Search results

Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

Humanitarian intervention – that is, military intervention aimed at saving innocent people in other countries from massive violations of human rights (primarily the right to life) – entered public consciousness around 1990 as never before in the course of the twentieth century. It has earned a central place in scholarly research and in the preoccupations of decision-makers and international organizations and has captured the imagination of the wider public in a

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century

France has been a central actor in human protection, yet the existing literature has too often focused on Anglo-Saxon states or states that are wary of its development. In order to address this gap, this book provides an original and much-needed account of France’s relationship to human protection since the 1980s. It analyses a ‘tale of two norms’ using an innovative theoretical framework: The first is ‘France’s domestic norm of human protection’, and the second is the dominant international principle or norm of human protection at the time (chiefly humanitarian intervention in the 1990s and the responsibility to protect (R2P) in the 2000s). Through this ‘tale of two norms’, and also thanks to interviews with key actors such as Gareth Evans and Bernard Kouchner and analysis of fourteen case studies, the book reshapes our understanding of the development and influence of key principles and norms of human protection. It also corrects prevailing assumptions about France’s foreign policy and allows us to anticipate its future foreign policy more accurately. Last but not least, by showing how important it is to pay more attention to the interplay between domestic and international norms and building an innovative framework that can be used beyond the analysis of France and human protection, the book makes a key contribution to the literature on norms and International Relations theory more generally. The book is therefore an essential read for anyone interested in human protection, peace studies, France, foreign policy analysis, International Relations and norm diffusion.

Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

Advocates and opponents of humanitarian intervention From the 1860s onwards, international law became an academic discipline in its own right in Europe and the Americas, taught separately from philosophy, natural law or civil law, and came to be written by professional academics or theoretically inclined diplomats. 1 Until then what existed was the droit public de l’Europe or ‘external public law’. Britain in particular had to

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
Setting the precedent

This book is an attempt at a comprehensive presentation of the history of humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century, the heyday of this controversial doctrine. It starts with a brief presentation of the present situation and debate. The theoretical first part of the book starts with the genealogy of the idea, namely the quest for the progenitors of the idea in the sixteenth and seventeenth century which is a matter of controversy. Next the nineteenth century ‘civilization-barbarity’ dichotomy is covered and its bearing on humanitarian intervention, with its concomitant Eurocentric/Orientalist gaze towards the Ottomans and other states, concluding with the reaction of the Ottomans (as well as the Chinese and Japanese). Then the pivotal international law dimension is scrutinized, with the arguments of advocates and opponents of humanitarian intervention from the 1830s until the 1930s. The theoretical part of the book concludes with nineteenth century international political theory and intervention (Kant, Hegel, Cobden, Mazzini and especially J.S. Mill). In the practical second part of the book four cases studies of humanitarian intervention are examined in considerable detail: the Greek case (1821-1831), the Lebanon/Syria case (1860-61), the Balkan crisis and Bulgarian case (1875-78) in two chapters, and the U.S. intervention in Cuba (1895-98). Each cases study concludes with its bearing on the evolution of international norms and rules of conduct in instances of humanitarian plights. The concluding chapter identifies the main characteristics of intervention on humanitarian grounds during this period and today’s criticism and counter-criticism.

Just war and against tyranny
Alexis Heraclides and Ada Dialla

) sufficient justification, (5) costs and evil from the war not greater than the good that would come about from the war, and (6) war as a last resort. Grotius, like his predecessors, was also concerned with the jus in bello aspect. Unjust causes were the desire to acquire rich lands and conquer others on the pretext that it is for their own good. 19 Against tyranny: the monarchomachs, Bodin, Vitoria, Gentili, Grotius Humanitarian intervention’s possible

in Humanitarian intervention in the long nineteenth century
Eglantine Staunton

This chapter investigates France's conception of, and contribution to, human protection from 1987 to 1993. This period is particularly interesting because on the one hand, it corresponds to the emergence of France's domestic norm of human protection during François Mitterrand's presidency (1981–95), and on the other, it witnessed the emergence of the international principle that was humanitarian intervention. 1 Consequently, it allows the analysis of both processes and their interplay in order

in France, humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect
Eglantine Staunton

The period 1994–99 constituted a challenging time for humanitarian intervention, as it faced strong international criticism before being contested by the end of the decade. In France, François Mitterrand completed his presidency and was replaced by President Jacques Chirac, whose first mandate lasted from 1995 to 2002. Both Mitterrand and Chirac had to work with governments from the opposite end of the political spectrum: the first cohabitation took place from 1993 to 1995 and forced left-wing President Mitterrand to work with a right

in France, humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect
Norman Geras

04 Crimes Against Humanity 098-112 3/12/10 10:11 Page 98 4 Humanitarian intervention We have seen in the preceding chapters that the concept of crimes against humanity implies a limit to state sovereignty. It is natural, therefore, that discussion of the concept, and especially of its beginnings, should make reference to an earlier tradition within international law to which that same limit is germane – I mean the tradition of humanitarian intervention. In fact, the principle of humanitarian intervention stands not only at the origin of the offence of

in Crimes against humanity
Ben Cohen and Eve Garrard

(This chapter is extracted from Crimes against Humanity: Birth of a Concept , Manchester University Press, Manchester, 2011) We have seen in the preceding chapters * that the concept of crimes against humanity implies a limit to state sovereignty. It is natural, therefore, that discussion of the concept, and especially of its beginnings, should make reference to an earlier tradition within international law to which that same limit is germane – I mean the tradition of humanitarian intervention. In fact, the principle of humanitarian intervention stands not

in The Norman Geras Reader
Ben Cohen and Eve Garrard

(This article was first published on ‘Normblog’, 24 March 2010) An article by Mark Mazower for the journal World Affairs may seem, at first, to strike an odd note. It characterizes the concept of humanitarian intervention as ‘dying if not dead’ and links this judgement with the hypothesis of a ‘new era of pragmatism ... in the making’ that sounds as though it might have the author’s approval. For me there is a jarring element in that coupling. Humanitarian intervention is an option that is available when the assumed protections of state sovereignty have

in The Norman Geras Reader