Non-interventionism

Last updated

Non-interventionism or non-intervention is commonly understood as "a foreign policy of political or military non-involvement in foreign relations or in other countries' internal affairs". [1] [2] This is based on the grounds that a state should not interfere in the internal politics of another state as well as the principles of state sovereignty and self-determination. A similar phrase is "strategic independence". [3]

Contents

Non-interventionism became a norm in international relations before World War I. During the Cold War, it was often violated in order to instigate revolutions, prevent revolutions, or protect international security. Many countries have since adopted their own interpretation of non-interventionism or modified it according to the responsibility to protect any population from egregious crimes. [4]

Terminology

In political science lexicon, the term "isolationism" is sometimes improperly used in place of "non-interventionism". [5] "Isolationism" should be interpreted as a broader foreign policy that, in addition to non-interventionism, is associated with trade and economic protectionism, cultural and religious isolation, as well as non-participation in any permanent military alliance. [6] The term "non-intervention" was used in the context of United States policy in 1915. [2] : 118 

History

The norm of non-intervention has dominated the majority of international relations and can be seen to have been one of the principal motivations for the US' initial non-intervention in World Wars I and II, and the liberal powers' non-intervention in the Spanish Civil War despite the involvement of Germany and Italy. [7] [8] The norm was then firmly established into international law as one of the United Nations Charter's central tenets, which established non-intervention as one of the key principles which would underpin the emergent post-World War II peace. [9] [10]

However, this was soon affected by the advent of the Cold War, which increased the number and intensity of interventions in the domestic politics of a vast number of developing countries under pretexts such as instigating a "global socialist revolution" or ensuring "containment" of such a revolution. The adoption of such pretexts and the idea that such interventions were to prevent a threat to "international peace and security" allowed intervention under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. There must be a vote of nine member states out of fifteen, within the Security Council along with no vetoes from the five permanent members." [11] Additionally, the UN's power to regulate such interventions was hampered during the Cold War due to both the US and USSR holding veto power in the United Nations Security Council.

In different countries

China

Mutual non-interference has been one of China's principles on foreign policy since 1954. After the Chinese economic reform, China began to focus on industrial development and actively avoided military conflict over the subsequent decades. [12] As of December 2018, China has used its veto eleven times in UN Security Council. [13] China first used the veto on 25 August 1972 to block Bangladesh's admission to the UN. From 1971 to 2011, China used its veto sparingly, preferring to abstain rather than veto resolutions indirectly related to Chinese interests. [14] According to David L. Bosco, China turned abstention into an "art form," abstaining on 30% of Security Council Resolutions between 1971 and 1976. [15] : 140 

Sweden

Sweden became a non-interventionist state after the backlash against the king following Swedish losses in the Napoleonic Wars; the coup d'etat that followed in 1812 caused Jean Baptiste Bernadotte to establish a policy of non-intervention, which lasted from the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 until the accession of Sweden into NATO in 2022.

Switzerland

Switzerland has long been known for its policy of defensively armed neutrality. Its neutrality allows for the protection of the state by strategically avoiding conflict to preserve the autonomy of the state, and prevent the large powers surrounding it from invading its borders. This strategy has kept Switzerland from joining conflicts that threaten its sovereignty as well as allow its diverse citizenry to form a sense of national unity. [16]

United States

After the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001, the United States changed its foreign policy to support the idea that "norms of sovereignty" are not respected when there are threats of terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. [17]

In December 2013 the Pew Research Center reported that their newest poll, "American's Place in the World 2013," had revealed that 52 percent of respondents in the national poll said that the United States "should mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own." [18] That was the most people to answer that question this way in the history of the question, which pollsters began asking in 1964. [19] Only about a third of respondents felt that way a decade earlier. [19]

Russia

On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine and began to mobilize machinery, shelling operations, and continuous airstrikes in cities like Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Lviv. [20] Following the intervention, the United Nations Security Council attempted to invoke a resolution in order to address the Ukrainian issue. Since Russia is one of the five permanent members, they could utilize their veto power to prevent the resolution from passing. Many countries imposed sanctions in response to the veto as an attempt to deter Russia from its intervention. [21]

