Humanitarian Intervention
Rana Al Mutawa

What is Humanitarian
Intervention?
• “State's use of "military force against anotherstate when the chief publicly declared aim of thatmilitary action is ending human-rights
violations being perpetrated by the state against
which it is directed." (Marjanovik)

Three Characteristics• It almost always involves the threat and use of
military force.
• It interferes in internal affairs through militaryforce.
• It is in response to a humanitarian crisis which
does not necessarily affect the interfering states’
security.

Research Question• Is “humanitarian intervention” being used in a
way that ends human rights violations?

Methods• Qualitative Method:i. Six Factors of R2P
ii. Consequences (death toll, war crimes,
refugees, economic impact, political impact,stability…etc.)

R2P-Six Factors• Just Cause - Is the threat a "serious andirreparable harm occurring to human beings"?
• Right Intention - Is the main intention of themilitary action to prevent human suffering or are
there other motives?
• Final Resort - Has every other measure besides
military invention been taken into account?
• Right Authority-Who should make the decision?
• Proportional Means - Are the minimum
necessary military means applied to secure humanprotection?
• Reasonable Prospect - Is it likely that military
action will succeed in protecting human life, andare the consequences of this action sure not to beworse than no action at all?

Do countries want to intervene?
• Military intervention is risky and without the
incentive of benefit to the intervening states,
most would prefer to stay away from it. Reasonsare:• It’s costly and requires large amounts of money
to be spent for military intervention• Intervening states do not want to intervene inally or friendly state• There might be opposition from the public• It may create political tension with other states.
• Intervention may fuel a conflict and intervening
countries may be blamed

When do they intervene?
• Worry that a humanitarian crisis might spillover
to other strategic states or area
• Intervention motivated for political regimechange• Intervention motivated by economic gains andaccess to resources through intervention• Intervention for other political reasons such as
distracting from problems at home, showing
strength and ability to control the international
arena

Case Study: Libya• Civil war in 2011 between Gaddafi and hisloyalists and rebel forces• NATO intervention• Motivations include ending human rights
abuses, regime change or access to resources• Gaddafi partly nationalized oil wealth. “Western
oil companies operating in Libya have privately
warned that their operations in the country may
be nationalized if Colonel Gaddafi’s regime
prevails.”

Death Toll & Credibility• NTC estimated tens of thousands killed by
Gaddafi's forces (some 50,000 people killed)• Figure was revised down to 25,000 dead• Jan 2013, figure was around 4,700 from rebels’
side• Similar figure for the old regime

Rebels-Terrorism & War Crimes• Many rebels are part of Al Qaeda• Killings of black Africans, torture, prisoners
without charges…etc.
• Sectarianism-burning of Sufi mosques…etc.
• Funding of Al-Qaeda which commits atrocities
of its own

Military Force-Last Resort?
• Military force should be used as a last resort,and international community should assist in
non-military means to achieve peace• However, international community was
undermining peace• France, Qatar, US…etc armed the rebels, adding
to the violence• France violated UNSCR 1970• Just Cause – Death toll cited in the beginning was
inaccurate – 4,700 were killed, not 50,000.
• Right Intention – It can be said that the main
intention is regime change and access to resources• Final Resort – No, it has not. International
community funded the rebels and fuelled conflict• Right Authority-Select powerful states voted forintervention. Others abstained or said they wereagainst it• Proportional Means –Non-military means havenot been exhausted• Reasonable Prospect – No, because the situation
was complex – rebels were Al-Qaeda linked, death
toll was unclear, violations committed by bothsides…etc.

Case Study: Kosovo• Conflict between Federal Republic of Yugoslavia(FRY) and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA)
and NATO.
• In March 1999, the US Defense Secretary statedthat 100,000 “may have been murdered”(Dogget). The number went down to less than
3,000 people killed (Steele). It turned out that
2,500 people were killed before the intervention,and 10,000 after.
• Serbian president tried for war crimes at ICT.
Bill Clinton and NATO leaders at top of the list.

• During the five months before the intervention
there were no international refugees. Threedays after the bombing started, there were only
4,000 refugees, but one week after the refugees
amounted to 350,000• “Reverse ethnic cleansing”- 70,000 Serbs fleeing
from Kosovo since the beginning of the NATObombing campaign (Becker).

Rambouillet• Serbia agreed to: “An immediate end to all hostilities, broad
autonomy for Kosovo, an executive legislative assembly headed bya president, a Kosovar judicial system, a democratic system,
elections under the auspices of the OSCE within nine months of thesigning of the agreement, respect of the rights of all persons andethnic groups, and the territorial integrity of the FRY, with Kosovo
remaining within the country.”• Serbia opposed: “NATO personnel shall enjoy, together with
their vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and equipment, free andunrestricted passage and unimpeded access throughout
the FRY including associated airspace and territorial
waters. This shall include, but not be limited to, the right ofbivouac, maneuver, billet, and utilization of any areas or facilities
as required for support, training, and operations.”

Unacceptable agreement• Ex-secretary of state Henry Kissinger said: "theRambouillet text, which called on Serbia to admit
NATO troops throughout Yugoslavia, was a
provocation, an excuse to start bombing" (Bancroft).
• Former Canadian Ambassador to Yugoslavia said:"it is now generally accepted by those who have seen
the Rambouillet agreement that no sovereign state
could have agreed to its conditions. The...demandthat a referendum on autonomy be held within three
years guaranteed a Serbian rejection”

• Just Cause -The death toll was 2,500 before intervention. Thismay have warranted an intervention, but the toll after intervention
was much higher• Right Intention -The intent for intervention as cited above werereasons such as credibility and distracting from problems at home.
• Final Resort –Peace deal efforts were sabotaged. The deals madewould not be accepted by a sovereign state• Right Authority-The UNSC was not even given consideration inthis intervention. The international community was split• Proportional Means -NATO’s use of force was disproportionate
to the situation at hand. The issue could have been possibly solved
through respectable negotiations for both sides, yet that was nevertried.
• Reasonable Prospect -There was reason to see this intervention
as causing more damage, because the damages before theintervention was not great. Damages to the environment andinfrastructure ensued after the bombing, along with economic
damage. That is not including the death toll and refugee crisis that
occurred after intervention

East Timor• Birth of indigenous political parties in East
Timor after colonies left. The most popular:
UDT and the Fretilin.
• Both parties entered a coalition by January 1975
and ended it on August because of internal
conflicts.
• Three week civil war, Fretilin won, andIndonesia invaded.

Indonesian Invasion Supported by US,
UK and Australia• Australia’s military aid doubled between 1975
and1981, continuing through to 1999.
• 90% of the arms supplied by the US.
• Weapons significant to Indonesia’s saturation
bombing supplied by Britain.
• “It is in Britain’s interests that Indonesia should
absorb the territory as soon…as possible ..weshould…avoid taking sides against theIndonesian government.”Humanitarian Intervention• Took place after genocide and after hundreds ofthousands killed.
• Same countries which supplied weapons andgave military aid were part of the intervention• Public pressure, fear of instability and loss of
economic gain main reasons for intervention

Benefits for Australia• “The Howard government pressured East Timor
into agreeing a series of dodgy resource sharing
deals allowing it to take billions of dollars thatrightfully belongs to the East Timorese”(Lachicas).
• A new agreement in 2002: managing the“Greater Sunrise” was 80% up to Australians.
Largest oil field in the area, expected to bring$40 billion. Contains 9.5 trillion cubic feet of gas
reserves and 300 million barrels of oil. East
Timor would only be allowed to get 18% of therevenues from this project (Lachicas).

• 1- Just Cause -There were around 200,000 East Timorese killedduring the decades of Indonesian invasion,• 2- Right Intention –It was not to end human suffering as
human suffering has been present in East Timor for the past 25
years with the military, economic and diplomatic support of theintervening forces. The reasons for intervention was a mix of publicpressure and the prevention of political and economic losses• 3- Final Resort -No, they have not. The intervening forces,
namely the US, UK and Australia had 25 years to cut military,economic and diplomatic relations with Indonesia• 4- Right Authority- The East Timorese people did want UNintervention• 5-Proportional Means -Use of force was disproportionate. There
was no need for military intervention in 1999, had there been a cut
in military and economic assistance by intervening countries. But
when it was too late to fix everything diplomatically, the UN was
unable to disarm or disband the militias, and was unable to try themfor their crimes• 6- Reasonable Prospect -There was reason to see thisintervention as helping the situation after 25 years of occupation.
However, there were other means to have ended it without militaryforce and without ending so many human lives.

Case Study: Rwanda• War between Tutsis and Hutus.
• Estimated 80,000 dead in almost 3 months• No intervention cited as reason for the genocide• Example of how “humanitarian intervention”
has failed

Iraq: Kurdish Massacre• 50,000 to 100,000 non-combatant civilians
including women and children killed• 4,000 villages (out of 4,655) in Iraqi Kurdistan
destroyed. 250 towns and villages were exposed
to chemical weapons• Wiped out around 90% of Kurdish villages intargeted areas

No Intervention• Usual intervener (West) friends with Saddam
during that time
• Saddam’s regime sustained by military aid itfrom UK and US administration at that time
• Thatcher increased arms sale to Saddam in1988

