Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T07:05:53.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Legitimizing the Use of Force in Kosovo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2012

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Essays
Copyright
Copyright © Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Roberts, Adam, “NATO's ‘Humanitarian War’ over Kosovo,” Survival 41 (Autumn 1999), pp. 102–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 J. L. Holzgrefe developed this definition of humanitarian intervention for a roundtable on the subject at the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University, “After Kosovo: Humanitarian Intervention at the Crossroads,” January 18–19, 2001. This definition excludes non-forcible interventions as well as forcible interventions aimed at protecting or rescuing the intervening state's nationalsGoogle Scholar.

3 Judah, , Kosovo, p. 179Google Scholar.

4 Wheeler, , Saving Strangers, p. 287Google Scholar.

5 Franck, Thomas, The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990Google Scholar); and Finnemore, Martha, “Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention,” in Katzenstein, Peter, ed., The Culture of National Security (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), p. 159Google Scholar. See also Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” International Organization 2 (Autumn 1998), pp. 895905Google Scholar.

6 Chomsky, , A New Generation Draws the Line, pp. 13Google Scholar.

7 Ibid., p. 42Google Scholar.

8 Ibid., p. 13Google Scholar.

9 Ibid., p. 21Google Scholar.

10 Hammond, and Herman, , eds., Degraded Capability, pp. 78Google Scholar.

11 Ali, ed., Masters of the Universe, p. ivGoogle Scholar.

12 Walt, Stephen M., “Two Cheers for Clinton's Foreign Policy,” Foreign Affairs 79 (2000), pp. 6379CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Walt identifies one of Clinton's four foreign policy goals to be “build[ing] a world order compatible with basic American values by encouraging the growth of democracy and by using military force against major human rights abuses” (p. 67). See also Editors, “Clinton's Foreign Policy,” Foreign Policy 79 (November/December 2000), pp. 18–28, who find that the so-called Clinton Doctrine included a strong human rights component, although it was inconsistently and opportunistically applied.

13 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 12Google Scholar.

14 Wheeler, , Saving Strangers, p. 285Google Scholar.

15 Ibid., p. 11Google Scholar.

16 Ibid., p. 288Google Scholar.

17 Skinner, Quentin, “Analysis of Political Thought and Action,” in Tully, James, ed., Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1988), p. 117Google Scholar; quoted in Wheeler, , Saving Strangers, p. 288Google Scholar.

18 Wheeler, , Saving Strangers, p. 288Google Scholar.

19 Hammond, and Herman, , eds., Degraded Capability, p. 70Google Scholar. Hume argues, “The media bear a heavy burden of responsibility for the way that constantly accusing the Serbs of genocide [in Bosnia and Kosovo] has been used, both to distort perceptions of the situation in the Balkans and effectively to rewrite the history of the Holocaust” (p. 70). Hume goes so far as to accuse some journalists of “acting as little more than copy typists for NATO” (p. 75). Similarly, Diane Johnstone points out that this media coverage could incite a new form of racism: “To merit all those bombs, the ‘bad’ people must be tarnished with collective guilt” (Ali, ed., Masters of the Universe, p. 168).

20 I develop both of these theories in Mertus, Julie A., “Reconsidering the Legality of Humanitarian Intervention: Lessons from Kosovo,” William and Mary Law Review 41 (May 2000), pp. 1743–87Google Scholar. See also Reisman, Michael, “Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law,” American Journal of International Law 84 (October 1990), pp. 866–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 See Lillich, Richard, “Forcible Self-Help by States to Protect Human Rights,” Iowa Law Review (1967–68), pp. 325–51Google Scholar; Krylov, Nicholai, “Humanitarian Intervention: Pros and Cons,” Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Journal 17 (February 1995), pp. 365407Google Scholar.

22 See Reisman, Michael, “Criteria for the Lawful Use of Force in International Law,” Yale Journal of International Law 10 (Spring 1985), pp. 279–85Google Scholar.

23 The UN Security Council has recognized that “non-military sources of instability in the economic, social, humanitarian and ecological fields have become threats to peace and security.” See United Nations Security Council Official Resolution, 47th Session, at p. 143, UN Document S/PV.3046 (1992)Google Scholar.

