Humanitarian Intervention in an Area of Conflict

Student Name: Ahmed A. Massud
Collage of Liberal Arts and Sciences
St. John's University in Rome; Italy
Instructor: Professor of Government and Politics
FRANK PAUL LE VENESS
International Law course #344


Humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict
Issue paper #29
NB. Note: the paper was supposedly to be prepared by two students but unfortunately it was done only by me because there was no other student to share with me.

Humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict:
It is ever since the emergency of the principles of human rights in relations to international humanitarian laws and corresponding developments of political interests of nations. With the upcoming newly independent nations from colonialism since world war two the concept of humanitarian intervention was growing.                         
Explanations of sovereignty of independent nations become critical as humanitarian intervention and human rights become the use of the doctrine of the most advanced countries. This is exactly after the collapse of the berlin wall and disintegration of the former Soviet Union. But meaning if sovereignty is a right then this rights has duties that nations, states have duties to protect their nationals and if they ( states, nations ) fail to protect their nationals then the use of a collective force measures will be imposed accordingly. Similarly if a state become weak to protect its own population thus a collective force to help restore law and order will be the responsibility of the international community.
Today we find many scholars from different schools of thought as well as politician have burning issues in this regards. For example who has the right to take action to respond such crises (the responsibility to protect, the responsibility to intervene or the responsibility to rebuild. But what about the sovereignty of states?

Now the essence of the question is if humanitarian intervention is indeed an unacceptable assault on sovereignty of nations…..  Then how should we respond to the cases in countries like Rwanda and Srebrenica, Kosovo, Mali, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Bahrain, Darfur-Sudan, Crimea and Yemen etc.
Therefore, Intervention is it legal or illegal?
If we look into Sovereignty, intervention and humanitarianism what was said on:  international commission an intervention and state sovereignty (ICISS) 2001? Lead by the government of Canada.
The aim of the humanitarian intervention is to create a practical and concrete political impact on the concerned population’s socio-political formation.
Actually history is made by the winning part over the opposing groups. As such the scenario of intervention is not sometimes from internal population but it might be attracted by external factors etc. for example, according to Hehir, 20’10, p.220 what happened in Rwanda was the Pressure of imposing the concept of democratization by the IMF and WB structural adjustment were the cause of genocide.
Opposite to the humanitarian based principles of the UN charter of 1945 promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for the fundamental freedoms for all without discrimination as to race, sex, language and religion.
Therefore, exercising the concept of (Humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict) and its principles gave the full power to UN member states the right to intervene. accordingly sovereignty and intervention of colonialism contradict each other–However, the post-cold war era and after 9/11 for instance can be linked as one condition or phenomenon that facilitated supreme powers to intervene sovereignty of states. In this circumstance if a state corrupts the concept of humanity by being a sovereign and integral
to its internal policy but by violating human rights of its own population, then what is the proper solution to such a scenario? Intervention, then who has the Right to intervene, to Protect? Is it the UN or the unilateral decision of a state?
As a matter of fact the situation of the concept of sovereignty intervention and humanitarian is a complex issue to sort out but needs more and deep analysis and find clear cut explanations to the theme. However, if the situation is inevitable for intervention then the best option for the UN body is seek collaboration from the regional and sub-regional organizations already functional in these areas of conflict. For example in the case of UN/OAU intervention in Sudan-Darfur is a practical example for handling conflicts situation of humanitarian crises. The humanitarian crises in Darfur has been reduced  on a large scale by the involvement of both the regional and the UNDPKO intervention with its full mandate, reforming the conflict into peace introducing education, training and development  and peaceful negotiations amongst the conflict affected areas.
As Darfur situation is a conflict between two ethnic groups living in the same area basically two ethnic groups:  one ethnic group are farmers (the Africans) while the others are pastoralists (Arabs origin) but both are Muslims by religion and there is no religious sects of different philosophy as like the case in many other countries. The source of the problem here in Darfur is basically resources sharing; especially the grazing fields for the Arab animal stocks who are destroying indiscriminately the farm crops of the Africans. The Arabs are using armies to commit atrocities against the Africans and dismiss with the support of the central government.


Therefore, having seen the atrocities committed by the government of Sudan together with these armed ethnic groups the UN security Council issued resolution 1769 of 31 July 2007 and decided that UNAMID is authorized to take the necessary action in the areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities to protect its personnel and support the effective implementation of the Darfur peace agreement. Of course this can be counted as one of the best practice of the UN intervention for the sake of humanitarian intervention.
However, While in contrast to Yemen; the intervention of the Arab coalition against Yemen Republic. The situation is a bit different. Why? Because the Yemen situation is based internal political power struggle, between Mu'tamar party, Islah Party, Socialist party and Ansar Allah and further regional powers.

Historically, In the past there was a coalition between the former President Party and Islah Party (an affiliate of Muslim brothers of Egypt party). 

