3
bombing campaign. In light of the empirical summary, it also addresses and
assesses the principal rationales offered by the interveners for their action
and selected key arguments pro and con its justifiability. NATO’s
intervention purportedly to assist Albanian Kosovars from brutal attack
provides an almost classic example of dilemmas associated with
humanitarian efforts and their complications in war-torn societies. The
analysis concludes that NATO’s intervention, though at odds with UN
Charter provisions and contrary to generally accepted conventions of
international law, was and is ethically defensible. That assessment however,
for several reasons is not an unqualified one.
Humanitarian Intervention: Definition and Scope
A general, dictionary understanding of the word “humanitarian” as either a
noun or adjective is that it describes agents or acts “Having regard to the
interests of humanity or mankind at large; relating to, advocating, or
practising humanity or humane action” (OED); it denotes a focus on
“improving people’s lives and reducing suffering” of those in need of aid,
irrespective of their politics, religion, beliefs, sex, ethnicity or colour
(Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Online). Its meaning in modern
international politics has its origins in President Lincoln’s Lieber Code of
1863, the St. Petersburg Declaration by various nations in 1868 announcing
an agreement by parties “ to conciliate the necessities of war with the
dictates of humanity”, and the Hague Convention IV of 1907 with its
Regulations. As a norm or set of international law norms what constitutes
“humanitarian” has come to be associated since World War II with a series
of international agreements in the form of treaties, conventions and
protocols. The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their 1977 Protocols,
Convention