Premium
Responsibility to Protect and Militarized Humanitarian Intervention
Author(s) -
Reed Esther D.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of religious ethics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.306
H-Index - 20
eISSN - 1467-9795
pISSN - 0384-9694
DOI - 10.1111/jore.12009
Subject(s) - responsibility to protect , humanitarian intervention , seriousness , intervention (counseling) , doctrine , political science , law , law and economics , sociology , psychology , human rights , psychiatry
My essay “Responsibility to Protect and Militarized Humanitarian Intervention: When and Why the Churches Failed to Discern Moral Hazard” ( JRE 40.2) called for more questioning engagement with R2P than the broadly uncritical welcome given by the churches to the doctrine between S eptember 2003 and S eptember 2008. In response to L uke G lanville's reply, this essay identifies further reasons for caution before accepting R2P and so‐called humanitarian wars alongside defensive wars as paradigmatically justified. It is structured with reference to the tests in A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, the Report by the Secretary‐General's High‐level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change , as recommended to the General Assembly when considering whether to authorize or apply military force: seriousness of risk, intention, last resort, proportional means, balance of consequences.