 |
| Vai alla copia |
Humanitarian Intervention and the
Responsibility To Protect considers who should undertake humanitarian
intervention in response to an ongoing or impending humanitarian crisis, such as
found in Rwanda in early 1994, Kosovo in 1999, and Darfur more recently. The
doctrine of the responsibility to protect asserts that when a state is failing
to uphold its citizens' human rights, the international community has a
responsibility to protect these citizens, including by undertaking humanitarian
intervention. It is unclear, however, which particular agent should be tasked
with this responsibility. Should we prefer intervention by the UN, NATO, a
regional or subregional organization (such as the African Union), a state, a
group of states, or someone else? This book answers this question by, first,
determining which qualities of interveners are morally significant and, second,
assessing the relative importance of these qualities. For instance, is it
important that an intervener have a humanitarian motive? Should an intervener be
welcomed by those it is trying to save? How important is it that an intervener
will be effective and what does this mean in practice? The book then considers
the more empirical question of whether (and to what extent) the current
interveners actually possess these qualities, and therefore should intervene.
For instance, how effective can we expect UN action to be in the future? Is NATO
likely to use humanitarian means? Overall, it develops a particular normative
conception of legitimacy for humanitarian intervention. It uses this conception
of legitimacy to assess not only current interveners, but also the desirability
of potential reforms to the mechanisms and agents of humanitarian
intervention.
