Search

Begin New Search Topic Humanitarian Intervention Publication Year within 25 Years

1. Exploring the Effectiveness of the Human Rights Court in Indonesia: A Call for Humanitarian Action

Author:
Ria Wierma Putri, Yunita Maya Putri, and Eddy Rifai
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Indonesia’s Human Rights Court, established under Law No. 26/2000, has faced criticism due to persistent unresolved cases, highlighting flaws in its legal foundation. The Court’s performance revealed that Indonesia has been ineffective in resolving serious human rights violation cases. This research emphasizes two main points: 1) exploring human rights enforcement in Indonesia based on the effectiveness of the Human Rights Court’s performance, and 2) scrutinizing the context of humanitarian intervention in cases of gross human rights violations in Indonesia. The article utilized a normative juridical research approach, followed by a descriptive analysis through a literature study. The research illustrated that human rights enforcement in Indonesia was inadequate, often stalling at the inquiry stage. Trials for the 1984 Tanjung Priok massacre, East Timor, and Abepura resulted in acquittals, raising doubts about the effectiveness of the Human Rights Court’s Law (No. 26/2000). Furthermore, humanitarian intervention was deemed necessary to address these unresolved violations, viewed not as a violation of sovereignty but as a means to enhance human rights protection. This requires national and international cooperation, focusing on resolving cases rather than debating jurisdiction.
Topic:
Human Rights, Courts, Humanitarian Intervention, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Indonesia and Southeast Asia

2. Addressing a Human Rights and Looming Terrorism Crisis in Afghanistan: The Need for Principled International Intervention

Author:
Lisa Curtis and Annie Pforzheimer
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Pursuing the same harsh policies as it did during its previous stint in power in the 1990s, the Taliban has increasingly clamped down on the rights of women and girls since recapturing control of Afghanistan in August 2021. Restrictions on education started with the Taliban mandate in March 2022 banning girls from attending school past the sixth grade. The Taliban furthered its efforts to deny women basic rights when it announced later in the year that women could no longer attend university or work for international nongovernmental organizations. These and dozens of additional restrictions on Afghan women remain in place today. Meanwhile, terrorist threats that emanate from Afghanistan are intensifying, and the Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISIS-K) constitutes the main international concern, especially since it took responsibility for the March 22, 2024, attack on a concert hall in Moscow that killed at least 140 people. The Taliban opposes ISIS-K and had been fighting the group and eliminating its senior leaders, including the mastermind behind the August 26, 2021, suicide bombings that killed 170 Afghans and 13 U.S. service members.1 Regional groups like the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan are also active but face few constraints on their activities from the Taliban, with whom they share core ideological beliefs.2 The Taliban also remains allied with al-Qaeda and has even allowed the terrorist group responsible for the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States to take on leadership roles within its regime.3 Monitoring threats from ISIS-K necessitates engagement with the Taliban, but U.S. counterterrorism goals should not prevent the United States from also pressing a human rights agenda. For the benefit of the Afghan people—especially women and girls—and the long-term stability and prosperity of the nation, Washington and like-minded partners must employ both incentives and disincentives to compel the Taliban to improve human rights. Since regional countries largely ignore human rights in their dealings with the Taliban, it is incumbent upon the United States, United Nations (UN), and European Union to follow a principled approach and incorporate human rights into their agenda on Afghanistan. In the long term, relying on regional governments to take the lead in engaging with the Taliban would result in disaster for the Afghan people and international security. The best hope for shaping future Taliban behavior lies with the UN, which can speak coherently and convincingly on behalf of the international community. In his remarks following a meeting of special envoys in Doha, Qatar, in February 2024, for example, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres articulated a UN agenda for Afghanistan that would be a starting point for a coherent international strategy. He emphasized that meeting participants had achieved a consensus to focus on counterterrorism, inclusive governance where all ethnic groups are represented, human rights—especially for women and girls, with an emphasis on education—counternarcotics, and more effective delivery of aid.4
Topic:
Human Rights, Terrorism, Taliban, and Humanitarian Intervention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and South Asia

3. WOULD AN ARMED HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION IN HAITI BE LEGAL—AND COULD IT SUCCEED?

Author:
Alexandra Byrne, Zoha Siddiqui, and Kelebogile Zvobgo
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
Haitian officials and world leaders are calling for an armed humanitarian intervention backed by the United Nations (UN) to defeat organized crime. Gangs in Haiti have reportedly kidnapped and killed hundreds of civilians and displaced thousands. Gangs are also limiting access to fuel and blocking critical humanitarian aid to civilians. Add to this a resurgence of cholera. The United States asked the UN Security Council in October to approve a targeted intervention, under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. US Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield underscored “extreme violence and instability” in Haiti and proposed a mission led by a “partner country” (not the United States or UN peacekeeping forces). There is nominal support for the mission. In the coming weeks, Canada will send naval vessels to Haiti’s coast, and Jamaica has offered some troops, but no country is taking the lead. Critics argue that past missions in Haiti did more harm than good. In 2010, UN peacekeepers even reintroduced cholera into Haiti. Nonetheless, the United States is pushing for an intervention.
Topic:
International Law, United Nations, Peacekeeping, and Humanitarian Intervention
Political Geography:
Caribbean, Haiti, and United States of America

4. Localizing Humanitarian Action in Africa

Author:
Mvemba Phezo Dizolele, Kurtzer Jacob D., and Hareem Fatima Abdullah
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
The international humanitarian community is increasingly focusing on the need for local and national actors to lead humanitarian response and recovery efforts in conflict-affected or disaster-prone regions, especially in the Global South. Local and national actors responding to crises remain severely underfunded, particularly in Africa, where civil society organizations (CSOs) receive insufficient funding from African and international actors alike. African funders reportedly directed 9 percent of large gifts to African CSOs between 2010 and 2019, while non-African philanthropists provided 14 percent of their funding to these groups. The United States is the world’s largest foreign assistance donor, having contributed $35.5 billion in overseas development assistance (ODA) in 2020. Much of this aid goes to sub-Saharan Africa, including $8.5 billion to 47 countries and 8 regional programs in 2020. Yet national and local organizations receive little of this funding directly. At the same time, Washington has repeatedly signaled a commitment to the “localization” of humanitarian aid, or the shift of decisionmaking power, program implementation, and resources to local and national actors. Yet localized humanitarian assistance in Africa has failed to materialize. Bureaucratic and regulatory hurdles, as well as geostrategic calculations, pose a challenge to localization efforts. African voices are excluded from the decisionmaking landscape—in donor discussions and localization efforts themselves—resulting in a gap in cultural competency. The conversation on localization in Africa cannot be limited to the African continent; it must occur in donor capitals, with African voices leading the dialogue. To achieve sustainable localization, the U.S. and African policy landscapes should resolve bureaucratic obstacles and shift an exclusionary aid paradigm to one that is inclusive and builds on existing successes.
Topic:
Security, Humanitarian Aid, Humanitarian Intervention, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa

5. Finding a Path through Quagmire

Author:
Will Brown
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
n the Central Sahelian nations of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, a decade of violent instability has left 18 million individuals in need of humanitarian assistance. Climate change, underdevelopment, ethnic violence, corruption, and state decay have left civilians in need of peacebuilding, humanitarian, and development support. The deterioration of security conditions, however, has limited civilian access to essential services and impacted humanitarian response capabilities. Donors have promoted the “triple nexus” approach aimed at enhancing the coordination and effectiveness of humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding interventions. Yet, implementation in the Sahel has been hamstrung by a lack of common understanding among partners and a disconnect between the interests and operations of humanitarian and security actors. For the triple nexus approach to effectively improve conditions in the Sahel, humanitarian, development, and security partners must improve collaboration. Actors in the region should develop operational frameworks that ensure they enhance complementary objectives.
Topic:
Development, Humanitarian Intervention, Humanitarian Crisis, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Africa and Sahel

6. The State of Local Humanitarian Leadership: A learning report on a series of LHL online convenings held in Asia, the Middle East and Northern Africa, the Pacific, and West Africa

Author:
Janice Ian Manlutac
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
From May 2021 to January 2022, Oxfam, in partnership with Sejajar Indonesia, the Tamdeen Youth Foundation in Yemen, and the Palestinian Agricultural Development Association (PARC) in Palestine, convened a total of 10 learning series through online convenings on local humanitarian leadership (LHL). Approximately 450 people participated, of whom 60% were from local and national NGOs representing approximately 30 countries. This document offers a snapshot report on the state of LHL across the four regions based on discussions, insights, and materials shared by the resource persons and audience members who participated in the series.
Topic:
Leadership, Humanitarian Intervention, Decolonization, and Local
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. US Policy Towards the Yemeni Conflict Must Change

