The Applicability of Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect During Armed Conflicts: Russia-Ukraine War in Focus

Abstract

Purpose: Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect have been at the centre of debate in the UN, among states and civil societies. The failure of the International Community to use military force to intervene in the case of Syria and the ongoing atrocities in Ukraine has weakened the enthusiasm that was kindled by the authorized use of force in Libya. This paper aimed at critically examining the situation in Russia-Ukraine in order to propose a way forward for the protection of civilians in Ukraine through humanitarian intervention. Methodology: To this end, the paper recalls the responsibility to protect bestowed on States and the International Community, evaluating the positive impacts of humanitarian intervention in Kosovo and Libya. Adopting a purely doctrinal research method, this paper questions why the international community is reluctant in using military intervention in the Russia-Ukraine situation in order to protect civilians, curb human rights violations and maintain peace and security. Findings: The study found out that the fear to trigger war in the whole of Europe and the fact that Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council with veto power have weakened this enthusiasm to intervene. Conclusion: The study concludes that there is necessity for humanitarian intervention to protect civilians in Ukraine by NATO and other States. Recommendation: This study recommends the use of the majority voting system in decisions to apply humanitarian intervention instead of the veto system. The study also recommend that permanent members of the Security Council who are involved in gross violation of human rights like Russia should be suspended and eventually removed as a Permanent member if violations persist.