The Pros And Cons Of A Humanitarian Intervention

The UK and other major powers have been involved in humanitarian intervention throughout history, however there is no one standard or legal definition for the act. As a central feature Humanitarian intervention involves the threat and use of military forces. It is an intervention in the sense that it entails interfering in the internal affairs of a state by sending military forces into the territory or airspace of a sovereign state that has not committed an act of aggression against another state. The intervention is in response to situations that do not necessarily pose direct threats to states' strategic interests, but instead is motivated by humanitarian objectives. Most importantly for a country to act on humanitarian terms they do not
This was an intervention that was given the agreement of UN Security Council due to the human rights violations that were taking place at the hands of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF). President Ahmad Kabbah asked the UK for troops to intervene which they did by sending 2000 troops to the country. They freed 11 British paratroopers seized by the ‘West Side Boy’ rebels and, by defeating them, helped to bring the whole conflict to an end. Later, the mission of the British troops was extended to help to equip and reorganise Sierra Leone’s army. This intervention quickly brought about the end of a civil was that had begun in 1991 and the country has since not relapsed in to further war. A report written by Journal of Strategic Studies in 2015 has subsequently confirmed that the involvement was a success
Therefore, as long as the UK is part of the UN it will always be in a place that it is able to intervene in other countries affairs. As we go forward it seems that the age of unipolarity is coming to an end, with China emergence as a world superpower and with Russia’s more aggressive world stance the balance of power is levelling out. To this end, the US and the UK must be accepting that these countries will start asserting their influence in the same method of humanitarian intervention. An early example of this is Russia’s involvement in Crimea, siting humanitarian action as a reason for entry. However, the current situation of the US coalition be challenged is in Syria, here the Russians and Chinese have propped up the Assad regime against the will of the US. The period where the West was able to act how it wanted, where it wanted is now over and this will be a factor when deciding on future