论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】The paper analysizes dilemma of international humanitarian intervention, covering justification, legitimacy, hegemony politics and unilateral intervention; the sovereignty and human rights of the native; abuse of military force and departure from the aim and effect of the intervention, and then proposes desirable prospects. To guarantee its normalization, institutionalization and function in human rights-assuring and peace-keeping, we should enhance the function and empowerment of United Nations, regulate its procedure, use economic sanctions, world opinion and political stress rather than military force, and improve international supervision mechenism.
【Key words】Humanitarian intervention；Dilemma；Prospects；Peace-keeping
0.Introduction
The contradictions, such as the regional conflicts, ethnical and religious disputes are more severe after the cold war, thus international intervention mechanism begins to work frequently. Somalia has indicated there is huge deviation between the intervention in the name of justice, morality and the real effect. The difference between the ideal and reality leads to people’s doubt about its necessity and rational.
1.Definition
The concept is controversial owing to the dual meanings of “legal intervention” and derogatory term “illegal intervention”. Appropriate intervention is ethically acceptable when there is serious human right -invading behaviors in one country. Illegal invention means interfere with others’ internal affairs. Among them, military force is evidently the most controversial one which conflicts with the intervened country’s sovereignty.
In a sense, the key point lies in whether a country can legally intervene in others’ internal affairs with military force. However, the intervention has been seriously distorted and confronted with various dilemma .
2.Dilemma
2.1 Legitimacy
The distinct feature is regardless of the intervened country’s empowerment. The United Nations carried out such actions as peace-keeping in Somalia, Iraq and Bosnia in the name of humanitarian intervention. It is apparently different from the traditional humanitarian aids In what circumstances is the humanitarian intervention legal validity and widely accepted?
It has got into trouble in terms of legality. The focus of the disputes in academic field has been whether unilateral humanitarian intervention should be legally accepted. Truly, it is beyond reproach with pure humanitarian intervention, but, it is hard to know whether there is humanitarian crisis or not in one country. Lagging legality increases the risk of abuse of military force since it involves unilateral humanitarian intervention in disputes of right and wrong.
2.2 Mostly self-beneficial
The aim of intervention is to enhance human rights and prohibit humanitarian crisis. It is fair and non-political itself. However, some great powers essentially violently intervene others’ internal affairs in the name of humanitarianism for their self-consideration. Take Somalia as the example, the intervention aims to restore Somalia’s “ peace, stability, law and order”.
But, America-led western countries foster their political affiliation to control Somalia. America participated in it positively when it is profitable. America withdrew from Somalia in 1994 while returned due to the need for oil resource and anti-terrorism.
Therefore, the second dilemma occurs. There are disputes between humanitarian intervention and interests of states, and between its name and essential aim.
2.3 Abuse of military force
It has been controversial whether intervention should employ peaceful or forcible means including military force. The United Nations stress the basic principles of voluntary, neutral and non-force in peace-keeping operation. But, humanitarian intervention increasingly tends to employment of military force with the rising of problems of humanitarianism and complex of the intervened contries’ situation.
2.4 Sovereignty and human rights
One reason for the failure of peace-keeping operation in Somalia is disrespect for human rights. There were also some scandals of treating the civilians violently among peace-keepers.
These events of disrespect for human rights resulted in some native civilian’s strong confrontation with peace-keeping. Therefore, the problem of human rights involved in humanitarian intervention becomes another dilemma. It is dilemma how to tackle with and respect for native human rights in practical intervention.
2.5 Hegemonies，power politics and unilateral intervention
The intervention usually associates with power politics in terms of motivation. Some countries were humanitarianly intervened not for serious problem of human rights but strategic benefits. They will lose the interest once their political and economic benefits are threatened.
Carrying out self-interest in the name of humanitarian intervention has always been the big powers imposing their will on a small country. American attempts to establish pro - American parties. The change of American policies towards Somalia indicated the sole consideration of self-interests. 2.6 Deviation of intervention effects
Humanitarian intervention has also unavoidable contradictions in terms of its effect. The aim is to protect human rights abuse, which requires the intervention must be harmless in the results, or ease the situation, and even beneficial to the safety of life and property and ease the situation there.
