Argumentative Essay On Humanitarian Intervention

There is no static or perfect definition that can encapsulate all that may fall under the theme of humanitarian intervention. Philosophically speaking, humanitarian intervention is the idea that individuals have the duty to prevent human rights violations from occurring. Furthermore, the legal basis of humanitarian intervention is derived from the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Lecture 11/15/16). As decided by the UN in 1948, all nations have a responsibility to protect, or to prevent crimes against humanity, and while it was an important milestone for the recognition of human rights, not all those experiencing the crimes of genocide

Consequences of intervention can include the loss of lives from an otherwise uninvolved country, the spread of violence, and the possibility of inciting conflict over new problems, just to name a few (Lecture, 11/15/16). For example, John Mueller considers the potential negative consequences of intervention prove that they are insignificant to the cause of humanitarian intervention as a whole. Moreover, with intervention into ethnic conflicts, the outcome, no matter how positive, is overshadowed by a gross exaggeration of negative consequences (Mueller). In both Yugoslavia and Rwanda the solution, to Mueller appeared simple, a well ordered and structured militarized presence was all that was required to end the conflict (Mueller). If this is the case, when discussing whether or not intervention is necessary the political elite must not over-exaggerate the difficulty. One of most crucial aspects of humanitarian intervention is the lack of proper motives. As noted by Bush, Martiniello, and Mercer, in the case of Libya and Côte d’Ivoire the Western nations were pursuing their own economic imperial interests under the guise of humanitarian intervention (Bush). The lack of pure motives to help decrease crimes against humanity resulted in an increased number of human rights violations in both Libya and Côte d’Ivoire (Bush). In order

Unfortunately for the citizens of countries like Syria, the rules enforced in the international sector are set by western nations to the benefit of western nations. This is evidenced, for example, following the Washington consensus policies instituted by western nations for the developing world, “The Washington Consensus era is often considered the “lost decade” of development, with increases in acute poverty, urban migrations, environmental degradation, increased militarization” (Lecture, 10/11/16). The west may claim that it has the best interest in aiding the developing countries growth, but empirical evidence shows that western nations will support a leader that is hostile towards improvements within their borders. Humanitarian Imperialism details the shift of humanitarian assistance in favor of western interests, “The new humanitarianism involve[d] a shift in the centre of gravity of policy away from saving lives to supporting social processes and political outcomes” (Bush 313). Although the Syrian president had been abusing human rights, the democratic process, and economic opportunity, his business friendly policies kept him in good graces with the west (Leber). The push on behalf of western nations for an integrated global economy creates a vacuum of human rights, leaving developing nations wrought with domestic