership should be made to account for its own short comings. These interventions however, should not be based on the greed to serve personal vendettas but for the common good of preserving humanity. This essay is a critical evaluation on humanitarian intervention, supporting the idea that they can only be successful if conducted by strong states, citing examples of successes and failures mostly from the US perspective. Humanitarian Intervention Humanitarian interventions as discussed herein, involves exercising liberty to disregard the sovereignty of a country with a genuine reason in order to protect the rights of the citizens as the understanding of international customary law dictates (Nye 2008 p 66). Many citizens continue to die as a result of power hungry politicians, who are willing and able to kill their fellow country men for them to remain in power. In defense, rebel movements especially in the third world countries continue to emerge resulting to more deaths and destruction of property. The Iraq government for example under the watch of president Saddam did not only pose a great threat to its neighbors such as Iran and Kuwait but also to its own citizens, who faced brutality from security forces, especially those who dared to criticize his rule. It is estimated that 300000 Iraqis died as a result of atrocities committed against them by Saddam’s regime. Most of these victims were targeted on the basis of their ethnicity as most of them were Kurds and Shiite Muslims (Nye 2008 p 88). However, it is important to note that Saddam’s government had a powerful and experienced military, which was capable of waging war on other sovereign countries meaning that it required a country with a higher and stronger military equipment and intelligence such as the US and Britain to capture and bring the president and his associates to justice. It is important to realize that intervening in such a manner results to mass destruction of property as a result of using explosives as well as freezing the economy since businesses would have to close down to pave way for military action. Sectors such as transport would have to be paralyzed due to fear of citizens being attacked on transit as there would be a possibility of government sympathizers attacking their fellow citizens, who may be seen as supporting such activities. Lawlessness would also be witnessed as the government of the day would be incapacitated paving way for looters and thieves to terrorize the streets. As such, the intervening force should be capable of rebuilding and restoring normalcy as well as infrastructure so that the citizens they are purporting to protect would benefit from the change brought forward. The US government after sending its troops and capturing Saddam in the year 2003 has availed approximately $50 billion to rebuild the country, funds which has been used to train security forces, build new health centers, strengthening criminal justice systems by constructing new prisons as well as building infrastructure among others (Chomsky 2004 p 41). The country has a great economy and is one of the super powers and this means that it can afford to spend and support humanitarian interventions without necessarily having to jeopardize its own economic growth. Weak states such as the third world countries on the other hand may fail to succeed in such activities. This is due to the fact that most of them depend on super powers to fund their economies either through grants or loans and therefore, their priorities do not allow them to exercise such authority. In most cases, they are usually on the receiving end as their economies are characterized by slow growth due to poor planning, high populations with low purchasing power, poor political and education systems among others. An example is Rwanda which has a history of civil wars and the infamous genocide that took place in 1994. The international community is said to have taken a back seat during this period though they had been previously warned of a possibility of such an occurrence (Kuperman 2001 p 29). However, strong countries such as Britain, US, Canada and Austria were among the first to react by sending troops on a peace keeping mission as well as restoring the country’s economy, which became successful. This clearly shows that not any country can wake up to intervene on matters concerning governance in another country without having the resources to solve such dilemmas conclusively. It is believed that if these countries had reacted fast on the possibility, approximately 800000 lives lost within the 100 days of the massacre would have been saved (Kuperman 2001 p 36). The world’s super powers have a history of exercising their military and economic power to influence other countries to follow their ideologies (Chomsky 2007 p 27). This can be noted from the era of colonialism whereby they seized weaker nations and made them their protectorates. After these states were allowed independence amid chaos and rebellions, the super powers left a lot of strings attached such that these countries had to maintain links with their former protectorates. They adopted the same form of governance, constitutions, education systems and religion as that of their colonial masters. On the other hand, the superpowers had already established their constitutions meaning that their governments were already running smoothly and had already stemmed out barbaric cases of civil wars and conflicts. Major discoveries in science were already in place and the citizens were working day and night to generate wealth. In fact, it is during this time that these countries were fighting battles of supremacy to showcase their military power. On the contrary, colonies on attaining independence failed to focus on development but concentrated more on sharing political positions and accumulating wealth on individuals thereby creating a foundation for enmity between local tribes, hence tribal conflicts and civil wars (Kuperman 2001 p 10). Corruption became a monster that has haunted these countries for as long as their independence and instead of gaining wealth to assist other needy countries, they have continued to rely on the international community to assist them. It therefore goes without saying that countries such as the US, Britain, Germany, Russia among others can do as they wish to protect their own interests on the basis of humanitarian intervention. The US for example is adamant on the need to suppress activities in any country that exhibit development of nuclear weapons, which it considers to be a great threat to world peace. This is believed to be the major pretext for invading Iraq though the efforts can be justified by the positive results that the country has managed to achieve (Chomsky 