3.Prospects
3.1 Improvement in legislation
The conditions of humanitarian intervention must be clear and standardized. Only through legislation can humanitarian intervention make a real difference to the protection of human rights.
The focus of construction of legislative regulation is that unilateral humanitarian intervention should be clearly defined as illegal. To solve the problem of slow decision-making, it needs to make emergency procedure and enable the intervention to deal with the emergencies.
3.2 Giving full scope to functions of the United Nations
The United Nations must play a role to improve its role and mandate of the UN Security Council. Only through such a multilateral way can we strengthen its legitimacy.
The United Nations’ aim is to maintain the order and stability of the international community. While unilateral military action is illegal since it is self-benefit-oriented. In any case, the state should seek the approval before they carry out military action. The Security Council should respond promptly to the requests and investigate the area. Only after obtaining sufficient evidence can the military action be supported to intervene.
3.3 The regulation of approaches of the intervention
Means of intervention must be avoided to lead to a disaster, and the effect is to protect human rights and the prohibition of abuse of force. But now international practice is distorting and utilizing the principle.
According to the Charter, resorting force becomes legitimate once the Security Council finds some certain situation constitutes a threat to international peace and security.
3.4 Establishing the supervision mechanism and initialization routine
Initiating the supervision process consists of two levels: First, the Security Council carries out real-time monitoring on military intervention and supervise humanitarian intervention and responsible to the United Nations. To ensure that force will not be abused, it is necessary to monitor in-depth investigation and interfere with the process at any time.
3.5 Establishing of post-review and assistance procedure It is necessary for the UN General Assembly to make a post-review concerning the justice and effectiveness of intervention. According to the principle, UN General Assembly should stipulate and submit all the resolutions and investigation reports to the UN General Assembly. Disastrous consequences of interventions, such as environmental pollution and famine, etc., should be handled differently.
4.Conclusion
To sum up, although humanitarian intervention has confronted with various dilemma, it has reasonable value. In order to guarantee humanitarian intervention, it is necessary to seek breakthrough in the contradictions between ideal and reality. Establish the legislation to curb power of "humanitarian intervention" in the name of national interest, which is worth exploring a new way of institutionalizing and international affairs.
【References】
［1］James Pattison. Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect:Who Should Intervene?Oxford: Oxford University Press,2010.
［2］Hilpold,Peter,'Humanitarian Intervention:Is there a Need for a Legal Reappraisal?', European Journal of International Law,12(2002)：437-467.
【Key words】Humanitarian intervention；Dilemma；Prospects；Peace-keeping
0.Introduction
The contradictions, such as the regional conflicts, ethnical and religious disputes are more severe after the cold war, thus international intervention mechanism begins to work frequently. Somalia has indicated there is huge deviation between the intervention in the name of justice, morality and the real effect. The difference between the ideal and reality leads to people’s doubt about its necessity and rational.
1.Definition
The concept is controversial owing to the dual meanings of “legal intervention” and derogatory term “illegal intervention”. Appropriate intervention is ethically acceptable when there is serious human right -invading behaviors in one country. Illegal invention means interfere with others’ internal affairs. Among them, military force is evidently the most controversial one which conflicts with the intervened country’s sovereignty.
In a sense, the key point lies in whether a country can legally intervene in others’ internal affairs with military force. However, the intervention has been seriously distorted and confronted with various dilemma .
2.Dilemma
2.1 Legitimacy
The distinct feature is regardless of the intervened country’s empowerment. The United Nations carried out such actions as peace-keeping in Somalia, Iraq and Bosnia in the name of humanitarian intervention. It is apparently different from the traditional humanitarian aids In what circumstances is the humanitarian intervention legal validity and widely accepted?
It has got into trouble in terms of legality. The focus of the disputes in academic field has been whether unilateral humanitarian intervention should be legally accepted. Truly, it is beyond reproach with pure humanitarian intervention, but, it is hard to know whether there is humanitarian crisis or not in one country. Lagging legality increases the risk of abuse of military force since it involves unilateral humanitarian intervention in disputes of right and wrong.
2.2 Mostly self-beneficial
The aim of intervention is to enhance human rights and prohibit humanitarian crisis. It is fair and non-political itself. However, some great powers essentially violently intervene others’ internal affairs in the name of humanitarianism for their self-consideration. Take Somalia as the example, the intervention aims to restore Somalia’s “ peace, stability, law and order”.
