The University of Hong Kong, Department of Politics and Public Administration
2022-23 Semester 1
DILEMMAS OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION (CCGL 9036)
Course Information
Time: Wednesday 12.30-14.20
Location: MW T6
Mode of delivery: Face to Face
Lecturer
Dr. Marketa Moore
Email: mmoore@hku.hk
Consultations by appointment
Teaching assistant
Dr. Jessica Hun
Email: jhun11@hku.hk
Consultations by appointment
Course Description
In this course we will search for answers for some important questions, such as what is
humanitarian intervention? Is it ever a good idea? Who does the intervening and on whose
behalf? In order to explore these questions, this course adopts a broad understanding of
humanitarian intervention, focusing primarily on the post-war period. We will look at
historical and social context and legal framework in which a wide range of actors interact
and act for formally declared humanitarian purposes. Those actors are not only states, but
also non-governmental organizations (NGOs), intergovernmental organizations, legal
institutions, media and global businesses. We will analyze various forms of intervention,
from armed intervention to humanitarian aid, peacekeeping, human rights promotion, and
international criminal justice.
The course focuses on the emergence of humanitarian intervention, its contemporary
nature, successes and failures, moral challenges, and ways forward. The course examines
dilemmas generated by great power politics, the tension between state sovereignty and
global humanitarian action, and resource constraints in a world of potentially limitless
need. The course will equip students to think critically about the possibilities and limits of
effective humanitarian intervention and to apply these insights to real-life cases around the
world.
Course Learning Outcomes:
1. The course aims to generate an understanding of humanitarian intervention that is
deep in terms of historical sweep and broad in terms of territorial reach.
2. The course seeks to develop a thorough grasp of the full range of humanitarian
intervention found in the contemporary world, of the issues of principle and practice
it raises, and of ways forward for humanitarian actors.
1
3. Supporting these core objectives, the course encourages students to develop
academic excellence through critical intellectual inquiry; enhancing their
communicative and collaborative skills, and awareness for improvements in the
human condition. It is committed to giving real meaning to notions of global
citizenship held throughout the University.
Course Outline
Topic
1
Date
7 September
2
14 September
3
21 September
4
28 September
5
5 October
12 October
19 October
26 October
2 November
9 November
16 November
23 November
30 November
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Topic
Introduction: Dilemmas of humanitarian intervention
Humanitarian intervention in a world of states: Sovereignty and
human rights
Humanitarian intervention in an unequal world: Justice vs
charity
Intergovernmental organizations as humanitarian actors +
Introduction to humanitarian intervention case study
INGOs, humanitarianism and humanitarian intervention
READING WEEK - NO CLASS, NO TUTORIAL
State-led interventions during and after the Cold War
Responsibility to Protect: Towards a new norm?
The rise of China, R2P and humanitarian intervention
International criminal justice as a form of intervention
Humanitarian intervention case study - small group work
Humanitarian intervention case study - small group work
Case study debrief + take-home assignment revision
Teaching and assessment methods
The course is taught through weekly two-hour lectures and weekly 50-minute tutorials.
Tutorials begin in Week 4 (lecture 3). Tutorial attendance is compulsory. All students
are expected to participate in classroom debate in every tutorial session. The tutorial
registration system will open at 5 pm on Tuesday, 13 September).
Course performance is assessed through 100% coursework.
Summary of assessment methods:
Class participation (10%):
Class participation is graded on the basis of involvement in all class activities. This mainly
comprises your contributions to tutorial discussions (all of which are compulsory), but also
includes participation in Moodle discussion forums and related activities (e.g. Moodle
polls). All students are expected to make an active contribution to class debates and to help
the group explore many dilemmas of humanitarian intervention.
2
Humanitarian intervention case study (50%):
Students will develop their understanding of the dilemmas of humanitarian intervention
through an in-depth case study of a contemporary humanitarian crisis. Details of the case
study, and further instructions on the assessment tasks, will be provided in week 4 of the
course.
The assessment of the humanitarian intervention case study consists of two components:
(1) the individual policy paper (25%), and
(2) the small-group intervention strategy memo (25%).
(1) The policy paper (25%)
The policy paper should read like a briefing report to give advice on how the government
or organization that you represent should approach the humanitarian crisis that is the
subject of the case study. Your research must cover current issues, interests and policy
priorities for your state or organization. Some background information may be relevant;
include as needed. This is a research assignment. We will pay particular attention to
how well your paper reflects and documents reputable research materials. As such,
we want to see the use of peer-reviewed publications in citations. This is an individual
assignment.
