English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

WHY does the international community have a right to invade other nations if there are atrocities taking place?

i need best three arguments

~real answers plz...thanks

2007-12-04 10:00:49 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government International Organizations

5 answers

The idea of humanitarian intervention has been around for decades. We have to realize that in the international system, there exists a constant state of anarchy. No one state can tell another what they are doing right or wrong, its the idea of national sovereignty. But, we also see that states can go to war and that there is often little punishment for the winner of such wars. The international community can do simply whatever it wants to do. If they want to invade Iraq? Sure, go right ahead. There is literally nothing stopping them except for themselves. The UN Charter even stipulates that states have a right to war if it is to defend themselves or a gross injustice against the people.

Even though states may have sovereignty that should prevent them from being invaded during an intervention or war, we have to realize that the sovereignty of a country rests with the PEOPLE, not the government. If we are doing something to stop a humanitarian crisis like Darfur, Iraq, Afghanistan, Malaysia, Rwanda, Bosnia, South Africa, Greneda, Cambodia, etc. from harming the people of a country then it is within the international communities right.

2007-12-05 03:37:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If you include the UN as an international community/entity and wonder why they often do NOT invade/intervene in tragedies i.e darfur/rwanda/burma, it is because the UN charter says it will only intervene in conflicts that are interstate. Such as India invades Pakistan,Somalia invades DRC, etc. However, most of these conflicts have not really existed since WWII (at the time of the creation of the UN). Today, most conflicts are internal (such as civil war) and many country's do not wish to invade or participate in something that does not benefit them in one way or another.
States have a right to defend themselves, but not neccesarily a RIGHT to invade. However, if it is directly a threat to their states own well being, existence and security then invasion could be a possible option (which is legal only if approved).

2007-12-05 02:12:40 · answer #2 · answered by bax 3 · 0 1

Existence of unauthorized nuclear weapons, internal dispute resulting to oppression and dictatorship are some reasons where the International Community can interfere in the affairs of other countries and it is acceptable under the rules of International Law.

2007-12-07 16:17:37 · answer #3 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0 0

Would you stand by and let a vicious person beat and kill a child? How about one vicious person endorsing the beating, raping and killing of thousands? It is the job of those in power to protect those who are weaker. Even those in other nations. If someone takes advantage of their position to practice atrocities against its citizens, then I believe that it is the duty of those who can to try to bring an end to that persons power, and to help establish a government that will rule at the will of the people.

2007-12-04 18:12:21 · answer #4 · answered by diamondldy4 3 · 0 0

Because a country involved in atrocities such as genocide have voluntarily given up their right to not be interfered with just as a murderer or rapist has voluntarily given up their right to walk free.

2007-12-04 18:08:06 · answer #5 · answered by solarianus 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers