Intervention of States and Human Rights

Intervention of States and Human Rights

When and how should States intervene in the affairs of other States with poor human rights records? What threshold of violations has to be corssed first? Who decides when it has been crossed?

The sovereignty of states remains paramount and as recognized in the UN Charter. However, other states may surpass the sovereignty clause in cases of gross human rights violations by the host state. For states to intervene in matters of another state, in matters concerning human rights violation, prior documentation of evidence pertaining to violation should exist. These documents give and support reason for intervention in matters of other countries (Knight, 2008).

In the Sudan, documented evidence pointed to gross human rights violations in the Darfur Region. The indiscriminate murder and continued killing of civilians amounted to genocide (Binder, 2008). As such, there rose a need for international intervention to stop the killings. Further, the documented mass killings of civilians in Somalia, in the early 1990s, prompted the international community to intervene to prevent further human rights violation.

According to the Resolution 1973, the international community has a responsibility to protect innocent and oppressed civilians from dictatorial and tyrannical leaders. As such, when the Gaddafi regime rose against the anti-regime protesters in 2011, the international community had no option, but to intervene. The Libya Army rose against the people, killing innocent, women and children, in what represented a gross violation of the rights of the people.

Considering the past atrocities that the Gaddafi administration had perpetrated on the citizens, and the excessive and un-ebbing police force and brutality in use, the UN sanctioned a no-fly zone over Libya throughout the period of crisis. Further, the international community provided arms to the rebels in an attempt to aid in the capture of administrative powers from Gaddafi. The provision of arms presents a need for self-liberalization of the natives without the actual ground involvement of foreign forces (Knight, 2008).

In the case of genocides, in Rwanda, in 1994, there arose the need for intervention of the international community to save the lives of the innocents. The mass murders of Hutus by the Tutsis presented a rude awakening to the world on extreme cases of tribal cleansing (Elshtain, 2001). As such, failure or late response of the international community led to extreme loss of lives, property and violation of all basic human rights during the genocide period.

The mass murders in Srebrenica massacre, in Bosnia, prompted the intervention of the international community. This led to saving of many innocent lives that could otherwise have been lost in the continued aggression. The deposition of ground troops, as well as use of air attacks slowed and eventually snuffed out the killings (Portela, 2000). This presented a timely intervention in preventing the violation of human rights.

As the two cases of Rwanda and Srebrenica demonstrate, human lives present the very first and basic human right. Therefore, in cases of gross violation, the international community always invokes the Genocide Convention of 1948 to protect innocent lives. This convention over-rides the UN Charter on the sovereignty of states (Portela, 2000). The application of the Genocide Convention of 1948 prompts nations to uphold and respect human lives.

The international community can intervene in matters of other states, in cases of high casualties arising during natural disasters, which the country, cannot fully contain. The Myanmar Cyclone test brings to the fore the intervention of the international community in internal matters of nations. The huge magnitude of the cyclone presented extreme strain on both the personnel and resources of the affected country, prompting international intervention in the provision of both aid and human resource (Binder, 2008).

International intervention involves different tools. The primary tool involves the use of diplomacy in prevention and containment of conflicts. The international community engages diplomatic representatives in the negotiation process in attempts to stop atrocities and human rights violations in place (Binder, 2008). This process involves the identification of the root causes and signing of agreements to stop violations. This method worked well in diversion of disaster in Kenya during the post-election violence of 2007-08.

Another method of intervention lies in coercive inducement. This arises upon early recognition of the need to protect the innocent where indications point to eruption of violence. The deployment of peace-keeping personnel serves to contain the crises as well as collecting information and intelligence on the situation (Knight, 2008). However, the regime involved need to accept the deployment of peace-keeping forces to prevent misconception of aggression. This process goes on in the Congo.