Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: questions of abuse and proportionality

Abstract

The aim of this thesis is to discuss the concepts of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect (R2P), and; to investigate how best to apply the concepts in the face of humanitarian crises, in order to address concerns about their implementation. The failure of the Security Council to react to grave human rights abuses committed in the humanitarian crises of the 1990s, including Iraq (1991), Somalia (1992), Rwanda (1994), Bosnia (1993-1995) Haiti (1994-1997), and Kosovo (1999),triggered international debatesabout: how the international community should react when the fundamental human rights of populations are grossly and systematically violated within the boundaries of sovereign states, and; the need for a reappraisal of armed humanitarian intervention. Central to the debate was whether the international community should continue to adhere unconditionally to the principle of non-intervention enshrined in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, or take a different course in the interest of human rights. The debate culminated in the establishment of the Canadian International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in 2000, with the mandate to find a balance between respect for sovereignty and intervention, for purposes of protecting human rights. Much of the scholarly literature on military intervention for human protection purposes deals with the legality and legitimacy of the military dimension of the concepts. The significance of the thesis is that: it focusesthe investigation on the potential abuse of the use of force for human protection purposes, when moral arguments are used to justify an intervention that is primarily motivated by the interests of the intervener, and; the propensity to use disproportionate force in the attainment of the stated objective of human protection, by powerful intervening states. The central argument of the thesis is that there are double standards, selectivity, abuses, andindiscriminate and disproportionate use of force in the implementation of R2P by powerful countries, and; that, whether a military intervention is unilateral, or sanctioned by the UN Security Council, there is the potential for abuse, and in addition, disproportionate force may be used.The thesis makes recommendations to address these concerns, in order to ensure the survival of the concept.