24 See Adelman, Howard, “Humanitarian Intervention: The Case of the Kurds,” International Journal of Refugee Law 4 (Winter 1992), pp. 138Google Scholar. See also Michael, J. Bazyler, “Reexamining the Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention in Light of the Atrocities in Kampuchea and Ethiopia,” Stanford Journal of International Law 23 (Summer 1987), pp. 547619Google Scholar; Michael, J. Levitin, “The Law of Force and the Force of Law: Grenada, the Falklands and Humanitarian Intervention,” Harvard Interventional Law Journal 27 (Spring 1986), pp. 621–57Google Scholar; Lillich, Richard, “Humanitarian Intervention: A Reply to Dr. Brownlie and a Plea for Constructive Alternatives,” in Moore, John Norton, ed., Law and Civil War in the Modern World (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974), pp. 229–51Google Scholar.

25 Chomsky, , A New Generation Draws the Line, p. 36Google Scholar.

26 Ibid., p. 112Google Scholar.

27 For Germany's restrictive asylum policies, see Hansen, Randall, “Asylum Policy in the European Union,” Georgetown Immigration Law journal 14 (Spring 2000), pp. 779800Google Scholar. For anti-Albanian sentiment in Germany, see Roger Cohen, “A Family's Time in Germany Runs Out; Divide Over Immigration/Kosovars Must Go,”International Herald Tribune (November 21, 2000), p. 2.

28 Judah, , Kosovo, p. 119Google Scholar.

29 Chomsky, , A New Generation Draws the Line, p. 103Google Scholar.

30 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 12Google Scholar.

32 Ibid., p. 40Google Scholar.

33 Chomsky, , A New Generation Draws the Line, p. 111Google Scholar.

34 See ibid., p. 32Google Scholar.

35 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 58Google Scholar.

36 Judah, , Kosovo, p. 240Google Scholar.

37 Independent International Commission Kosovo, on, Kosovo Report: Conflict—International Response—Lessons Learned (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 88Google Scholar, also available at http://www.kosovocommission.org/reports.

38 Judah, , Kosovo, p. 241Google Scholar.

39 Chomsky, , A New Generation Draws the Line, p. 33Google Scholar.

40 Ibid., pp. 35 and 115Google Scholar.

41 Ibid., p. 126Google Scholar.

42 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 15Google Scholar.

44 Judah, , Kosovo, p. 219Google Scholar, quoting Hill.

45 The main sources for the law of war include the Law of The Hague (1907); the Geneva Conventions of 1949; the 1977 Geneva Protocols; and customary international law. See Roberts, Adam and Guelff, Richard, eds., Documents on the Laws of War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989Google Scholar); also Levie, Howard S., “The Law of War and Neutrality,” in Norton Moore, John, Tipson, Frederick S., and Turner, Robert F., eds., National Security Law (Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 1990), pp. 307–57Google Scholar.

46 The concept of proportionality requires an ends-oriented comparative assessment: “The anticipated loss of life and damage to property incidental to attacks must not be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected to be gained.” U.S. Army, Operational Law Handbook (2000), sec. 5–4. See also Article 57 of Protocol I Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions (Protocol I)Google Scholar.

47 Burkhalter, Holly J., “Memorandum to the President,” in Council on Foreign Relations, Humanitarian Intervention: Creating a Workable Doctrine (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 2000), p. 25Google Scholar.

48 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 4Google Scholar.

49 Ibid., p. 21Google Scholar.

50 Ibid., p. 20Google Scholar.

51 Ignatieff, , Virtual War, p. 62Google Scholar.

52 See generally Gardam, Judith Gail, “Proportionality and Force in International Law,” American Journal of International Law 87 (July 1993), pp. 391413CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Ignatieff, , Virtual War, p. 108Google Scholar.

54 Clark, , Civil Resistance, p. 183Google Scholar.

55 Ibid., p. 184Google Scholar.

56 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 195Google Scholar.

58 Ignatieff, , Virtual War, p. 161Google Scholar.

59 Ibid., p. 191Google Scholar.

61 Ibid., p. 215Google Scholar.

62 Wheeler, , Saving Strangers, p. 284Google Scholar.

63 Daalder, and O'Hanlon, , Winning Ugly, p. 16Google Scholar.

66 Ignatieff, , Virtual War, p. 213Google Scholar.

67 Clark, , Civil Resistance, p. 59Google Scholar.

68 Ibid., p. 68Google Scholar.

70 Ignatieff, , Virtual War, pp. 103104Google Scholar.

71 The English School includes Charles Manning, E. H. Carr, Herbert Butterfield, Martin Wright, Adam Watson, Hedley Bull, and R J. Vincent. See Wheeler, , Saving Strangers, p. 6Google Scholar, n. 16.