Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Motives, outcomes, intent and the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention.Alex J. Bellamy - 2004 - Journal of Military Ethics 3 (3):216-232.
    During the 1990s, international society increasingly recognised that states who abuse their citizens in the most egregious ways ought to lose their sovereign inviolability and be subject to humanitarian intervention. The emergence of this norm has given renewed significance to the debate concerning what it is about humanitarian intervention that makes it legitimate. The most popular view is that it is humanitarian motivations that legitimise intervention. Others insist that humanitarian outcomes are more important that an actor's motivations, pointing for instance (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Challenges in Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: The Security Council Veto and the Need for a Common Ethical Approach.Brian D. Lepard - 2021 - The Journal of Ethics 25 (2):223-246.
    In 2005 the member states of the United Nations recognized a “responsibility to protect” (“R2P”) victims of mass atrocities such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. They acknowledged a special role for the U.N. Security Council in responding to these atrocities, including potentially authorizing military action using its extensive powers under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. However, the Council has very rarely been able to agree on appropriate action, and the five permanent Council members (“P5”), most notably (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark