The politics of humanitarian organizations neutrality and solidarity: the case of the ICRC and MSF during the 1994 Rwandan genocide
- Authors: Delvaux, Denise
- Date: 2005
- Subjects: International Committee of the Red Cross -- History , Médecins sans frontières (Association) , Humanitarian intervention , Neutrality -- Rwanda , Solidarity -- Rwanda , Genocide -- Rwanda -- History -- 20th century , Genocide -- Rwanda , Rwanda -- History -- Civil War, 1994 , Rwanda -- Politics and government
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2769 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002979 , International Committee of the Red Cross -- History , Médecins sans frontières (Association) , Humanitarian intervention , Neutrality -- Rwanda , Solidarity -- Rwanda , Genocide -- Rwanda -- History -- 20th century , Genocide -- Rwanda , Rwanda -- History -- Civil War, 1994 , Rwanda -- Politics and government
- Description: With the seemingly infinite existence of complex emergencies and the overwhelming presence of humanitarian organizations responding to such crises, it is essential that the assumptions, precepts, and actions of humanitarian organizations be critically examined and understood. The aim of this thesis is to explore differing traditions within humanitarian thought: neutrality and solidarity. In the process, this thesis will determine whether it is possible to maintain clear ideologies in the context of a complex emergency and whether the existence of different humanitarian ideologies results in a dichotomy or polarization of humanitarian action. This study is of great import as it delves into the contemporary literature claiming that humanitarianism is currently in a state of crisis – the unsustainability of competing humanitarian ideologies operating together in a complex emergency. Primary documents from both the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) regarding their operations in the 1994 Rwandan complex emergency were examined in order to provide a foundation for the theoretical investigation. Although the ICRC and MSF occupy seemingly polarized positions in the neutrality – solidarity debate, the investigation into their humanitarian activities during the 1994 genocide and the resulting refugee crisis reflected the difficulties of providing relief based upon humanitarian ideals. Due to the complex realities of the 1994 Rwandan crisis, the ideological notions dividing the ICRC and MSF were overshadowed by the simple humanitarian desire to aid those in need.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2005
The validity of humanitarian intervention under international law
- Authors: Beneke, Méchelle
- Date: 2003
- Subjects: Humanitarian intervention , Intervention (International law)
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11056 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/305 , Humanitarian intervention , Intervention (International law)
- Description: The study which follows considers the current approach to State sovereignty, use of force, and human rights, in order to determine the balance which exists between these concepts. A shift in this balance determines the direction of development of the concept of ‘humanitarian intervention.’ The investigation establishes that State sovereignty and certain human rights are at a point where they are viewed as equal and competing interests in the international arena. This leads to the question of whether or not the concept of humanitarian intervention has found any acceptance in international law. It is determined that the right to intervention rests exclusively with the United Nations Security Council. There are, however, obstacles to United Nations action, which necessitate either taking action to remove the obstacles, or finding an alternative to United Nations authorized action. The alternatives provided are unilateral interventions by regional organizations, groups of States or individual States, with interventions by regional organizations being favoured. The study further discusses the requirements which would make unilateral action more acceptable. These same requirements provide a standard against which the United Nations can measure its duty to intervene. Such an investigation was done by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, and a synopsis of its Report and Recommendations are included. Finally, the question of responsibility is addressed. State and individual responsibility for two separate types of action are considered. The responsibility of States and individuals for initiating an intervention is considered under the topic of the crime of aggression. The responsibility of States and individual for exceeding the mandate of a legitimate intervention is considered under the heading of war crimes.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2003