The policy paper should include the following:
1. A coversheet listing the state/organization that you are advising, your name and
HKUID number.
2. A brief introduction, framing the humanitarian crisis case study from the point of
view of your state/organization (1 double-spaced page).
3. Summary/analysis of your state’s/organization’s position and interests in relation
to the case study (2 double-spaced pages maximum).
4. Policy recommendations for your state/organization (2 double-spaced pages
maximum).
5. A brief conclusion (1/2 double-spaced page).
Please use Times New Roman font size 12, standard margins.
Penalties apply for (a) late submission, (b) failure to write within the specified page limit,
(c) inadequate referencing and (d) disregard for the formatting requirements.
The deadline for submission of the policy paper is 23:59 on Friday, 14 October 2022
via Turnitin on Moodle in MS Word document only.
(2) The intervention strategy memo (25%)
Students will be assigned to small groups (of 5-6 students, depending on class numbers).
Each group will be made up of students representing different states/organizations that
have been grouped together on the basis of their region and/or interests. Each group will
be tasked with writing up a memo to be presented to the UN Secretary General. Each
memo should be a maximum of 2 double-spaced pages long (Times New Roman font
size 12, standard margins) and should contain the following information:
3
1. A brief summary of the humanitarian crisis case study from the point of view of
the group members.
2. Concrete recommendations to the UN Secretary General on an intervention
strategy.
A key question to bear in mind is whether or not your state’s/organization’s immediate
and long-term interests are served in the memo. In this way, the assessment is also a test
of your ability to negotiate, cooperate, and compromise with other group members, each
of whom has their own interests and priorities.
This is a group assignment and will be assigned a group grade. We will implement a ‘free
rider’ policy. This means that group members who do not contribute to the group work
will not share in the group grade. They will either receive an ‘F’ (for no contribution) or a
lower grade based on their level of contribution.
A soft copy of each group’s memo should be uploaded on Moodle via Turnitin by
23:59 pm on Wednesday, 30 November 2022 in MS Word document only.
The take-home assessment (40%)
The assessment questions will be released on Friday, 2 December 2022, 9:00 am, i.e.
the last week of semester. Assessment responses will be due by Monday 5 December,
23:59 pm. The format of the assignment will be short-essay style questions and you will
have a number of questions to choose from. The questions will draw on the breadth of the
course material.
We will discuss the format of the assessment and strategies for revision in class, closer to
the date. Assessments should be submitted via Turnitin on Moodle.
Summary of assessment ratios and deadlines:
Assessment Methods
Assessment Ratio (%)
Class participation
10%
Policy paper
25%
Intervention strategy memo
25%
(group assignment)
Take-home assessment
40%
Due Date
Ongoing
23:59 Friday 14 October
2022
23:59 pm Wednesday, 30
November 2022
23:59 pm Thursday, 5
December 2022 (questions
released 2 December 9 am)
Assessment criteria:
All written work is assessed on an A-F scale, with grades in the A range awarded for
excellent work, grades in the B range awarded for good work, grades in the C range
awarded for satisfactory work, grades in the D range awarded for passing work, and grades
in the F range awarded for failing work. Excellent work is expected to be strong in all
respects: structure, coverage, analysis, argument, writing, referencing. Good work is likely
4
to fall short on one or two of these dimensions, but to be strong in all others. Satisfactory
work is likely to fall short on many of these dimensions, and to be strong in only one or
two areas. Passing work is likely to be no more than average on all of these dimensions.
Failing work is likely to be weak in many, or even all, of these dimensions.
Class participation is graded on the basis of involvement in classroom discussion, mainly
in tutorials but also in lectures. A necessary component of classroom participation is
attendance. On top of that, marks are awarded for active engagement through critical
assessment of assigned readings, and an ability to make relevant points that contribute to
classroom debate.
Course conduct policies:
Late papers are not accepted with full opportunity for grading, unless there is a signed
doctor’s note or a letter from the Dean explaining why the deadline cannot be met. Without
one of these documents, your paper will be penalized half a grade for each 24- hour period
(or part thereof) that the papers is late (i.e. A to A-, A- to B+ etc.). Saturdays, Sundays and
public holidays count. It makes no sense to lose marks in this way: be sure to submit work
on time. Penalties apply to all the group members if working in groups.
Plagiarism is subject to penalties in line with University policy. It could result in a zero
mark for the affected piece of work, or even in failure of the entire course.
Academic misconduct warning:
The University expects all students to work to the highest standard of academic integrity.
Students’ written work is scrutinized for academic misconduct, which includes plagiarism
of others’ words or ideas, falsification, fabrication, and misuse of data. We use Turnitin
(www.turnitin.com) to help identify potential cases of plagiarism. In the event that a
student submits work that appears to be plagiarized, whether in an essay, presentation, or
other course material, he or she will be asked for an explanation. The University does not
tolerate plagiarism, whether direct, indirect, or self-plagiarism. Direct plagiarism is
intentionally and completely lifting the words, equations, charts, graphs or artistic material
of another author or authors. Indirect plagiarism is failing to cite completely or accurately,
or copying from another author or authors themes, ideas or sources that the student has not
read. Self-plagiarism is recycling papers, documents, equations, and so forth from a
document previously submitted by the student without quotation, citation or attribution of
the previous work. Acts of plagiarism could result in heavy penalties, including
disciplinary action. Further information about HKU’s plagiarism policy is at
http://www.hku.hk/plagiarism.
Provision of Feedback:
Department policy on provision of feedback for coursework assignments and written
examinations (http://www.ppaweb.hku.hk/pages/ppa-feedback-policy)
Required and recommended course texts:
There is no single required or recommended course text. Rather, lists of readings are given
for the course in general, and especially for individual tutorial topics (below). In addition,
a (non-exhaustive) list of useful websites is provided here. All will come up on a Google
search.
5
Recommended readings
Here is a selection of general books that focus on humanitarian intervention (and related
issues) from a variety of perspectives. All are available through HKU libraries. These
books do not necessarily use the core definition of ‘humanitarian intervention’ employed
in the course.
- Antony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty, and the Making of International Law
(CUP, 2005).
- Courtney Fung, China and Intervention at the UN Security Council:
Reconciling Status (OUP, 2019). [Full text online via HKU libraries]
- Adom Getachew, Worldmaking after Empire (Princeton University
Press, 2019).
- Aidan Hehir, Humanitarian Intervention: An Introduction (Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). [There is a second edition from 2013, but that is not
held by HKU Libraries. Some parts might be accessible through the Amazon or
Palgrave websites.]
- Aidan Hehir, The Responsibility to Protect: Rhetoric, Reality and the
Future of Humanitarian Intervention (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012).
- Watanabe Kōji (ed.), Humanitarian Intervention: The Evolving Asian
Debate (Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange, 2003).
- Makau Mutua, Human Rights Standards: Hegemony, Law, and Politics
(State University of New York Press, 2016). [Full text online via HKU
libraries]
- Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice: The Ethics of Poverty and
Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).
- Michael Newman, Humanitarian Intervention: Confronting the
Contradictions (London: Hurst, 2009).
- Onora O’Neill, Bounds of Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2000).
- Thomas Pogge, World Poverty and Human Rights, 2nd ed. (Cambridge:
Polity Press, 2008).
- Samantha Power, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of
Genocide (Basic Books, 2002).
- Henry Shue, Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign
Policy, 2nd ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996).
- Nicholas J. Wheeler, Saving strangers: Humanitarian intervention in
international society, (OUP, 2000). [Full text online via HKU libraries]
- Jennifer M. Welsh (ed.), Humanitarian Intervention and International
Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). [Full text online via HKU
libraries]
The core readings are available through Moodle, or are accessible online.
6
Websites:
Action Against Hunger
AusAID
Brookings Institution
BRAC
Caritas International
Catholic Relief Services
CSR Asia
Danish Refugee Council
ECHO (EU)
Global Citizen
Global Humanitarian Assistance
Human Rights Watch
InterAction
International Crisis Group
International Rescue Committee
Médecins Sans Frontières
OECD DCD-DAC
Open Society Foundations
Physicians for Human Rights
ReliefWeb
United Nations
UNESCO
UNHCR
UN Watch
USAID
World Bank
Amnesty International
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
International Peace Institute
CARE International
Carter Center
Caux Round Table
Council on Foreign Relations
CriticalInvestigationsintoHumanitarianismAfrica
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Global Fund
Global Witness
Humanitarian Intervention Centre
International Committee of the Red Cross
IMF
Lutheran World Relief
Norwegian Refugee Council
OCHA
Oxfam
Relief International
Save the Children
UNDP
UN Global Compact
UNICEF
UN World Food Programme
WHO
World Vision
Weekly topics and readings
PART I: Humanitarian intervention - setting the scene
Topic 1: Introduction: Dilemmas of humanitarian intervention
The lecture introduces the concept of humanitarian intervention, and presents some of the
major dilemmas generated by it and maps out the broad ground covered by the course.
