Full Text
From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect
Kurt Mills and Cian O'Driscoll
Subject
International Studies
Key-Topics
genocide, human rights, justice, responsibility, sovereignty, war
DOI: 10.1111/b.9781444336597.2010.x
Extract
Comment on this article Humanitarian intervention has garnered a great deal of academic commentary in recent years despite the relative dearth of empirical cases. Aside from a few cases in the nineteenth century, three possible instances in the 1970s, and a limited set of post–Cold War actions, states have generally shied away from the practice of military intervention for humanitarian purposes. Yet, the legal and moral issues raised by the possibility of humanitarian intervention dominate academic discourse and public advocacy on human rights today. This essay will review these debates, mapping them against the historical practice of humanitarian intervention. It contends that although contemporary accounts of humanitarian intervention reflect the development of human rights discourse and institutions in the latter half of the twentieth century, its roots reach back to the medieval just war tradition. With this in mind, we commence with the just war tradition, outlining the historical connections between the idea of just war and the possibility that force might be used for humanitarian purposes. We then extend our focus on historical connections to the realm of practice, examining the history of intervention from the nineteenth century to the recognition of the Responsibility to Protect by the World Summit in 2005 and its (non-)application in Darfur. This broad sweep demonstrates ... log in or subscribe to read full text
Log In
You are not currently logged-in to Blackwell Reference Online
If your institution has a subscription, you can log in here: