Document Type

Article

Disciplines

International Law

Abstract

Principles of international law frequently conflict and are invoked in direct opposition to one another. The Kurdish relief effort in the spring of 1991, and the current American humanitarian aid mission to the African state of Somalia, are examples of the conflicting principles of humanitarian intervention and nonintervention. Humanitarian intervention is an emotional concept which is usually undertaken as a moral duty. Humanitarian intervention is defined as "intervention (in the narrow sense of coercive interference in the internal affairs of another state) in order to remedy mass and flagrant violations of the basic human rights of foreign nationals by their government." 1 International law recognizes humanitarian intervention and can, on occasion, justify it.

International law recognizes the principle of human rights and codifies the concept in international documents. Article 55 of the United Nations Charter pledges "universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms." 2 In Article 56, members "pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in co-operation with the Organization" for this purpose.' Humanitarian intervention is, however, regarded as more of a curio of international law rather than a peremptory norm of international law. Humanitarian intervention is not a consistently acted upon principle of international law. In direct contrast and conflict with humanitarian intervention is the universally accepted concept of nonintervention. The doctrine of nonintervention is firmly established in the tradition, customs, treaties and doctrine of international law. Article 2(7) of the United Nations Charter states: "Nothing in the present charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in the matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state . . ." State sovereignty is of paramount importance in international law. Under what conditions humanitarian intervention may override the doctrine of nonintervention into state sovereignty warrants examination.

The aftermath of the 1991 Persian Gulf War provides an excellent case study for large scale implementation of humanitarian intervention. The Iraqi government's aggression and systematic murder of Iraqi Kurds created a situation United Nations and the allied forces would not tolerate. In an unprecedented move, the allied powers proposed establishing an ethnic enclave within the territorial boundaries of Iraq. Security for the enclave would be provided by allied military forces. The United Nations Security Council passed a French proposed Resolution, Number 688,' giving general authorization for the humanitarian intervention to begin. The legal question is to determine if the establishment of an ethnic enclave in a sovereign state by foreign powers for humanitarian reasons is within the scope of international law. If so, does the action set new precedent where human rights outweigh state sovereignty?

Accessibility Requirements

1

Download

Share

COinS