The only reading for this week’s class is the class syllabus. Tutorials will start after
Lecture 3 (Week 4).
Topic 2: Humanitarian intervention in a world of states: Sovereignty and human
rights
This lecture looks at the structure of the post-1945 world - that is, its division into discrete,
sovereign nation states, linked by ‘universal’ values and norms, including human rights.
7
We consider how this structure both enables and impedes certain kinds of humanitarian
intervention.
Questions to consider:
 What is sovereignty?
 What different types of sovereignty does Krasner describe? Why does he call
sovereignty ‘organized hypocrisy’?
 What are human rights?
 Do you think that human rights are based on universal values or on culturallyspecific values?
 Is humanitarian intervention possible in a world of sovereign states?
Core readings:
- Nhina Le (2016) ‘Are Human Rights Universal or Culturally Relative?’, Peace
Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 203-211.
- Stephen D. Krasner (2010) ‘The Durability of Organized Hypocrisy’ in Hent
Kalmo and Quentin Skinner (eds.), Sovereignty in Fragments, CUP.
For a critical take on human rights as a neo-colonial enterprise, see:
- Makau Mutua, ‘Savages Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights’,
Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 201-245.
Additional readings:
- Eva Brems (1997) ‘Enemies or Allies? Feminism and Cultural Relativism as
Dissident Voices in Human Rights Discourse’, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 19,
No. 1, pp. 136-164.
- Roland Burke (2015) ‘Human Rights Day after the ‘Breakthrough’: Celebrating
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at the United Nations in 1978 and
1988’, Journal of Global History, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 147-170.
- Roland Burke (2010) Decolonization and the Evolution of Human Rights,
University of Pennsylvania Press.
- Jack Donnelly (1984) ‘Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights’,
Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 400-419.
- Jack Donnelly (2003) Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice 2nd
edition, Cornell University Press.
- Rosa Freedman (2014) ‘Universal Rights or Cultural Relativism?’, in Failing to
Protect: The UN and the Politicization of Human Rights, Hurst and Co., pp. 3746.
- Adom Getachew, Worldmaking after Empire (Princeton University Press, 2019),
chapters 2 and 3.
- Michael Haas (2008) International human rights: A Comprehensive
Introduction 2nd edition, Routledge. (See especially chapters 1-3.)
- Stefan-Ludwig Hoffmann, ‘Introduction: Genealogies of Human Rights’, in
Stefan- Ludwig Hoffmann (ed.) Human Rights in the Twentieth Century (CUP,
2011).
- Lynne Hunt (2008) Inventing Human Rights, W.W. Norton.
- Anthony J. Langlois (2001) The Politics of Justice and Human Rights: Southeast
Asia and Universalist Theory, CUP.
8
- Makau Mutua (2008) ‘Human Rights in Africa: The Limited Promise of
Liberalism’, African Studies Review, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 17-39.
- Mark Mazower (2004) ‘The Strange Triumph of Human Rights, 1933-1950’,
Historical Journal, Vol. 47, pp. 379-398.
- Johannes Morsink (1999) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins,
Drafting, and Intent, University of Pennsylvania Press.
- Anthony Pagden (2003) ‘Human Rights, Natural Rights and Europe’s Imperial
Legacy’, Political Theory, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 171-199.
- Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink (eds.) (1999) The Power
of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change, CUP.
- Fareed Zakaria (1994) ‘Culture Is Destiny: A Conversation with Lee Kuan
Yew’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 73, No. 2.
Topic 3: Dilemmas of humanitarian intervention in an unequal world: Justice vs
charity
This lecture considers the meaning of, and possibility for global justice in an unequal
world.
Questions to consider:
 What are some of the causes of global inequality?
 What can be done, and by whom, to reduce global inequality?
 Is addressing global inequality a matter of justice or of charity?
Core readings:
- Adom Getachew (2019) ‘The Welfare World of the New International
Economic Order’ in Adom Getachew, Worldmaking after Empire, Princeton
University Press.
