Nicholas J. Wheeler
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199267217
- eISBN:
- 9780191601118
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199267219.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Argues that we are witnessing the development of a new norm of military intervention for humanitarian purposes in contemporary international society. Since the end of the Cold War, the United Nations ...
More
Argues that we are witnessing the development of a new norm of military intervention for humanitarian purposes in contemporary international society. Since the end of the Cold War, the United Nations Security Council has been more active in the realm of intervention, extending its Chapter VII powers into matters that had previously belonged to the domestic jurisdiction of states. Without the material power of Western states, this activism would not have been possible. However, a purely materialist explanation for this development fails to consider the changed normative context within Western states that permitted, and in some cases encouraged, intervention. While normative evolution has occurred, it is also limited in its scope, specifically over the question of whether military intervention must have Security Council authorization.Less
Argues that we are witnessing the development of a new norm of military intervention for humanitarian purposes in contemporary international society. Since the end of the Cold War, the United Nations Security Council has been more active in the realm of intervention, extending its Chapter VII powers into matters that had previously belonged to the domestic jurisdiction of states. Without the material power of Western states, this activism would not have been possible. However, a purely materialist explanation for this development fails to consider the changed normative context within Western states that permitted, and in some cases encouraged, intervention. While normative evolution has occurred, it is also limited in its scope, specifically over the question of whether military intervention must have Security Council authorization.
Jennifer M. Welsh (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199267217
- eISBN:
- 9780191601118
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199267219.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
The issue of humanitarian intervention has generated one of the most heated debates in international relations over the past decade, for both theorists and practitioners. At its heart is the alleged ...
More
The issue of humanitarian intervention has generated one of the most heated debates in international relations over the past decade, for both theorists and practitioners. At its heart is the alleged tension between the principle of state sovereignty, and the evolving norms related to individual human rights. This edited collection examines the challenges to international society posed by humanitarian intervention in a post-September 11th world. It brings scholars of law, philosophy, and international relations together with those who have actively engaged in cases of intervention, in order to examine the legitimacy and consequences of the use of military force for humanitarian purposes. The book demonstrates why humanitarian intervention continues to be a controversial question not only for the United Nations but also for Western states and humanitarian organisations.Less
The issue of humanitarian intervention has generated one of the most heated debates in international relations over the past decade, for both theorists and practitioners. At its heart is the alleged tension between the principle of state sovereignty, and the evolving norms related to individual human rights. This edited collection examines the challenges to international society posed by humanitarian intervention in a post-September 11th world. It brings scholars of law, philosophy, and international relations together with those who have actively engaged in cases of intervention, in order to examine the legitimacy and consequences of the use of military force for humanitarian purposes. The book demonstrates why humanitarian intervention continues to be a controversial question not only for the United Nations but also for Western states and humanitarian organisations.
Jennifer M. Welsh
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199267217
- eISBN:
- 9780191601118
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199267219.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Outlines and evaluates the political, legal, and ethical objections to humanitarian intervention. In so doing, it questions not only whether the doctrine of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ has taken ...
More
Outlines and evaluates the political, legal, and ethical objections to humanitarian intervention. In so doing, it questions not only whether the doctrine of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ has taken hold in international society, but also whether it should – particularly in the form suggested by Western states. The author argues that the ethical position of pluralism – as articulated by non-Western states – represents the most compelling case against humanitarian intervention, by emphasizing the impact on international society of relaxing the norm of non-intervention. Despite these pluralist objections, military intervention in cases of supreme humanitarian emergency can be defended on moral grounds, provided the intervention meets certain tests of legitimacy. Given the unintended consequences of military action, the author also suggests that more attention should be paid to the non-military means of operationalizing ‘sovereignty as responsibility’.Less
Outlines and evaluates the political, legal, and ethical objections to humanitarian intervention. In so doing, it questions not only whether the doctrine of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ has taken hold in international society, but also whether it should – particularly in the form suggested by Western states. The author argues that the ethical position of pluralism – as articulated by non-Western states – represents the most compelling case against humanitarian intervention, by emphasizing the impact on international society of relaxing the norm of non-intervention. Despite these pluralist objections, military intervention in cases of supreme humanitarian emergency can be defended on moral grounds, provided the intervention meets certain tests of legitimacy. Given the unintended consequences of military action, the author also suggests that more attention should be paid to the non-military means of operationalizing ‘sovereignty as responsibility’.
