In this entry I explore the last one out of six criteria for military intervention, which defines who has the right to authorize military intervention.
Criterion 6: Right authority
It is rather important to ensure that a military intervention is legitimate and has broad support from the international community. The United Nations Security Council is the only international body that should represent the world’s voice and make decisions with binding force. But the politicization of the...
In this entry I explore fourth and fifth criteria for military intervention, which are to determine whether the international community can supply adequate means and whether the intervention can bring more good than harm.
4 and 5 Criteria: Proportional means and reasonable prospect
Proportional means and reasonable prospect are intertwined ideas that can be looked at together. Reasonable prospect means that after intervention the situation in the country must be better than if the intervention...
In this entry I explore second and third criteria for military intervention, namely, looking at just cause and primary motivation for intervention.
Criterion 2: Just Cause
Military intervention requires a lot of resources and enormous political will, and might be quite dangerous for the troops participating in the intervention. Military intervention can be only justified when non-intervention will result in more civilian casualties. Without a just cause, military intervention cannot be called...
In my previous blog entry I talked about the politicized and selective approaches of UN Member States to making decision on intervention into intra-state conflicts. So, what could be the solution to this problem? What is needed to minimize the politicization? Clear criteria for military intervention should be defined in international law, so that when an intra-state conflict erupts, the international community, having timely assessed the conflict on the ground, could run through a checklist of those...