Decline

Since the end of the Cold War, new emergent norms of humanitarian intervention are challenging the norm of non-intervention, based upon the argument that while sovereignty gives rights to states, there is also a responsibility to protect its citizens. The ideal, an argument based upon social contract theory, has states being justified in intervening within other states if the latter fail to protect (or are actively involved in harming) their citizens. [22] The R2P doctrine follows a "second duty" that employs states to intervene if another state is unwilling or unable to protect its citizens from gross human rights violations. [4] Moreover, the International Criminal Court closely monitors states who are unable or unwilling to protect their citizens and investigate if they have committed egregious crimes. Non-intervention is not absolute. Michael Walzer's Just and Unjust Wars , which identifies three instances for when intervention is justifiable: "1) a particular community seeks secession or "natural liberation" within a set of boundaries; 2) counter-intervention is necessary to protect boundaries that already have been crossed; or 3) a terrible "violation of human rights," such as "cases of enslavement of massacre" has occurred. [17] Nations use these guidelines to justify violating the non-intervention norm.

That idea has been used to justify the UN-sanctioned intervention Operation Provide Comfort in Northern Iraq in 1991 to protect the Kurds and in Somalia, UNOSOM I and UNOSOM II from 1992 to 1995 in the absence of state power. However, after the US "Black Hawk Down" event in 1993 in Mogadishu, the US refused to intervene in Rwanda or Haiti. However, despite strong opposition from Russia and China, the idea of the responsibility to protect was again used to justify NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1999 and the 2011 military intervention in Libya.

The new norm of humanitarian intervention is not universally accepted and is often seen as still developing. [22]

See also

Related Research Articles

Isolationism is a term used to refer to a political philosophy advocating a foreign policy that opposes involvement in the political affairs, and especially the wars, of other countries. Thus, isolationism fundamentally advocates neutrality and opposes entanglement in military alliances and mutual defense pacts. In its purest form, isolationism opposes all commitments to foreign countries, including treaties and trade agreements. In the political science lexicon, there is also the term of “non-interventionism”, which is sometimes improperly used to replace the concept of “isolationism”. “Non-interventionism” is commonly understood as “a foreign policy of political or military non-involvement in foreign relations or in other countries’ internal affairs”. “Isolationism” should be interpreted more broadly as “a foreign policy grand strategy of military and political non-interference in international affairs and in the internal affairs of sovereign states, associated with trade and economic protectionism and cultural and religious isolation, as well as with the inability to be in permanent military alliances, with the preservation, however, some opportunities to participate in temporary military alliances that meet the current interests of the state and in permanent international organizations of a non-military nature”.

Territorial integrity is the principle under international law where sovereign states have a right to defend their borders and all territory in them from another state. It is enshrined in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and has been recognized as customary international law. Under this principle, forcible imposition of a border change is an act of aggression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council</span> One of the six principal organs of the UN

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations (UN) and is charged with ensuring international peace and security, recommending the admission of new UN members to the General Assembly, and approving any changes to the UN Charter. Its powers as outlined in the United Nations Charter include establishing peacekeeping operations, enacting international sanctions, and authorizing military action. The UNSC is the only UN body with authority to issue resolutions that are binding on member states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council and the Iraq War</span> Security Council positions before war

In March 2003 the United States government announced that "diplomacy has failed" and that it would proceed with a "coalition of the willing" to rid Iraq under Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction the US and UK claimed it possessed. The 2003 invasion of Iraq began a few days later. Prior to this decision, there had been much diplomacy and debate amongst the members of the United Nations Security Council over how to deal with the situation. This article examines the positions of these states as they changed during 2002–2003.

The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence are the Chinese government's foreign relations principles first mentioned in the 1954 Sino-Indian Agreement. Also known as Panchsheel, these principles were subsequently adopted in a number of resolutions and statements, including the preamble to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China.

China is one of the members of the United Nations and is one of five permanent members of its Security Council. One of the victorious Allies of World War II, the Republic of China (ROC) joined the UN as one of its founding member countries in 1945. The subsequent resumption of the Chinese Civil War between the government of Republic of China and the rebel forces of the Chinese Communist Party, led to the latter's victory on the mainland and the establishment of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. Nearly all of Mainland China was soon under its control and the ROC government retreated to the island of Taiwan.

