Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 313–328 | Cite as

Reconciling Just Causes for Armed Humanitarian Intervention

  • Eamon Aloyo


Michael Walzer argues that the just cause for humanitarian intervention is not met if there are only “ordinary” levels of human rights abuses within a state because he believes that respecting the right to collective self-determination is more morally important than protecting other individual rights. Several prominent critics of Walzer advocate for a more permissive account of a just cause. They argue that protecting individuals’ human rights is more morally important than respecting a right to collective self-determination. I argue that these two accounts are far more similar than either Walzer or his critics realize because collective self-determination requires the protection of some human rights in order to allow each person the opportunity to participate in collective choices. Consequently, the just cause for intervention is met whenever at least some important human rights of one person are violated and others are being credibly threatened. The counter intuitive conclusion of my argument is that justified interventions can actually promote rather than undermine collective self-determination because just interventions allow innocents, who otherwise would have excluded from this process, the opportunity to contribute to collective choices. Of course, a just cause is insufficient in itself for intervention to be permissible because other just war precepts must also be met.


Humanitarian intervention Just war theory Collective self-determination Human rights Sovereignty Just cause 


  1. Altman A, Wellman C (2009) A Liberal Theory of International Justice. Oxford University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Annan K (1999) Two Concepts of Sovereignty. The Economist.
  3. Beetham D (1999) Democracy and Human Rights, 1st edn. PolityGoogle Scholar
  4. Beitz C (1980) Nonintervention and communal integrity. Philos Public Aff 9(4):385–391Google Scholar
  5. Beitz C (2001) Human rights as a common concern. Am Polit Sci Rev 95(2):269–282Google Scholar
  6. Beitz C (2009) The moral standing of states revisited. Ethics Int Aff 23(4):325–347. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7093.2009.00227.x
  7. Bellamy A (2011) Global Politics and the Responsibility to Protect: From Words to Deeds. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Christiano T (2011) An instrumental argument for a human right to democracy. Philosophy & Public Affairs 39(2):142–176. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2011.01204.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen J (2006) Is There a Human Right to Democracy? In: C Sypnowich (ed) The Egalitarian Conscience: Essays in Honour of G. A. Cohen. Oxford University Press, USA, 226–48Google Scholar
  10. Doyle M (2009) A few words on mill, walzer, and nonintervention. Ethics Int Aff 23(04):349–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7093.2009.00228.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dworkin R (1984) Rights as Trumps. In: Waldron J (ed) Theories of Rights. Oxford University Press, USA, pp 153–167Google Scholar
  12. Evans G, Sahnoun M, Côté-Harper G, Hamilton L, Ignatieff M, Lukin V, Naumann K, et al. (2001) The Responsibility to Protect: The Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. IDRC Books: OntarioGoogle Scholar
  13. Fabre C (2012) Cosmopolitan War. Oxford University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. Frowe H (2010) A practical account of self-defence. Law Philos 29(3):245–272. doi: 10.1007/s10982-009-9062-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frowe H (2011) The Ethics of War and Peace: An Introduction. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodin R (2007) Enfranchising all affected interests, and its alternatives. Philos Public Aff 25:40–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hurka T (2005) Proportionality in the morality of war. Philos Public Aff 33(1):34–66Google Scholar
  18. Hurka T (2008) Proportionality and Necessity. In: L May (ed) War: Essays in Political Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 127–44Google Scholar
  19. Luban D (1980a) Just war and human rights. Philos Public Aff 9(2):160–181Google Scholar
  20. Luban D (1980b) The romance of the nation-state. Philos Public Aff 9(4):392–397Google Scholar
  21. Manza J, Uggen C (2006) Locked Out: Felon Disenfranchisement and American Democracy. Oxford University Press, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mapel DR (2010) Moral liability to defensive killing and symmetrical self-defense. J Polit Philos 18(2):198–217. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00340.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McMahan J (1994) Innocence, self-defense and killing in war. J Polit Philos 2(3):193–221. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.1994.tb00021.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McMahan J (1996) Intervention and collective self-determination. Ethics Int Aff 10(1):1–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7093.1996.tb00001.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McMahan J (2005) The basis of moral liability to defensive killing. Philos Issues 15(1):386–405. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-6077.2005.00073.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McMahan J (2009) Killing in War, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. McMahan J (2010) Humanitarian Intervention, Consent, and Proportionality. In: Davis A, Keshen R, McMahan J (eds) Ethics and Humanity: Themes from the Philosophy of Jonathan Glover. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Orwell G (1945) Politics and the English Language. In: Essays. Everyman’s Library, pp. 954–67Google Scholar
  29. Pattison J (2010) Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility To Protect: Who Should Intervene? Oxford University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Philpott D (2001) Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Pogge T (2003) Preempting Humanitarian Interventions. In: Jokic A (ed) Humanitarian Intervention: Moral and Philosophical Issues. Broadview Press, Peterborough, pp. 93–108Google Scholar
  32. Quong J (2012) Liability to defensive harm. Philos Public Aff 40(1):45–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.2012.01217.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rawls J (1999) The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”, 1st edn. Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  34. Rodin D (2002) War and Self-Defense. Oxford University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Rodin D (2014) Rethinking Responsibility to Protect: The Case for Human Sovereignty. In: D E Scheid (ed) The Ethics of Armed Humanitarian Intervention. Cambridge University Press, 243–60Google Scholar
  36. Walzer M (1973) Political action: the problem of dirty hands. Philos Public Aff 2(2):160–180Google Scholar
  37. Walzer M (1977 [2000]) Just And Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument With Historical Illustrations, 3rd edn. Basic BooksGoogle Scholar
  38. Walzer M (1980) The moral standing of states: a response to four critics. Philos Public Aff 9(3):209–229Google Scholar
  39. Walzer M (2007) The Argument About Humanitarian Intervention. In: Miller D (ed) Thinking Politically: Essays in Political Theory. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 237-250Google Scholar
  40. Walzer M (2011) The Wrong Intervention. Dissent Magazine.
  41. Wellman C (2012) Debate: taking human rights seriously. J Polit Philos 20(1):119–130. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2011.00407.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Hague Institute for Global JusticeDen HaagNetherlands

Personalised recommendations