Humanitarian Success Post Bellum
The likelihood of success criterion makes armed humanitarian action politically and morally prohibitive. Yet, the just war tradition is designed to confront egregious moral evils. To help reconcile these tensions, this essay questions the applicability of the success principle to armed humanitarian...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
2024
|
| In: |
The review of faith & international affairs
Year: 2024, Volume: 22, Issue: 2, Pages: 51–60 |
| Further subjects: | B
Humanitarian Intervention
B Human Rights B Peace B state-building B Just War Theory B Genocide |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The likelihood of success criterion makes armed humanitarian action politically and morally prohibitive. Yet, the just war tradition is designed to confront egregious moral evils. To help reconcile these tensions, this essay questions the applicability of the success principle to armed humanitarian intervention. This questioning provokes reflection on how the just war theory’s high threshold for success can rarely be achieved in the direct aftermath of humanitarian interventions. A low likelihood of success post bellum leads to the suggestion that the full demands of just war theory’s tranquilitas ordinis definition of peace ought not to be required in the aftermath of armed humanitarian intervention. Guaranteed failure may be a more useful criterion than likelihood of success for interventions aimed at ending acute state-sponsored human rights atrocities. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1931-7743 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The review of faith & international affairs
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/15570274.2024.2335075 |