What can you tell me about Humanitarian Intervention??
I'm so lost I don't know how to start my essay.
I was thinking of defining humanitarian intervention first then talk about any obligations the international community might have to undertake humanitarian intervention.
right now I don't think I know anything about humanitarian intervention, there have been times when it takes like 4 days to sink in but I want to write my essay now. Urgh.
Re: What can you tell me about Humanitarian Intervention??
Originally posted by Asami
I was thinking of defining humanitarian intervention first then talk about any obligations the international community might have to undertake humanitarian intervention.
Hmm, I've never wrote an essay bout that 😬
But, here at least, starting it with the phenomenon definition is a NONO! As well as historical flashbacks. Maybe you should start by describing how things are today and saying it has had great effects on humans and society, blah blah blah 😖
You could state that Humanitarian Intervention, when on the part of a state government, is usually done for commercial, financial and political reasons, and is usually humanitarian only coincidentally... for example, when Iraq was invaded, the purpose was not to free the Iraqi people from dictatorship, but to safeguard oil supplies... also, humanitarian aid from individuals and independent groups is usually hindered by governments and financial institutions. Take Yugoslavia... genocide was being practiced, but only months and months of nagging got them any intervention... but they had nothing valuable. It was only when the fighting threatened to spill over into Greece and Italy that anything was done... Nothing was done in Romania to aid victims of the Ceaucescu regime until after he was dead... but then, what benefits would there have been for the great powers if they had intervened? Governments may disguise there efforts as "Humanitarian... " but they are lying... the Second World War wasn't fought to aid the Jews, or prevent Naziism... it was fought to see whether capitalism, Communism or Fascism would dominate the important markets of the world
Good post kirk. Another thing to think about is how a lot of times it ends up in a huge mess, like Iraq, like Vietnam. Neither of which were actually fought to "save people". In Iraq, they hate the Americans, and who can blame them? They've killed a hell of a lot more civillians than they have terrorists, and probably enemy troops as well. They barge into people's homes and arrest them at random. Remember the whole ditty over Jessica Lynch? It was staged. She said afterwords that they had actually been very kind to her at the hospital. There was a nurse there who brought her extra cookies with her dinner and sang her to sleep at night. And as it turns out, she didn't go down fighting either. I know that's a little off topic, but it did arise from "humanitarian efforts" to save the oil.
Is it plausible for me to say that the problems that may arise in humanitarian intervention includes disrespecting the sovereign of the territorial state?
E.g. Saddam Hussien was the ruler of Iraq, he was probably really p'd off that there's these other state intervening with his ruling.
But human rights there was a problem so it justifies disrespecting the state sovereignty so it was ok to intervene.
Would the primary motivation then be resources rather than humanitarian reasons?
Yes, I think that would be perfectly fine for you to say.
And in the case of Saddam and Iraq, though it is indeed true that he was killing a lot of people, the primary motivation was NOT to save people. The real reason was oil. If you had asked the US govt. a year and a half ago, they would've said that the motivation was those damn slippery WMD's. If you asked them now, they'd say it was "humanitarian intervention".
In fact, they ended up hurting more people than they probably saved. They said they weren't going to kill any civilians... How they expected to pull that off, I don't know. It's a war, for god's sake. And they just go around chosing random people and saying "hey you, come over so we can question you, you dirty terrorist".
In short, "human rights" (in quotations because I really don't believe that's a very accurate word... Can't be bothered to explain) were an issue in Iraq, but that's true in countries all over the world. Which raises the question, "why did we pick Iraq?" (actually, we know why...) It is quite disrespectful of us to barge into a country and overthrow its leadership, no matter how poor it may be. And, we didn't even accomplish what is now said to be the "goal" of the war.
Just remember kids...
war
Humanitarian Interventions? It is just another name for Empire's intervention, but you can freely say that soon they will have to come up with another name, in addition to " fight against terroris", cause no one buys that any more".As others said you can visit the UN site, but take it all upsaide down, everything u would read there will justify the term, you could visit (If i'm asked) Amnesty International site and Human Watch Site, you will find more relevent updates and information....
.. YOu can start your essay like (Title):
"Humatarian Intervention, intervention indeed or bussiness by itself???"