The Conflict Between Humanitarian Intervention and the Principle of Non-Intervention in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter

This paper examines the conflict between the principle of non-intervention, enshrined in Article 2(7) of the United Nations Charter, and the practice of humanitarian intervention. The principle of non-intervention aims to protect state sovereignty by prohibiting external interference in domestic matters, but it faces challenges in the context of severe humanitarian crises. Through analysis of legal frameworks, ethical debates, and case studies such as Kosovo, Libya, and Syria, this paper explores the complexities of balancing respect for sovereignty with the moral imperative to protect human rights. The role of the UN Security Council in authorizing interventions and the influence of geopolitical dynamics are discussed, as well as the evolving doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The paper concludes by highlighting the need for clearer international standards that reconcile non-intervention with the responsibility to prevent atrocities, offering insights into potential reforms for a more consistent approach to humanitarian intervention in international law.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Studies in Law and Justice
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.56397/slj.2024.12.02
Primary Topic
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Conflict Between Humanitarian Intervention and the Principle of Non-Intervention in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter

Edmond H. Fischer, T. Greer, Daniel J. Hensley
Studies in Law and Justice
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
article

The Conflict Between Humanitarian Intervention and the Principle of Non-Intervention in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter

Edmond H. Fischer, T. Greer, Daniel J. Hensley
article en

Abstract

This paper examines the conflict between the principle of non-intervention, enshrined in Article 2(7) of the United Nations Charter, and the practice of humanitarian intervention. The principle of non-intervention aims to protect state sovereignty by prohibiting external interference in domestic matters, but it faces challenges in the context of severe humanitarian crises. Through analysis of legal frameworks, ethical debates, and case studies such as Kosovo, Libya, and Syria, this paper explores the complexities of balancing respect for sovereignty with the moral imperative to protect human rights. The role of the UN Security Council in authorizing interventions and the influence of geopolitical dynamics are discussed, as well as the evolving doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The paper concludes by highlighting the need for clearer international standards that reconcile non-intervention with the responsibility to prevent atrocities, offering insights into potential reforms for a more consistent approach to humanitarian intervention in international law.

Studies in Law and JusticeVol. 3(4)
University of the West of England (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.