The United States is a charter member of the United Nations and one of five permanent members of the UN Security Council.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 678</span> 1990 resolution on removal of Iraq from Kuwait by "all necessary means"

United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 was adopted on 29 November 1990. After reaffirming resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674 and 677, the council noted that despite all the United Nations efforts, Iraq continued to defy the Security Council.

Human security is a paradigm for understanding global vulnerabilities whose proponents challenge the traditional notion of national security through military security by arguing that the proper referent for security should be at the human rather than the national level. Human security reveals a people-centred and multi-disciplinary understanding of security which involves a number of research fields, including development studies, international relations, strategic studies, and human rights. The United Nations Development Programme's 1994 Human Development Report is considered a milestone publication in the field of human security, with its argument that ensuring "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" for all persons is the best path to tackle the problem of global insecurity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council veto power</span> Legal power of the five permanent UNSC member states to veto resolutions

The United Nations Security Council veto power is the power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council to veto any decision other than a "procedural" decision.

Humanitarian intervention is the use or threat of military force by a state across borders with the intent of ending severe and widespread human rights violations in a state which has not given permission for the use of force. Humanitarian interventions are aimed at ending human rights violations of individuals other than the citizens of the intervening state. Humanitarian interventions are only intended to prevent human rights violations in extreme circumstances. Attempts to establish institutions and political systems to achieve positive outcomes in the medium- to long-run, such as peacekeeping, peace-building and development aid, do not fall under this definition of a humanitarian intervention.

The use of force by states is controlled by both customary international law and by treaty law. The UN Charter reads in article 2(4):

All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.

The responsibility to protect is a global political commitment which was endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly at the 2005 World Summit in order to address its four key concerns to prevent genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. The doctrine is regarded as a unanimous and well-established international norm over the past two decades.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244</span> 1999 resolution establishing Kosovos UNMIK

United Nations Security Council resolution 1244, adopted on 10 June 1999, after recalling resolutions 1160 (1998), 1199 (1998), 1203 (1998) and 1239 (1999), authorised an international civil and military presence in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and established the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK). It followed an agreement by Yugoslav President Slobodan Milošević to terms proposed by President of Finland Martti Ahtisaari and former Prime Minister of Russia Viktor Chernomyrdin on 8 June, involving withdrawal of all Yugoslav state forces from Kosovo.

The Westphalian system, also known as Westphalian sovereignty, is a principle in international law that each state has exclusive sovereignty over its territory. The principle developed in Europe after the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, based on the state theory of Jean Bodin and the natural law teachings of Hugo Grotius. It underlies the modern international system of sovereign states and is enshrined in the United Nations Charter, which states that "nothing ... shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1674</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2006

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1674, adopted unanimously on April 28, 2006, after reaffirming resolutions 1265 (1999) and 1296 (2000) concerning the protection of civilians in armed conflict and Resolution 1631 (2005) on co-operation between the United Nations and regional organisations, the Council stressed a comprehensive approach to the prevention of armed conflict and its recurrence.

The United Nations has been criticized for a variety of reasons, including its policies, ideology, equality of representation, administration, ability to enforce rulings, and ideological bias.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2011

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970 was a measure adopted unanimously by the UN Security Council on 26 February 2011. It condemned the use of lethal force by the government of Muammar Gaddafi against protesters participating in the Libyan Civil War, and imposed a series of international sanctions in response.

The responsibility to protect (R2P) is a widely endorsed and developing norm aimed at preventing humanitarian atrocities. China has been receptive towards the development of R2P since its inception in 2001, despite China's traditional tendency to obstruct engagement in humanitarian crises. As veto-wielding Security Council member, important regional power, and major economic power, with interests in states experiencing, or vulnerable to, humanitarian crisis, including Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Angola and Sudan, the support of China for R2P is vital.

International sanctions are political and economic decisions that are part of diplomatic efforts by countries, multilateral or regional organizations against states or organizations either to protect national security interests, or to protect international law, and defend against threats to international peace and security. These decisions principally include the temporary imposition on a target of economic, trade, diplomatic, cultural or other restrictions that are lifted when the motivating security concerns no longer apply, or when no new threats have arisen.