Thus; during the Arab Spring in 2010/2011 the partnerships of the People’s Congress and islah parties broke, becoming hostilities to each other. Then the former president had to step down. A UN supporting agreement and resolution was adopted of the peaceful transition of power from the former president through an interim state and later elections to be conducted and a legitimate elected government to be established. During the process of the transition and negotiations; the Ansar Allah started gradually to overtake the state public institutions and eventually dismissed the national parliament.

The new political party Anas Allah together with the people’s congress party supported by Islamic Republic of dismissed the Yemeni parliament and overtook the legitimate government running state affairs.
Due to this KSA who is a traditional enemy with Iran Islamic republic  started to intervene with the collaborations of the Arab-Golf states as well as with a UN resolution Number 2216 (2015). To this Arab coalition started 26/03/2015 military air strikes against Yemen people which committed huge humanitarian atrocities casualties ranging on schools, hospitals, mosques, other religions and cultural gatherings devastating the whole countries economic, environmental, social and cultural aspects and is still continuing against these innocent population without reaching any concrete resolution to the conflict resulting innumerous humanitarian crises,  about 3,000,000 people internally displaced, hundreds of thousands flee as refugees in to the neighboring countries and many others died as a result of these air strikes.

Therefore, the question is; is it the right answer the humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict?
Take another example for instance the Syrian crises. As a result of the American/Russian interventions to Syria what is the impact to the crises there, according to the UN data there are millions of Syrians flee from these atrocities of both conflicting parties thus resulting an unprecedented influx of refugees in to Europe and millions are internally displaced within Syria. Therefore, will military intervention or humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict resolve internal crises like Syria or Yemen Republic? The anticipated answer is no! Not really but however, may be a good example of humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict could be the case of Darfur-Sudan when the UN together with the Organization of African Union mediated Sudan conflicting Darfur ethnic political issues.
For example when the African Union/UN operation in Darfur (UNAMID) was established on 31th July 2007 with the adoption of the security council resolution 1769, UNAMID was mandated to the protection of civilians as its core mandate and with the contributing to security for the humanitarian assistances, monitoring and verifying in the implementation of agreements, contributing to the protection of Human rights and rule of law. This was reached with the consent of the Sudan Government without bios. Comparing to what has happened to Srebrenica Kosovo, Crimea and Rwanda.
There comes a wide range of a concept and contradicting principles of international laws, customary laws which are who takes the responsibility to protect the principles of state sovereignty and the principles of human sovereignty and the responsibility that one has the other.

Naturally the protection of human life is obvious and above everything, thus to protect human life diplomacy must play the highest standards regards humanitarian intervention in an area of conflict. The role of the UN, the Regional organizations, NGO Humanitarian Organization and other political entities in the region like embassy level should be very active involving negotiations, mediation and seek for a peaceful resolutions and reformations of the current dilemma (human rights) humanitarian intervention. So in order to prevent the loss of human life, the diplomatic engagement must be in priority and intensive as nothing is contestable to it. Atrocities from both sides should be zero, and negotiations from different angles including religious and peace development organizations to be involved to play a role in bringing peace to the conflict situations.
May be as to the case of Yemeni civil war to resolve needs an external political agreement between KSA and Iran who are the key players of the Yemeni civil war. Thus a lasting deal can be reached between Suni verses Shie’ite globally and may be most of the political and religious crises and conflict between the Arab Golf countries and Islamic Republic of Iran can be resolved peacefully.
One of the best ways resolving conflicts is by finding the most suitable conflict resolution mechanisms can be implemented on situations like Yemen civil war, Syria and any other conflicting situation between states.
a- Find and list each and every sides’ conditions ( demands)
b- Find out what are the common points that they can agree up on.
c- Find out a common goal that is acceptable for both side and signed.
d- Set a monitoring and verifying implementation agreement of both sides.
e- Assess any other means possible referring any further atrocities.
f- Election votes under the escort and observation of the UN/regional and any other neutral organizations.
If the prevention of war politically fails, then there will be the use of force according to the UN article 45 to (enable the UN to take urgent military measures, members shall hold immediately available national air-force contingents for combined international enforcement action. The strength and degree of readiness of these contingents and plans for their combined action shall be determined, within the limits laid down in the special agreements or agreements refereed to the article 43 by the Security Council with the assistance of the military staff committee.)
Although a large scale of human rights violation will result due to military interventions.  So to prevent such atrocities to happen the number (1) one responsibility to protect human rights is the state on their citizens to abide the resolutions adopted by the UN and the regional organization in order to avoid any humanitarian atrocities.
For example the state and the UN must strengthen the role and the responsibilities of institution dealing with crises prevention and management without under mining the principles of peaceful dispute settlements. Fact finding missions, especial envoys should be in place and functional before last resort of resolving issues by force.