Jennifer M. Welsh
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199267217
- eISBN:
- 9780191601118
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199267219.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Three main themes emerge from this edited collection. First, there has been an increased incidence of intervention for humanitarian purposes since the end of the Cold War. In these cases, the alleged ...
More
Three main themes emerge from this edited collection. First, there has been an increased incidence of intervention for humanitarian purposes since the end of the Cold War. In these cases, the alleged conflict between sovereignty and human rights has been addressed in one of two ways: through an evolution in the notion of sovereignty, from ‘sovereignty as authority’ to ‘sovereignty as responsibility’; and through an expanded definition of what constitutes a threat to international peace and security under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Second, despite this new climate of permissiveness, humanitarian intervention remains a controversial norm in international relations – largely because of continued opposition from certain members of international society, and concerns about its potentially negative consequences. Third, while the post Cold War period has seen some successful cases of intervention to address humanitarian catastrophes, the current capability of international organizations to undertake humanitarian interventions remains limited. Indeed, as the book demonstrates, the issue of humanitarian intervention has the potential to divide international institutions such as the UN and damage their credibility.Less
Three main themes emerge from this edited collection. First, there has been an increased incidence of intervention for humanitarian purposes since the end of the Cold War. In these cases, the alleged conflict between sovereignty and human rights has been addressed in one of two ways: through an evolution in the notion of sovereignty, from ‘sovereignty as authority’ to ‘sovereignty as responsibility’; and through an expanded definition of what constitutes a threat to international peace and security under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Second, despite this new climate of permissiveness, humanitarian intervention remains a controversial norm in international relations – largely because of continued opposition from certain members of international society, and concerns about its potentially negative consequences. Third, while the post Cold War period has seen some successful cases of intervention to address humanitarian catastrophes, the current capability of international organizations to undertake humanitarian interventions remains limited. Indeed, as the book demonstrates, the issue of humanitarian intervention has the potential to divide international institutions such as the UN and damage their credibility.
Luke Glanville
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- May 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780226076898
- eISBN:
- 9780226077086
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Chicago Press
- DOI:
- 10.7208/chicago/9780226077086.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter examines the emergence since the end of the Cold War of the principle that sovereignty entails a responsibility to protect populations from mass atrocities in the light of the historical ...
More
This chapter examines the emergence since the end of the Cold War of the principle that sovereignty entails a responsibility to protect populations from mass atrocities in the light of the historical story which the previous chapters have told. It considers developments in international consensus on the rights and responsibilities of sovereignty in the 1990s and it examines the intellectual foundations for a redefinition of sovereignty laid in this decade by Francis Deng who articulated a concept termed “sovereignty as responsibility,” and also Kofi Annan. It then turns to the emergence of the “responsibility to protect” concept in the early twenty-first century. While the ideas underpinning the “responsibility to protect” were by no means new, they had never before been so clearly endorsed by the society of states as they were at the UN World Summit in 2005. The chapter traces developments in international consensus on the accountability of sovereigns to the point that in 2011 the UN Security Council only for the first time authorised the use of force against a functioning sovereign state, Libya, without its consent, for the purpose of protecting civilians from mass atrocities.Less
This chapter examines the emergence since the end of the Cold War of the principle that sovereignty entails a responsibility to protect populations from mass atrocities in the light of the historical story which the previous chapters have told. It considers developments in international consensus on the rights and responsibilities of sovereignty in the 1990s and it examines the intellectual foundations for a redefinition of sovereignty laid in this decade by Francis Deng who articulated a concept termed “sovereignty as responsibility,” and also Kofi Annan. It then turns to the emergence of the “responsibility to protect” concept in the early twenty-first century. While the ideas underpinning the “responsibility to protect” were by no means new, they had never before been so clearly endorsed by the society of states as they were at the UN World Summit in 2005. The chapter traces developments in international consensus on the accountability of sovereigns to the point that in 2011 the UN Security Council only for the first time authorised the use of force against a functioning sovereign state, Libya, without its consent, for the purpose of protecting civilians from mass atrocities.
Gillian Brock
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- May 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199230938
- eISBN:
- 9780191710957
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230938.003.0007
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Political Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
This chapter argues that military intervention to support the goals of global justice can be defensible in the extreme cases in which people's abilities to meet their most basic needs and protect ...
