Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Authorising humanitarian intervention: a five-point defence of existing multilateral procedures

  • Stefano Recchia (a1)
Abstract
Abstract

Even scholars who support multilateralism in principle frequently question the value of securing approval from existing multilateral bodies for humanitarian intervention. The United Nations (UN) and regional organisations such as NATO, the argument goes, are far from democratic; furthermore, multilateralism is often a recipe for doing nothing; therefore, unauthorised intervention should be permissible in circumstances of ‘humanitarian necessity’. This article maintains that although today’s multilateral organisations and related procedures for authorising armed intervention may be suboptimal, they have significant output legitimacy. First, existing authorisation procedures reduce the risk of destabilising conflict spirals among powerful states. Second, they diminish the likelihood that humanitarianism will be used as a pretext. Third, they reduce epistemic problems concerning the identification of a just cause for intervention and thus the risk of accidental abuse. Fourth, they minimise the ‘moral hazard’ of humanitarian intervention. Finally, compliance with multilateral procedures is increasingly required for successful peacebuilding. This leads me to conclude that humanitarian warfare should always be authorised by the UN or regional multilateral organisations.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Authorising humanitarian intervention: a five-point defence of existing multilateral procedures
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Authorising humanitarian intervention: a five-point defence of existing multilateral procedures
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Authorising humanitarian intervention: a five-point defence of existing multilateral procedures
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
*Correspondence to: Dr Stefano Recchia, Department of Politics and International Studies, Alison Richard Building, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 9DT. Author’s email: sr638@cam.ac.uk
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Inis Claude , ‘Collective legitimization as a political function of the United Nations’, International Organization, 20:3 (1966), p. 372

Daniele Archibugi , ‘Cosmopolitan guidelines for humanitarian intervention’, Alternatives, 29:1 (2004), pp. 121

Robert E. Williams , Jr, and Dan Caldwell , ‘Jus post bellum: Just war theory and the principles of just peace’, International Studies Perspectives, 7:4 (2006), pp. 309320

Madhav Joshi and T. David Mason , ‘Civil war settlements, size of governing coalition, and durability of peace in post-civil war states’, International Interactions, 37:4 (2011), pp. 388413

Stefano Recchia , ‘Just and unjust postwar reconstruction: How much external interference can be justified?’, Ethics & International Affairs, 23:2 (2009), pp. 165187

John Ruggie , ‘Multilateralism: the anatomy of an institution’, International Organization, 46:3 (1992), p. 571

Sarah Kreps , ‘Multilateral military interventions: Theory and practice’, Political Science Quarterly, 123:4 (2008), pp. 573603

Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin , ‘The promise of institutionalist theory’, International Security, 20:1 (1995), pp. 3951

Alexander Thompson , ‘Coercion through IOs: the Security Council and the logic of information transmission’, International Organization, 60:1 (2006), pp. 134

Dag Henriksen and Ann Katrin Larssen (eds), Political Rationale and International Consequences of the War in Libya (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016)

Mohammed Ayoob , ‘Humanitarian intervention and state sovereignty’, International Journal of Human Rights, 6:1 (2002), p. 92

Mark S. Stein , ‘Unauthorized humanitarian intervention’, Social Philosophy and Policy, 21:1 (2004), p. 31

Andrew P. Cortell and James W. Davis , ‘How do international institutions matter? The domestic impact of international norms and rules’, International Studies Quarterly, 40:4 (1996), pp. 451487

Joachim Krause , ‘Multilateralism: Behind European views’, Washington Quarterly, 27:2 (2004), pp. 4359

Atsushi Tago , ‘Determinants of multilateralism in U.S. use of force’, Journal of Peace Research, 42:5 (2005), pp. 585604

Stefano Recchia , ‘Why seek international organisation approval under unipolarity? Averting issue linkage vs. appeasing Congress’, International Relations, 30:1 (2016), pp. 78101

Erik Voeten , ‘The political origins of the UN Security Council’s ability to legitimize the use of force’, International Organization, 59:3 (2005), pp. 527557

Ned Dobos , ‘Is U.N. Security Council authorisation for armed humanitarian intervention morally necessary?’, Philosophia, 38:3 (2010), pp. 499515

Robert Jervis , ‘Bridges, barriers, and gaps: Research and policy’, Political Psychology, 29:4 (2008), pp. 578579

Dina Badie , ‘Groupthink, Iraq, and the War on Terror: Explaining US policy shift toward Iraq’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 6:4 (2010), pp. 277296

Mark A. Wolfgram , ‘Democracy and propaganda: NATO’s War in Kosovo’, European Journal of Communication, 23:2 (2008), pp. 153171

Dane Rowlands and David Carment , ‘Moral hazard and conflict intervention’, in Murray Wolfson (ed.), The Political Economy of War and Peace (The Hague: Kluwer, 1998)

Timothy W. Crawford , ‘Moral hazard, intervention and internal war: a conceptual analysis’, Ethnopolitics, 4:2 (2005), pp. 175193

Roberto Belloni , ‘The tragedy of Darfur and the limits of the “Responsibility to Protect”,’ Ethnopolitics, 5:4 (2006), pp. 327346

Roberto Belloni , ‘The trouble with humanitarianism’, Review of International Studies, 33:2 (2007), pp. 459461

Andrew H. Kydd and Scott Straus , ‘The road to hell? Third-party intervention to prevent atrocities’, American Journal of Political Science, 57:3 (2013), pp. 673684

Jon Western , ‘Illusions of moral hazard: a conceptual and empirical critique’, Ethnopolitics, 4:2 (2005), pp. 225236

Alex J. Bellamy and Paul D. Williams , ‘On the limits of moral hazard: the “Responsibility to Protect”, armed conflict and mass atrocities’, European Journal of International Relations, 18:3 (2011), pp. 539571

Wolfgang Petritsch and Robert Pichler , Kosovo-Kosova: Der Lange Weg zum Frieden (Klagenfurt: Wieser, 2004), p. 148

Joshua Busby , Jonathan Monten , Jordan Tama , and William Inboden , ‘Congress is already post-partisan’, Foreign Affairs (28 January 2013)

Sarah Kreps , ‘Elite consensus as a determinant of alliance cohesion: Why public opinion hardly matters for NATO-led operations in Afghanistan’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 6:3 (2010), pp. 191215

Paul Richter , ‘U.S. enlists more countries in Iraq, at taxpayers’ expense’, Los Angeles Times (22 June 2007)

Fernando R. Tesón , Humanitarian Intervention: an Inquiry into Law and Morality (2nd edn, Irvington-on-Hudson, NY: Transnational Publishers, 1997), pp. 179195

Stefano Recchia , ‘Did Chirac say “non”? Revisiting UN diplomacy on Iraq, 2002–03’, Political Science Quarterly, 130:4 (2015), pp. 625654

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Review of International Studies
  • ISSN: 0260-2105
  • EISSN: 1469-9044
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-international-studies
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 233
Total number of PDF views: 560 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 668 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 25th June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.