| Summary: | This study examines the theories about intervention and sovereignty in relation to the world of today, with the raising question about humanitarian intervention in a globalized society.The purpose of this paper is to examine if intervention can be justified in a sovereign state and how it can be justified. The expected outcome is that conclusion can be drawn from the specific case with United Nations intervention in Bosnia and Hercegovina, and what kind of motives they putted up to justify their intervention.Because we are still living in the era of the Westphalia system with the inherited thoughts of state sovereignty, but in conflict with the new ideas of globalization and human rights, it’s of big relevance to look at this topic closer.First of all the reader is presented to the theoretical aspects of state, sovereignty and different kinds of intervention, to become more aware of the complications surrounding the relationship between these conceptions.The method used in this study is a motive analysis with the focus on the motives told by United Nation, to be the reason for the intervention in Bosnia and Hercegovina. The empirical results are based on the reports from United Nations Security Council during the years 1991 – 1995.The results are that the intervention in Bosnia and Hercegovina can be justified when looking at the theories in relation to the empirical result, with the FN – charter and the fact of violation against humanitarian law and human rights.One conclusion can easily be drawn, that individual rights are playing a big role in today’s global society and are putting some pressure on the United Nation to look over the rules about humanitarian intervention.
|
|---|