More
This chapter argues that military intervention to support the goals of global justice can be defensible in the extreme cases in which people's abilities to meet their most basic needs and protect their basic freedoms are not adequately attended to by the governments of those citizens. Reconceptualizing sovereignty as responsibility allows us to circumvent problems thought to attend such proposals, for instance, that intervention would interfere unjustly with the sovereignty of nations. Protections against abuse provide the assurances we need and constitute an important part of the justification for legitimate interventions. The findings of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty discussed in this chapter provide reason for optimism about future possibilities for acting decisively as humanitarian crises unfold, especially as the core idea of a responsibility to protect now enjoys widespread endorsement.Less
This chapter argues that military intervention to support the goals of global justice can be defensible in the extreme cases in which people's abilities to meet their most basic needs and protect their basic freedoms are not adequately attended to by the governments of those citizens. Reconceptualizing sovereignty as responsibility allows us to circumvent problems thought to attend such proposals, for instance, that intervention would interfere unjustly with the sovereignty of nations. Protections against abuse provide the assurances we need and constitute an important part of the justification for legitimate interventions. The findings of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty discussed in this chapter provide reason for optimism about future possibilities for acting decisively as humanitarian crises unfold, especially as the core idea of a responsibility to protect now enjoys widespread endorsement.
Peter Dietsch
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- August 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780190251512
- eISBN:
- 9780190251543
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190251512.003.0005
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Political Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
International tax theory should follow the lead of other domains of international law in replacing the antiquated notion of Westphalian sovereignty with a concept of sovereignty that acknowledges ...
More
International tax theory should follow the lead of other domains of international law in replacing the antiquated notion of Westphalian sovereignty with a concept of sovereignty that acknowledges both obligations and rights of states in their conduct towards other countries. The author proposes such an account called sovereignty as responsibility. Whereas the traditional view regards tax cooperation of the kind defended in this book as a constraint on sovereignty, the position put forward here holds that certain forms of tax cooperation are required by, and conducive to, the protection of sovereignty. The final section of the chapter extends the principles of tax justice defended in chapter 2 to the case of non-democratic regimes, where the internal conditions of fiscal sovereignty are not met.Less
International tax theory should follow the lead of other domains of international law in replacing the antiquated notion of Westphalian sovereignty with a concept of sovereignty that acknowledges both obligations and rights of states in their conduct towards other countries. The author proposes such an account called sovereignty as responsibility. Whereas the traditional view regards tax cooperation of the kind defended in this book as a constraint on sovereignty, the position put forward here holds that certain forms of tax cooperation are required by, and conducive to, the protection of sovereignty. The final section of the chapter extends the principles of tax justice defended in chapter 2 to the case of non-democratic regimes, where the internal conditions of fiscal sovereignty are not met.
Sarah Teitt
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- February 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780198793427
- eISBN:
- 9780191835247
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198793427.003.0017
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter questions the assumptions underlying Hedley Bull’s ‘revolt against the West’ by examining how—contra a system defined by the rise of radical pluralism—the evolution of human rights and ...
More
This chapter questions the assumptions underlying Hedley Bull’s ‘revolt against the West’ by examining how—contra a system defined by the rise of radical pluralism—the evolution of human rights and humanitarian norms over the past four decades has redefined sovereignty according to domestic and international responsibilities. Drawing lessons from Chinese diplomacy, the first half of the chapter argues that the ‘compromising’ of sovereignty by human rights was not simply a Western-driven, liberal response to the worst excesses of the post-1945 ‘negative’ sovereignty game. The second half of the chapter examines three key normative developments in the 1990s—the democratic entitlement, right to humanitarian assistance, and protection of civilians in armed conflict—which linked states’ international legitimacy to the will and well-being of their people, and established a field of practice that led to the consolidation of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ and ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) norms in the 2000s.Less
This chapter questions the assumptions underlying Hedley Bull’s ‘revolt against the West’ by examining how—contra a system defined by the rise of radical pluralism—the evolution of human rights and humanitarian norms over the past four decades has redefined sovereignty according to domestic and international responsibilities. Drawing lessons from Chinese diplomacy, the first half of the chapter argues that the ‘compromising’ of sovereignty by human rights was not simply a Western-driven, liberal response to the worst excesses of the post-1945 ‘negative’ sovereignty game. The second half of the chapter examines three key normative developments in the 1990s—the democratic entitlement, right to humanitarian assistance, and protection of civilians in armed conflict—which linked states’ international legitimacy to the will and well-being of their people, and established a field of practice that led to the consolidation of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ and ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) norms in the 2000s.
