Global Ethics Corner: Ethics and Humanitarian Intervention

Nov 26, 2010

The UN Charter states that human rights is the responsibility of international society. It also prohibits forceful interference against the territorial integrity and political independence of any state. Which takes precedence in humanitarian crises, sovereignty or human rights?

Is it legitimate to intervene in another state's internal affairs?

Do gross violations of human rights justify armed intervention to stop atrocities?

According to the UN Charter, protection of human rights is the responsibility of international society. Hence, humanitarian interventions are foreign military actions which prevent or halt mass murder and other severe violations of human rights.

In contrast, the Charter also prohibits forceful interference against the territorial integrity and political independence of any state. The Charter rests on the principle of sovereignty.

Here the international community faces a legal and moral dilemma. Which takes precedence in humanitarian crises, sovereignty or human rights?

For skeptics, sovereignty is the key to international order, and each state holds the legitimate right to use military force domestically. They argue that hegemonic powers might exploit an ability to disregard sovereignty. Not-so-humanitarian, i.e. imperial, interventions could be justified on human rights grounds, using human rights as a foreign policy tool promoting national goals. (The Soviets in Afghanistan and the US in Iraq are possible examples.)

Supporters of humanitarian intervention embrace the idea that sovereignty is conditional based on states actually protecting their citizens, on human rights. Smith writes, a state "which violates the integrity of its subjects forfeits its moral claim to full sovereignty." Similarly, former UN Secretary General Annan argued that "no legal principle—not even sovereignty—can shield crimes against humanity."

What do you think? Should the principle of sovereignty be overridden in humanitarian crises? If so, what criteria should be used and who should intervene? Does the UN Security Council have enough legitimacy to make these calls?

By Omer Zarpli

For more information see:

Michael J. Smith, "Humanitarian Intervention: An Overview of Ethical Issues," Ethics and International Affairs, Volume 12, 1998

Kofi Annan, "We the Peoples: The Role of United Nations in the 21st Century."

Photo Credits in order of Appearance:

Olivier Duquesne
Craig J. Shell/ U.S. Marine Corps
Isriya Paireepairit
Andrew W. McGalliard
Tommy Avilucea
Rachael
Sean A. Terry/ U.S. Army
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jna_t-55_slovenia.jpg
Marion Doss
Mikhail Evstafiev
Michael Blackwell II/ U.S. Army
Rubén Díaz
Matthijs Gall
ILRI
Alan Chan
Pete Souza

You may also like

FEB 10, 2026 Article

A Moral Rupture

As moral relativists try to sanitize Trump's transgressive policies, Canada's Prime Minister Carney warns, "We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition."

President Trump at Davos, January 2026. CREDIT: ©2026 World Economic Forum / Benedikt von Loebell.

FEB 6, 2026 Article

Trump and the Gaslighting of American Realism

Trump's gaslighting around “realism” and U.S. foreign policy has gone into overdrive. How can the country find an equilibrium between power and principle?

FEB 3, 2026 Article

A Conversation with Carnegie Ethics Fellow Ruth Nashipae Muigai

This conversation features Ruth Nashipae Muigai, founder and CEO of The Gender Initiative, where she leads efforts for gender equality and inclusion in East Africa.

No traducido

Este contenido aún no ha sido traducido a su idioma. Puede solicitar una traducción haciendo clic en el botón de abajo.

Solicitar traducción