THE (IL)LEGALITY OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION

Abstract

The argument posed on International law from the realist viewpoint is that, the set of rules generally considered and accepted as binding in relations between states are only accepted by states as a result of their struggle for survival in an anarchic international community. States only adopt international legal norms that either increase their power, formalise their domination of weaker states, or those that they intend to violate or manipulate deliberately to suit their interests. For the realist, the general proposition that the law exerts little or no independent causal inluence on the relation(s) between states is at its peak in the context of International Humanitarian Law and perhaps on Humanitarian Interventions also ( Bradford 2004 :7). This essay therefore examines the legitimacy of Humanitarian Interventions (HI), drawing insight from Andreas question of “If law is lawful, all is well. But what if law is unlawful?” ( Andreas 2010 : 82)