Introduction to International Relations - When is Intervention Legal?
1.7 هزار بار بازدید -
6 سال پیش
-
Lecture 11: Legality vs. Morality
Lecture 11: Legality vs. Morality in the International System
Part II: What Justifies Intervention?
Is it legal for one state to intervene in the affairs of other states? Should the sovereignty of states be respected? Should states with the power, authority, and ability to halt violence, intervene to halt violence?
Should states intervene in places where crimes are being committed regardless of whether it is legal? Do moral principles justify intervention?
This lecture looks at the dilemmas facing the international system where states with the capacity to intervene in the affairs of others often do so under the rationale of pursuing a greater good while violating the sovereignty of a fellow state.
This lecture also asks why states intervene in some cases but not in others: why intervene in Bosnia but completely ignore Rwanda? Why intervene in Iraq on the basis of overthrowing a tyrannical government in Baghdad, while having no problem cooperating even more tyrannical governments elsewhere?
What also defines intervention? Is it more than conventional "boots on the ground"? Does it involve economic sanctions? Political interference?
Who has the right to intervene? If the United States can intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan, why can't Russia intervene in Syria? Why can't China intervene in Taiwan?
The dilemmas associated with intervention are that rationales and reasons are almost always based on subjective interpretations of upholding morals and values, but believing only one's own side has the "right" to do so.
Another major dilemma in intervention is that doing so for the purposes of upholding principles of human rights and international law now forces the intervening state into a commitment to do the same thing everywhere injustice occurs. In other words, if the US intervenes in Bosnia to stop the killing, it needed to intervene in Rwanda for the same reason - otherwise intervention is seen as self-serving and selective.
Dr. Michael Rossi
Department of Political Science
Rutgers University
November 11, 2015
Chapter Markers:
00:45 - The Legality of Intervention
05:55 - Defining Intervention
09:08 - When to Intervene?
12:45 - Do States have the Right to Withhold Economic Aid?
14:50 - Do States have the Right to Prosecute International Criminals?
18:05 - Is Intervention defined by Power Politics?
21:00 - If the U.S. can Intervene, Can't Others Too?
Music - Status Quo, "In the Army Now" (Rob Bolland, Ferdi Bolland, 1986)
Part II: What Justifies Intervention?
Is it legal for one state to intervene in the affairs of other states? Should the sovereignty of states be respected? Should states with the power, authority, and ability to halt violence, intervene to halt violence?
Should states intervene in places where crimes are being committed regardless of whether it is legal? Do moral principles justify intervention?
This lecture looks at the dilemmas facing the international system where states with the capacity to intervene in the affairs of others often do so under the rationale of pursuing a greater good while violating the sovereignty of a fellow state.
This lecture also asks why states intervene in some cases but not in others: why intervene in Bosnia but completely ignore Rwanda? Why intervene in Iraq on the basis of overthrowing a tyrannical government in Baghdad, while having no problem cooperating even more tyrannical governments elsewhere?
What also defines intervention? Is it more than conventional "boots on the ground"? Does it involve economic sanctions? Political interference?
Who has the right to intervene? If the United States can intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan, why can't Russia intervene in Syria? Why can't China intervene in Taiwan?
The dilemmas associated with intervention are that rationales and reasons are almost always based on subjective interpretations of upholding morals and values, but believing only one's own side has the "right" to do so.
Another major dilemma in intervention is that doing so for the purposes of upholding principles of human rights and international law now forces the intervening state into a commitment to do the same thing everywhere injustice occurs. In other words, if the US intervenes in Bosnia to stop the killing, it needed to intervene in Rwanda for the same reason - otherwise intervention is seen as self-serving and selective.
Dr. Michael Rossi
Department of Political Science
Rutgers University
November 11, 2015
Chapter Markers:
00:45 - The Legality of Intervention
05:55 - Defining Intervention
09:08 - When to Intervene?
12:45 - Do States have the Right to Withhold Economic Aid?
14:50 - Do States have the Right to Prosecute International Criminals?
18:05 - Is Intervention defined by Power Politics?
21:00 - If the U.S. can Intervene, Can't Others Too?
Music - Status Quo, "In the Army Now" (Rob Bolland, Ferdi Bolland, 1986)
6 سال پیش
در تاریخ 1397/05/23 منتشر شده
است.
1,799
بـار بازدید شده