Conclusion• Intervention needs to be motivated byhumanitarian reasons, situation on the groundshould be clear, credible facts should be clear,consequences should be anticipated for the
success of interventionReferences• Abu-Aun, Lutfi. "Russia: Arming Libya Rebels Is Crude Violation." Reuters. Thomson
Reuters, 30 June 2011. Web. 19 July 2013.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/30/us-libya-idUSTRE7270JP20110630• Bancroft, Ian. "Serbia's Anniversary Is a Timely Reminder." The Guardian. GuardianNews and Media, 24 Mar. 2009. Web. 19 July 2013.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/24/serbia-kosovo• Becker, Brian. "NATO Occupation of Kosovo." IACenter.org. International Action
Center, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.iacenter.org/warcrime/1_occup.htm>.
• Black, Ian. "Libyan Revolution Casualties Lower than Expected, Says New
Government."The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 01 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 July
2013. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/08/libyan-revolutioncasualties-lower-expected-government>.
• "Black Africans Come Under Attack in Libya." Al Jazeera -. N.p., 14 Sept. 2012. Web.
11 July 2013. <http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/black-africans-come-under-firelibya>.
• Blas, Javier, and Pfeifer, Sylvia. "Oil Companies Fear Nationalisation in Libya."
FT.com. Financial Times, 20 Mar. 2011. Web. 11 July 2013.
<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/67d1d02a-5314-11e0-86e6-00144feab49a.html>.
• Burr, William, and Michael Evans. "East Timor Revisited." The National Security
Archive. George Washington University, 6 Dec. 2001. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/>.
• "Counting the Cost of Nato's Mission in Libya." BBC News. BBC, 31 Oct. 2011. Web.
19 July 2013. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15528984>.

• Des Forges, Alison. “Leave No One to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda.” Human
Rights Watch. 1999.
• Doggett, Tom. "Cohen Fears 100,000 Kosovo Men Killed by Serbs." WP. The
Washington Post, 16 May 1999. Web. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/inatl/longterm/balkans/stories/cohen051699.htm>. dogget• "Durable Solutions Still Elusive 13 Years after Conflict." IDMC. Norweigan RefugeeCouncil, n.d. Web. <http://www.internaldisplacement.org/8025708F004BE3B1/(httpInfoFiles)/059256A33883575EC1257A
93003F6A18/$file/kosovo-overview-oct2012.pdf>. idmc
• "East Timor Profile." BBC News. BBC, 22 Nov. 2012. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14952883>.
• Elhelwa, Sherif. "Libya Islamists Gaining Strength: Libyans Concerned by Sectarian
Violence."The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 11 July
2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/19/libya-islamists-gainingstrength-libyans-concerned-by-sectarian-violence_n_2909693.html>.
• "Fact Sheet: UN Security Council Resolution 1970, Libya Sanctions." usun.state.gov.
US Mission to UN, 26 Feb. 2011. Web. 12 July 2013.
<http://usun.state.gov/briefing/statements/2011/157194.htm>.
• Frye, Alton. 'Humanitarian Intervention: Crafting a Workable Doctrine.' New York:Council on Foreign Relations. 2000.
• “Genocide in Iraq - The Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds”." HRW. Human Rights
Watch, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013.
• "GENOCIDE - RWANDA." PPUI. Peace Pledge Union Information, n.d. Web. 19 July
2013.http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_rwanda1.html• "Genocide in Rwanda." UHRC. United Human Rights Council, n.d. Web. 19 July
2013. <http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/genocide_in_rwanda.htm>.

• Jones, Matthew. "Brown & Root Pushes Portable Homes for Kosovo Refugees." NCE. New
Civil Engineer, 31 May 1999. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.nce.co.uk/brown-and-rootpushes-portable-homes-for-kosovo-refugees/834596.article>. nce• Karem, Harem. "How Thatcher Helped Saddam Commit Genocide." The Kurdistan
Tribune. The Kurdistan Tribune, 17 Apr. 2013. Web. 19 July 2013.
• Kozaryn, Linda. "Clinton Says NATO Must Act in Kosovo." US DoD. US Department of
Defense, 22 Mar. 1999. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=42682>. us dep• Lachica, Alan A. "Humanitarian Intervention in East Timor: An Analysis of Australia’s
Leadership Role." Peace & Conflict Review. University of Peace, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://www.review.upeace.org/index.cfm?opcion=0>.
• "Learn About RtoP." Responsibilitytoptotect.org. International Coalition for the
Responsibility to Protect, n.d. Web. 11 July 2013.
<http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/about-rtop>.
• Lemarchand, Rene. "Disconnecting the Threads: Rwanda and the Holocaust
Reconsidered", Idea Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, March 29th, 2002.
• "Libya Conflict: France Air-dropped Arms to Rebels." BBC News. BBC, 29 June 2011. Web.
12 July 2013. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13955751>.
• "Libya's Sufism Being Bulldozed to the Ground." RT.com. RT News, 28 Aug. 2012. Web. 11
July 2013. http://rt.com/news/libya-sufi-sites-bulldozed-579/• Libyan Rebels Cage Black Africans in Zoo, Force Feed Them Flags (SHOCK VIDEO)" RT.com. RT News, 3 May 2012. Web. 11 July 2013. <http://rt.com/news/libya-rebelstorture-africans-679/>.
• Mandel, Michael. How America Gets Away with murder: Illegal Wars, Collateral
Damage and Crimes Against Humanity. London, Ann Arbor MI: Pluto, 2004. Print.
• Mandelbaum, Michael. "The Failure of Intervention." Foreign Affairs. Council on Foreign
Relations, Sept.-Oct. 1999. Web. 20 July 2013.
<http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/55396/michael-mandelbaum/from-the-archivesthe-failure-of-intervention>.