References

  1. ↑ Smith, M. (2010). "The Myth of American Isolationism, Part I: American Leadership and the Cause of Liberty". The Heritage Foundation. Washington D.C.: 2.
  2. 1 2 Hodges, Henry G. (1915). The Doctrine of Intervention. Princeton, The Banner press. p. 1.
  3. ↑ Carpenter, Ted Galen (1997). The Libertarian Reader. Free Press. pp. 336–344. ISBN   978-0-684-83200-5.
  4. 1 2 Henderson, Stacy (2019). "The Evolution of the Principle of Non-Intervention: R2P and Overt Assistance to Opposition Groups". Global Responsibility to Protect. 11 (4): 365–393. doi:10.1163/1875984X-01104002. ISSN   1875-9858 – via Hein Online.
  5. ↑ Romanov, V. V.; Artyukhov, A. A. (2013). "The Notion of "Isolationism" in U.S. Foreign-Policy Thought: Conceptual Characteristics" (PDF). Vestnik Vâtskogo Gosudarstvennogo Gumanitarnogo Universiteta (in Russian) (3–1). Kirov, Russia: 67. ISSN   1997-4280.
  6. ↑ Artiukhov, A. A. (2022). "The Conceptual Characteristics of the Notion "Isolationism" at the Current Historical Stage". Meždunarodnyj Naučno-Issledovatel'skij Žurnal [International Research Journal] (in Russian). 8 (122). Yekaterinburg, Russia: 2. doi:10.23670/IRJ.2022.122.54. eISSN   2227-6017. ISSN   1997-4280.
  7. ↑ Corum, James S. (April 1998). "The Spanish Civil War: Lessons learned and not learned by the great powers". Journal of Military History. 62 (2): 313–334. doi:10.2307/120719.
  8. ↑ Rodrigo, Javier (2017). "On fascistization: Mussolini's political project for Franco's Spain, 1937–1939". Journal of Modern Italian Studies. 22 (4): 469–487. doi:10.1080/1354571X.2017.1350024.
  9. ↑ "Non-Intervention (Non-interference in domestic affairs)". The Princeton Encyclopedia of Self-Determination. Retrieved 28 September 2023.
  10. ↑ "Purposes and Principles of the UN (Chapter I of UN Charter) | United Nations Security Council". www.un.org. Retrieved 28 September 2023.
  11. ↑ Roth, Brad (2022). "Democratization's Discontents: Rediscovering the Virtues of the Non-Intervention Norm". Chicago Journal of International Law. 23 (1): 161–177.
  12. ↑ Brown, Kerry (17 September 2013). "Is China's non-interference policy sustainable?". BBC News. Retrieved 17 September 2013.
  13. ↑ Security Council – Veto List. Retrieved 17 December 2018.
  14. ↑ Pei, Minxin (7 February 2012). "Why Beijing Votes With Moscow". The New York Times.
  15. ↑ Bosco, David L. (2009). Five to Rule Them All: The UN Security Council and the Making of the Modern World . Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-532876-9.
  16. ↑ Morris, Kate, White, Timothy J. (2011). "Neutrality and the European Union: The case of Switzerland". Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution. 3 (7): 104–111. S2CID   154842039.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. 1 2 Elden, Stuart (2006). "Contingent sovereignty, territorial integrity and the sanctity of borders". SAIS Review of International Affairs. 26 (1): 11–24. doi:10.1353/sais.2006.0008.
  18. ↑ Healy, Gene (10 December 2013). "It's not isolationist for America to mind its own business". Washington Examiner. Retrieved 13 August 2014.
  19. 1 2 Lindsay, James M.; Kauss, Rachael (3 December 2013). "The Public's Mixed Message on America's Role in the World". Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Retrieved 13 August 2014.
  20. ↑ Suarez Ortiz, Santiago; Henríquez Torres, Isabella; Angulo Medina, Ricardo (3 February 2023). "The Russia-Ukraine conflict: analysis of the international responsibility of the States, the principles of non-intervention, and prohibited use of force under the International Court of Justice jurisprudence". Revista Ruptura: 89–116. doi: 10.26807/rr.v4i4.111 . eISSN   2737-6346. ISSN   1390-7182.
  21. ↑ Grant, Thomas D. (May 2024). "Russia in the United Nations Security Council: Charter Principles and Credentials Procedure". Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 57 (3): 837–875. ISSN   0090-2594.
  22. 1 2 Evans, Gareth (2004). "When is it Right to Fight?". Survival. 46 (3): 59–82. doi:10.1080/00396330412331343733. S2CID   154653540.

Bibliography

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.