International Law Commons^™

Worth A Pound Of Cure? An Empirical Assessment Of The Bush Doctrine And Preventive Military Action, Paul F. Diehl, Shyam Kulkarni

University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review

The Bush Doctrine, or the proposal that allows the use of military force preventively to address prospective attack from terrorists or involving weapons of mass destruction, has been debated from various normative and legal vantage points. In this article, we introduce the new evaluative criterion that such military action must also produce the desired outcomes of defeating opponents and preventing future attacks. We test the efficacy of preventive military actions over the last two centuries. We conclude that using military force in a preventive fashion provides very limited, if any value, to states that employ this strategy. At best, there …

April Roundtable: Responsibility To Protect And Human Rights Protection In The Ivory Coast, Introduction, Claudia Fuentes

Human Rights & Human Welfare

An annotation of:

Article under review: “The Case for Intervention in the Ivory Coast” by Corinne Dufka. Foreign Policy. March 25 2011.

Pandora’S Box Of Humanitarian Intervention, Edzia Carvalho

Human Rights & Human Welfare

“The Case for Intervention in the Ivory Coast” reminded me of the discussion that my undergraduate students had during the previous academic term on the conundrums surrounding humanitarian intervention. They innately responded to the intense suffering of individuals and groups facing gross human rights violations and initially argued that inaction in the face of suffering cannot be justified on any grounds. However, with their international relations hats on, many of them soon realized that putting an end to such a state of affairs is not as easy or straightforward as they had hoped.

A Structural Solution To Africa’S Wayward Presidents, Devin K. Joshi

Human Rights & Human Welfare

The current crisis in the Ivory Coast unfortunately resembles a number of crises in Western and Central Africa over the last few decades. Whereas the international community has generally been more willing to intervene in Europe and the Middle East, there has been a tendency to “wait and watch” while humanitarian crises unfold in middle Africa. In the last several years, as in the Ivory Coast right now, however, global awareness of the brutality of such crises has expanded tremendously.

Double Standards Demystified, Jonas Claes

Human Rights & Human Welfare

At the time Ms. Corinne Dufka’s op-Ed about the crisis in Côte D’Ivoire appeared, few would have predicted that three days later UN troops, with the support of the French military, would act forcefully to protect civilians and tip the balance in favor of the fighters loyal to Alassane Ouattara, eventually leading to the arrest of Laurent Gbagbo. The odds were not favoring this scenario.

Obama's Africa Policy On Human Rights, Use Of Force And Humanitarian Intervention: In Whose Interest, Vincent O. Nmehielle, John-Mark Iyi

Florida A & M University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Humanitarian Intervention, The Responsibility To Protect, And Confused Legitimacy, Eric A. Heinze

Human Rights & Human Welfare

A review of:

Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: Who Should Intervene? By James Pattison. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 284 pp.

and

Humanitarian Intervention: An Introduction. By Aidan Hehir. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. 303pp.

Adoption Of The Responsibility To Protect, William W. Burke-White

All Faculty Scholarship

This book chapter traces the legal and political origins of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine from its early origins in the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty through the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document and up to January 2011. The chapter examines the legal meaning of the Responsibility to Protect, the obligations the Responsibility imposes on states and international institutions, and its implications in for the international legal and political systems. The chapter argues that while the Responsibility to Protect has developed with extraordinary speed, it is still a norm in development rather than a binding legal rule. Its …