Author:
Eran Lerman
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Re-designating the Houthi movement as a terrorist organization after the drone attack on the UAE is imperative. This, along with overt support for the UAE, would deliver a sharp message and likely have a beneficial effect on Iranian conduct in Vienna.
Topic:
Terrorism, Military Strategy, Humanitarian Intervention, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Yemen, North America, and United States of America

8. The Humanitarian Paradox: Why Human Rights Require Restraint

Author:
Asli Bâli
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
For the United States to be “committed to a world in which human rights are protected, their defenders are celebrated, and those who commit human rights abuses are held accountable” requires more than rhetorical flourishes.1 To achieve the goal of protecting and promoting human rights, the United States must embrace a more restrained security posture together with a persistent diplomatic strategy that prioritizes engagement ahead of confrontation. Military force and economic coercion are the wrong tools for advancing human rights. As the cases of Iraq and Libya demonstrate, preventive or humanitarian wars have critically impaired human rights. Similarly, comprehensive sanctions regimes have imposed severe human rights costs while achieving few U.S. foreign policy goals, if any, in targeted countries. The United States should therefore incorporate the following policy approaches in the service of human rights: • Right-size its expectations of what American power can achieve to protect and advance human rights abroad. On balance, exaggerated and unrealistic confidence in American power has hurt rather than helped the cause of human rights. • Serve as a public advocate of human rights in multilateral settings, engaging with international institutions to pressure allies and adversaries alike on their human rights records. At the same time, the United States should raise human rights concerns directly in its bilateral dealings when abuses come to light, using private diplomacy to highlight specific issues or changes that are priorities. • Do much more to support the protection and promotion of human rights in areas under its direct control or influence. This would include, at a minimum, halting human rights abuses committed by the U.S. in its own counterterrorism operations, freezing military aid when U.S. arms are implicated in targeting civilians, building on the recent openness to Ukrainian refugees by strengthening and expanding U.S. asylum and refugee resettlement programs globally, and greatly increasing delivery of humanitarian aid, in the form of funding as well as medical and food assistance, to civilian populations deprived of their socioeconomic rights due to conflict, climate change, and the global food crisis.
Topic:
Human Rights, War, Humanitarian Intervention, and Coercion
Political Geography:
United States of America

9. Military Intervention on Request in Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello and the question of recognition of governments

Author:
Chiari Redealli
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Over the past decades, foreign interventions in internal conflicts upon the request of host governments have turned into a common practice. These instances have proved to be particularly challenging both from a jus ad bellum and a jus in bello point of view. On the one hand, it is often unclear whether the intervention is lawful; on the other hand, the classification of these armed conflicts is equally problematic. In both cases, the key to answer these questions is the identification of the organ capable of speaking on behalf of the state: who is the government? Considering the pivotal relevance of the identification of the government both in jus ad bellum and jus in bello, it is crucial to determine the criteria for identifying the authority capable of issuing a valid invitation. This article seeks to clarify these criteria. Ultimately, it will demonstrate that jus ad bellum and jus in bello reach different conclusions on the matter and it will argue that this should not be the case.
Topic:
International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, Military Intervention, Conflict, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. Seeing in the Dark: Real-Time Monitoring in Humanitarian Crises

Author:
Daniel Maxwell, Erin Lentz, Kamau Wanjohi, Daniel Molla, Matthew Day, Peter Hailey, Christopher Newton, and Anna Colom
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Feinstein International Center, Tufts University
Abstract:
Humanitarian information systems typically provide analysis to predict crisis, assess needs, direct program resources, and assess short- to medium-term effects of programs. But much of this information is “chunky”—a single estimate of “needs,” for example, can be expected to direct resources and programming for up to a full year (IASC 2020). A single early warning scenario might be expected to provide information about potential hazards and the exposure of population to the ill-effects of that hazard for three to four months. And almost by definition, early warning analyses are grounded in known and likely hazards, “population in need” (PIN) figures are based on the impacts of known shocks, and program resources are (or should be) allocated on the basis of known and projected PIN figures. There have long been questions about the timeliness of humanitarian information and especially about the extent to which information initiates appropriate and timely actions (Buchanan-Smith and Davies 1995; Bailey 2012; Lentz et al. 2020). And there have always been concerns that circumstances can change in shorter time periods than standard humanitarian analysis procedures can pick up, so interest in real-time monitoring (RTM) as a component of humanitarian information systems has increased for at least the past decade or so (FSNAU 2015).
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Humanitarian Aid, Famine, Food Security, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict, and Nutrition
Political Geography:
Middle East, Yemen, Somalia, Malawi, South Sudan, and Africa