Speak your mind: International intervention

Is international intervention justified if a country systematically violates human rights? Share your views.

Image Credit: EPA
Syrian refugee children who fled the unrest in Syria with their families, sit in their home,at Ramtha city near the Syrian border, Jordan. UN envoy for children and armed conflict says more than 34 children have been killed in Syria since the April 12 truce.
01 Gulf News

What is greater – a country’s sovereignty or human rights? We debate whether international intervention is justified if human rights are being systematically violated in a country. The following statements are up for debate:

• Humanity above borders – we all have a moral obligation to protect fellow human beings.
• National sovereignty is above all – any violation of it would only result in anarchy.
• National sovereignty ends when human rights are consistently violated.
• Intervention prevents nations from finding solutions within and creates dependent countries.

Share your views

1 Comment
Show
  • Ms. Arushi Madan

    27-Feb-2013 22:12

    State sovereignty should not be a considered absolute tool to exploit human rights. Human beings have a moral obligation to halt gross violations of human rights and brutal treatment of innocent people. Quite often it is only through intervention and use of force that standards of civilized conduct be enforced. On many occasions, theoppression reaches such a stage that there exists no national connection between the population and the state. Hence the argument for national sovereignty is no longer valid in those situations. If conflicts continue as a result of non-interference, there is a probability offurther instability in the neighbouring countries or region. Untended humanitarian crisis can become international security concerns.Humanitarian intervention should only be justified under certain situations.. Armed intervention with the interest of something else and not humanitarian cannot be allowed and it is a violation ofsovereignty. THUS humanitarian intervention can be justified under several conditions which are morally permissible and can also be morally obligatory, and should be authorised by UN. My conclusion is it should be UN authorized intervention , not unauthorised intervention

Latest Comment

State sovereignty should not be a considered absolute tool to exploit human rights. Human beings have a moral obligation to halt gross violations of human rights and brutal treatment of innocent people. Quite often it is only through intervention and use of force that standards of civilized conduct be enforced. On many occasions, theoppression reaches such a stage that there exists no national connection between the population and the state. Hence the argument for national sovereignty is no longer valid in those situations. If conflicts continue as a result of non-interference, there is a probability offurther instability in the neighbouring countries or region. Untended humanitarian crisis can become international security concerns.Humanitarian intervention should only be justified under certain situations.. Armed intervention with the interest of something else and not humanitarian cannot be allowed and it is a violation ofsovereignty. THUS humanitarian intervention can be justified under several conditions which are morally permissible and can also be morally obligatory, and should be authorised by UN. My conclusion is it should be UN authorized intervention , not unauthorised intervention

Ms. Arushi Madan

28 February 2013 10:08jump to comments