But, America-led western countries foster their political affiliation to control Somalia. America participated in it positively when it is profitable. America withdrew from Somalia in 1994 while returned due to the need for oil resource and anti-terrorism.
Therefore, the second dilemma occurs. There are disputes between humanitarian intervention and interests of states, and between its name and essential aim.
2.3 Abuse of military force
It has been controversial whether intervention should employ peaceful or forcible means including military force. The United Nations stress the basic principles of voluntary, neutral and non-force in peace-keeping operation. But, humanitarian intervention increasingly tends to employment of military force with the rising of problems of humanitarianism and complex of the intervened contries’ situation.
2.4 Sovereignty and human rights
One reason for the failure of peace-keeping operation in Somalia is disrespect for human rights. There were also some scandals of treating the civilians violently among peace-keepers.
These events of disrespect for human rights resulted in some native civilian’s strong confrontation with peace-keeping. Therefore, the problem of human rights involved in humanitarian intervention becomes another dilemma. It is dilemma how to tackle with and respect for native human rights in practical intervention.
2.5 Hegemonies，power politics and unilateral intervention
The intervention usually associates with power politics in terms of motivation. Some countries were humanitarianly intervened not for serious problem of human rights but strategic benefits. They will lose the interest once their political and economic benefits are threatened.
Carrying out self-interest in the name of humanitarian intervention has always been the big powers imposing their will on a small country. American attempts to establish pro - American parties. The change of American policies towards Somalia indicated the sole consideration of self-interests. 2.6 Deviation of intervention effects
Humanitarian intervention has also unavoidable contradictions in terms of its effect. The aim is to protect human rights abuse, which requires the intervention must be harmless in the results, or ease the situation, and even beneficial to the safety of life and property and ease the situation there.
3.Prospects
3.1 Improvement in legislation
The conditions of humanitarian intervention must be clear and standardized. Only through legislation can humanitarian intervention make a real difference to the protection of human rights.
The focus of construction of legislative regulation is that unilateral humanitarian intervention should be clearly defined as illegal. To solve the problem of slow decision-making, it needs to make emergency procedure and enable the intervention to deal with the emergencies.
3.2 Giving full scope to functions of the United Nations
The United Nations must play a role to improve its role and mandate of the UN Security Council. Only through such a multilateral way can we strengthen its legitimacy.
The United Nations’ aim is to maintain the order and stability of the international community. While unilateral military action is illegal since it is self-benefit-oriented. In any case, the state should seek the approval before they carry out military action. The Security Council should respond promptly to the requests and investigate the area. Only after obtaining sufficient evidence can the military action be supported to intervene.
3.3 The regulation of approaches of the intervention
Means of intervention must be avoided to lead to a disaster, and the effect is to protect human rights and the prohibition of abuse of force. But now international practice is distorting and utilizing the principle.
According to the Charter, resorting force becomes legitimate once the Security Council finds some certain situation constitutes a threat to international peace and security.
3.4 Establishing the supervision mechanism and initialization routine
Initiating the supervision process consists of two levels: First, the Security Council carries out real-time monitoring on military intervention and supervise humanitarian intervention and responsible to the United Nations. To ensure that force will not be abused, it is necessary to monitor in-depth investigation and interfere with the process at any time.
3.5 Establishing of post-review and assistance procedure It is necessary for the UN General Assembly to make a post-review concerning the justice and effectiveness of intervention. According to the principle, UN General Assembly should stipulate and submit all the resolutions and investigation reports to the UN General Assembly. Disastrous consequences of interventions, such as environmental pollution and famine, etc., should be handled differently.
4.Conclusion
To sum up, although humanitarian intervention has confronted with various dilemma, it has reasonable value. In order to guarantee humanitarian intervention, it is necessary to seek breakthrough in the contradictions between ideal and reality. Establish the legislation to curb power of "humanitarian intervention" in the name of national interest, which is worth exploring a new way of institutionalizing and international affairs.
【References】
［1］James Pattison. Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect:Who Should Intervene?Oxford: Oxford University Press,2010.
［2］Hilpold,Peter,'Humanitarian Intervention:Is there a Need for a Legal Reappraisal?', European Journal of International Law,12(2002)：437-467.