• "Marjanovic, Marko. “Is Humanitarian War the Exception?” Mises Institute. April
4th, 2011.
• Modeme, Lawrence. "The Libya Humanitarian Intervention: Is It Lawful inInternational Law | Dr Lawrence Modeme." Academia.edu. Academia, n.d. Web. 12
July 2013.
http://academia.edu/576116/The_Libya_Humanitarian_Intervention_Is_it_Lawful_in_International_Law• Milne, Seumas. "If There Were Global Justice, Nato Would Be in the Dock over
Libya." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 15 May 2012. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/15/global-justice-natolibya>.
• “New report: Libya held in 'stranglehold' by hundreds of militia groups.” Amnesty
International. July 5th , 2012
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20206• Nezan, Kendal. "When Our "friend" Saddam Was Gassing the Kurds." - Le Monde
Diplomatique. - Le Monde Diplomatique, n.d. Web. 19 July 2011
• "Rambouillet Agreement." Princeton University. Princeton University, n.d. Web.
<http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Rambouillet_Agreeme
nt.html>.
• "Saddam Hussein's Rise to Power." PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 11 July 2013.
<http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/iraq/war/player1.html>.
• "Serbia: 13,000 Killed and Missing from Kosovo War." ReliefWeb. OCHA, 6 Oct.
1999. Web. 20 July 2013. <http://reliefweb.int/report/serbia/serbia-13000-killedand-missing-kosovo-war-rights-group>.
• Shani, Giorgio; Satō, Makoto; and Pasha, Mustapha Kamal. "'Democratic
Imperialism', 'Neo-Liberal Globalization' and Human In/Security in the Global
South." Protecting Human Security in a Post 9/11 World: Critical and Global Insights.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. 18-19. Print.

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Steele, Jonathan. "Serb Killings 'exaggerated' by West." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 17
Aug. 2000. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/aug/18/balkans3>.
Stuart, Paul. "Camp Bondsteel and America’s Plans to Control Caspian Oil." WSWS-. World Socialist Web
SIte, 29 Apr. 2002. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2002/04/oil-a29.html>.
wsws"Syrian Opposition Studies Terror Tactics in Kosovo - RT News." RT.com. Russia Today, 04 May 2012.
Web. 19 July 2013. <http://rt.com/news/syrian-opposition-studies-terror-tactics-in-kosovo-585/>.
"Testimony of an OSCE Monitor in Kosovo until NATO Attack." York University. York University, 13 May
1999. Web. <http://www.math.yorku.ca/sfp/newsl/sfp69>. York Uni“The Responsibility to Protect: Report of The International Commission on Intervention of State
Sovereignty.” ICISS. International Development Research Center, December 2001.
http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf"THE KOSOVO CRISIS AFTER MAY 1997." UK Parliament. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmfaff/28/2809.htm>.
"Timeline: Kosovo." BBC News. BBC, 24 Jan. 2012. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/3550401.stm>. bbc 2"UK Duplicity Exposed on Kurdish Genocide." Press TV. Press TV, 2 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 July 2013.
"UN Security Council Resolution on Libya: Key Points." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 18
Mar. 2011. Web. 11 July 2013. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/18/un-security-councilresolution-key-points>.
“UN security council resolution 1973 (2011) on Libya – full text.” The Guradian. The Gardian, 17tth
March 2011. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/17/un-security-council-resolution"Washington May Arm Al-Qaeda-linked Libyan Rebels." RT.com. RT News, 1 Apr. 2011. Web. 11 July
2013. <http://rt.com/news/al-qaeda-libya-american-arms/>.
"What Happened in the Kurdish Genocide." KRG.org. KRG Representation in the United Kingdom, n.d.
Web. 19 July 2013.
Wippman, David. "Kosovo And the Limits of International Law." Fordham International Law Journal.
Fordham University, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013.
"World: Europe Two in Three Support Strikes.” BBC News. BBC, 23 Apr. 1999. Web. 19 July 2013.
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/326481.stm