Military Intervention: Its Necessity and Consequences
Among the years humanitarian intervention has become our response to any human right violation. The world today has changed, it is not the same as it was centuries ago back when tribes used to conquer lands for human resources and self-gain without consequences or repercussions whereas now we have laws and regulations specially for human rights not to mention the UN whom are watching over all of the worldwide countries, tracking their every move. The question today is whether or not a military campaign can be justified as human right defense and in essay about intervention research will be an attempt to give the answer.
Humanitarian intervention is when a country uses its military forces against another country and publicly announces its goal to end human rights violation in that country. Most of the time when countries perform this intervention it has nothing to do with putting an end to human rights violation, they take advantage of countries that have complications within their community and invade them to take out their resources such as water, oil, gold… for instance, when USA invaded Iraq with the excuse of fighting for injustice that was taking place in Iraq their main goal was to extract all of their oil, in the end Iraq was destroyed , their president Saddam Hussein was executed and all of their natural resources were extracted by the US. Moreover, when the US invaded Afghanistan is an act to fight terrorism, Afghanistan today is still a state of terrorists.
It is important to state that by law there are two exceptions for a military intervention to not be considered as an act of aggression, it must be ascertained as an international customary norm or it must conform to the rules under the UN charter where it can be justified if approved by the UNSC, humanitarian intervention could be legally justifiable if one refers to the UN Charter. However, it is interesting to note that what can be considered an international norm is fairly vague and requires one to study international law, particularly the meaning behind its concept of “internationally held norms”. The most important principle in international law is the inviolability of the territorial sovereignty of states. The principle of respect for the territorial integrity of states is well founded as one of the linchpins of the international system, as is the norm prohibiting interference in the internal affairs of other states. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter preserves the territorial integrity and political independence of states by forbidding any use of force, or threat of use of force against either. The accepted exception to this principle, which has now become a peremptory norm from which no derogation is permissible as it is known, is only the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, and Collective Security measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
The goal of military intervention should be to provide safety and stability in the targeted region and any state that fails to do so should be punished ; sadly in this day and age no one gets punished as long the US is satisfied , other countries have become stepping stones for the bigger countries to thrive and prosper. We have come to realize that international laws are being enforced conditionally depending on the opposing states without anyone interfering because there is no higher state of power.
The fact is there are truly countries that suffer from human right violations and actually need help, they are ruled by corrupt leaders who do not abide by international laws of human rights. Military intervention is actually not a solution for this problem since it puts more lives in danger and takes a lot of time to execute and doesn’t end successfully for instance, the US intervention of the Syrian war has been taking place for years with no good outcome for the Syrian people. Add to this the US’s humanitarian intervention has nothing but destroy the Middle East, take away all of its resources, devastate all of its cities, putting all of its people in danger. No human rights are being defended, only violated
In conclusion military intervention is absolutely not a solution for human rights violation but the exact opposite. The law should be enforced on every single state to an equal degree but that obviously is not taking place, these interventions seem efficient on paper but in the world we live in today they are just excuses for the rich to get richer and the poor become poorer.
