Geoffrey Bindman says that without collective action to defend the oppressed and the vulnerable, we are heading into dangerous isolationist territory
Simon Jenkins is right that “moral imperialism” has long been a motivating factor in military interventions by Britain and other western nations (The west’s nation-building fantasy is to blame for the mess in Afghanistan, 20 August). Afghanistan and Iraq are contemporary examples.
But concern about motive does not detract from the need to support and strengthen the international protection of human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and the framework of international humanitarian law which followed it were endorsed by almost every nation. The absence of an international police force – a weakness in the structure – increases the need for individual states to share responsibility for enforcement, particularly of international criminal law. The development of a “responsibility to protect”, dismissed by Jenkins, gives legitimacy to necessary humanitarian intervention. Military action should be a last resort, but it cannot be ruled out of every situation where lives are at stake.