2007 p 57). These countries as earlier stated have business and diplomatic interests in almost every country around the world as opposed to weaker countries, which relate mostly with countries that are well established and from which they can accrue monetary benefits. As such, they are extremely aware of the risks which their citizens face, such as terrorism, a fact that necessitates them to set aside a budget for dealing with eventualities of such occurrences in form of foreign economic and military aid. For example, in the year 2005, the US government allocated an approximated budget of $7.1 million as foreign military aid, which can be said to be a huge allocation that can only be done by a country which has a strong economic potential (Chomsky 2007 32). Not only does it require a country to be strong in terms of military and economic perspective, but also in terms of dealing with internal wrangles. This is due to the fact that massive support from within the country is essential so as to ensure good will since there can be a lot of opposition from Politicians and citizens, who may see it as deliberate exposure of their sons and daughters in the military to unnecessary life threatening activities. The war on Iraq for example almost damaged the reputation of two leaders George Bush and Tony Blair, who were the major participants, who provided troops to invade Iraq. The losses accrued from invading warring countries have in the past proved to be huge in terms of lives and property as discussed earlier. For example is the Battle of Mogadishu whereby the US had tried to suppress Somali militias, who were terrorizing innocent civilians in 1993. During this battle which is commonly referred to as Black Hawk Down, the US suffered great humiliation after two military helicopters were brought down by shoulder held rocket launchers (Schilling 2004 p 15). Several US soldiers were wounded while 18 are purported to have lost their lives. This signifies that engaging in war is an expensive affair that cannot be accomplished without allocating sufficient resources and proper policy formulation. In fact, it is due to this that the then government led by President Bill Clinton came up with a policy of refraining from intervening on third world civil wars and which led to its failure to assist in preventing Rwandan genocide. Somali militias are hardened street fighters with at least 18 years of fighting experience (Schilling 2004 p 39). Several countries in the United Nations league have tried without success to restore democracy and to impose a legitimate government. This is due to the fact that not many of them are capable of sustaining military activities in the country. However, the US government, having had the guts to invade countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan in search of seasoned terrorists and having dealt with terrorist attacks on its soils, is well placed to suppress the militias and lawlessness in the country. Instead of doing so, the government has been supporting other countries such as Ethiopia and Uganda to send troops and the result is that the militias are reiterating by waging attacks on these countries, which does not have sufficient military intelligence to prevent them as opposed to that of the US, Britain, Germany, Russia among others. Russia for example has a lot of socialistic influence on the country and it also could be best suited to restore sanity but since it has less business dealings with this section of the world, such actions are not stipulated in their policies and strategies. On the other hand, the US is more interested in a peaceful Somalia due to its close business dealings with other East African countries such as Kenya and Uganda (Nye 2008 p 45). As long as the strongest countries, which happen to be the super powers continue to take a back seat and watch, civil conflicts in needy countries will continue to claim the lives of innocent citizens since there is no one else who is capable of coming up with effective strategies to provide viable solutions. This is due to the fact that countries such as those developing and underdeveloped ones will continue to perceive each other as peers, who cannot be commanded to stop committing crimes against humanity. Each of these countries has a history either in the past or in the present of committing such crimes hence the need to bring in a stronger and independent force. This may be the reason why the US administers sanctions on countries that do not follow the wishes of the International Criminal Court as stipulated in the Rome Statute, which it is not a signatory. Conclusion Humanitarian intervention is the invasion of a country or sovereign state by another with the purpose of protecting civilians from political, social or criminal injustices committed by the ruling government for example against a minority group. It is essential in ensuring that basic human rights such as the right to life among others are protected without discrimination. However, it is a difficult task to invade a country that has a well established government and military. This is the reason why such activities are well suited for the strongest countries such as those which count as super powers and which has the capacity to neutralize any resistance. For example, the US and Britain were successful in invading Iraq and bringing down Saddam’s oppressive and totalitarian rule, which saw the killing of approximately 300000 innocent civilians by his careless security forces. On the other hand, it is an expensive and dangerous affair which may result to destruction of property as well as death of military men and women. It is from this aspect that weaker countries may fail to succeed due to lack of highly trained personnel and equipment strong enough to defeat the enemy. The US for example has spent a lot of tax payer’s money in foreign military activities such as in Iraq, Somalia, and Afghanistan among others. Where these strong countries have refused to intervene, a lot of lives and property have been destroyed, Rwanda and Somalia being examples. The US refused to intervene in Rwanda thereby failing to protect at least 800000 lives while in Somalia, it withdrew after a humiliating defeat leaving the country in political turmoil hence the enmity between the two countries. References 1. Chomsky, M. Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance, Holt Paperbacks, 2007 2. Kuperman, A. The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention: Genocide in Rwanda, Brookings Institution Press, 2001 3. Nye, J. Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History, Longman, 2008 4. Schilling, D. The Battle of Mogadishu: First Hand Accounts from the Men of Task Force Ranger, Presidio Press, 2004 Read More