The Ethics of Humanitarian Intervention in Libya
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12159337 |
|---|---|
| Authors | James Pattison (0000-0002-6938-2321, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 271-277 |
| Publication date | 2011-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Ethics & International Affairs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0892-6794 • E-ISSN: 1747-7093 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0892679411000256 |
| OpenAlex | W2105590961 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 19 |
| References cited | 7 |
Wars and interventions bring to the fore certain ethical issues. For instance, NATO's intervention in Kosovo in 1999 raised questions about the moral import of UN Security Council authorization (given that the Council did not authorize the action), and the means employed by interveners (given NATO's use of cluster bombs and its targeting of dual-use facilities). In what follows, I consider the moral permissibility of the NATO-led intervention in Libya and suggest that this particular intervention highlights three issues for the ethics of humanitarian intervention in general. The first issue is whether standard accounts of the ethics of humanitarian intervention, which draw heavily on just war theory, can capture the prospect of mission creep. The second issue is whether epistemic difficulties in assessing the intervention's likely long-term success mean that we should reject consequentialist approaches to humanitarian intervention. The third issue concerns selectivity. I outline an often overlooked way that selectivity can be problematic for humanitarian intervention
Authorization · Computer security · Human rights · Humanitarian aid · Humanitarian intervention · Intervention (counseling · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Psychological intervention · Security council · Sociology · Computer Science · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Law · Psychology · Public Administration · Torture, Ethics, and Law · War, Ethics, and Justification
The State of Responsibility to Protect Inception in Asean Regionalism
We need to talk about Jus ad vim
Paradox of humanitarian intervention
Explaining emerging powers’ reluctance to adopt intervention norms
R2P’s “Ulterior Motive Exemption” and the Failure to Protect in Libya
The Responsibility to Protect
Communication, reflexivity and harm principle
The Interventionist Turn of UN Peacekeeping
Why common humanity? Framing the responsibility to protect as a common response
The responsibility to protect as humanitarian negotiation
The responsibility to protect doctrine – Coherent after all
The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force
From Jus ad Bellum to Jus ad Vim
Trends in just war thinking during the US presidential debates 2000–12
The Permanence of Inconsistency
Killing and Rescuing
Legitimizing Military Action through “Rape-as-a-Weapon” Discourse in Libya
Morality as a Catalyst for Violence
Providing for the other
| Unique citing works | 19 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,46 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2025 (13) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 19 |