- Paul Krugman (1997) ‘In Praise of Cheap Labor', Slate, March 1997. Available
at: https://slate.com/business/1997/03/in-praise-of-cheap-labor.html
- Watch this debate on taxation and global inequality at the 2019 World Economic
Forum at Davos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5LtFnmPruU
Additional readings:
- Thom Brooks (ed.), The Global Justice Reader (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008).
- Gillian Brock and Darrel Moellendorf (eds), Current Debates in Global Justice
(Norwell, MA: Springer, 2005).
- Simon Caney, Justice beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2005).
- David Miller, National Responsibility and Global Justice (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2007).
- Darrel Moellendorf, ‘Global Inequality and Injustice’, Journal of International
Development, 21 (2009), 1125-1136.
- Thomas Nagel, “The Problem of Global Justice”, Philosophy and Public Affairs
33:2 (2005), 113-47.
- Thomas Pogge, World Poverty and Human Rights, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Polity
Press, 2008).
9
- Richard W. Miller, Globalizing Justice: The Ethics of Poverty and Power
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).
- Thomas W. Pogge, Realizing Rawls (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,
1989).
- Onora O’Neill, Bounds of Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2000).
- Charles R. Beitz, Political Theory and International Relations (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1979).
- Henry Shue, Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy, 2nd
ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996).
PART II: Actors in the humanitarian intervention space
Topic 4: Intergovernmental organizations as humanitarian actors +
Introduction to humanitarian intervention case study
The lecture focuses mainly on the UN system, and the large number of agencies
created to oversee multilateral forms of humanitarian intervention. Then we turn to the case
study.
Questions to consider:
 How does the UN system work? Is it effective?
 Are UN agencies impartial? Whose interests do they serve?
 Are intergovernmental organizations a ‘force for good’ regarding
humanitarian intervention?
 What are the various strengths and weaknesses of intergovernmental
organizations in addressing humanitarian crises?
Core reading:
- Jochen Prantl, ‘Informal Groups of States and the UN Security Council’,
International Organization, 59 (2009) 559-592.
[NOTE: this reading provides a theoretical and empirical framework for helping
us to understand the setting of our case study.]
A very relevant ongoing case on the strengths and weaknesses of IOs as humanitarian
actors concerns the World Health Organization (WHO) and COVID-19. See the
following short articles:
- Francois Godement (2020) ‘Fighting the Coronavirus Pandemic: China's Influence at
the World Health Organization’, Institut Montaigne, 23 March 2020. Available at:
https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/blog/fighting-coronavirus-pandemic-chinasinfluence-world-health-organization .
- Antoine Flahault (2020) ‘The WHO Versus Covid-19, Institut Montaigne, 1 July 2020.
Available at: https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/blog/who-versus-covid-19
Additional readings:
- Paul F. Diehl, Peace Operations (Cambridge: Polity, 2008).
10
- Alex J. Bellamy and Paul D. Williams with Stuart Griffin,
Understanding Peacekeeping, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Polity, 2010).
- Lise Morjé Howard, UN Peacekeeping in Civil Wars (Cambridge
University Press, 2008).
- Joachim A. Koops et al., The Oxford Handbook of United Nations
Peacekeeping Operations (Oxford University Press, 2015).
- Todd Sandler, “International Peacekeeping Operations: Burden Sharing
and Effectiveness”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution 61:9 (2017) 1875-1897.
- Sarah B. K. von Billerbeck, Whose Peace?: Local Ownership and United
Nations Peacekeeping (Oxford University Press, 2016).
Topic 5: INGOs, humanitarianism and humanitarian intervention
The lecture looks at the now very substantial world of INGOs, and examines their role in
humanitarian intervention. It explores contemporary debates about the “aid business”.
Questions to consider:
 What kind of roles do INGOs play in humanitarian crises?
 Who or what regulates INGOs? Are aid agencies accountable for their actions
and to whom?
 In general, do INGOs do more harm than good as humanitarian actors? How
can they do better?
 How do INGOs interact with other actors in humanitarian spaces (e.g.
governments, local people)? How ought they handle these interactions?
Core readings:
- Liesbet Heyse (2003) ‘Beyond the Age of Humanitarianism: Past Trends and
Future
Challenges’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 11, No. 4,
pp. 178-183.
An interesting case and critique of INGO work is provided by the ‘Kony 2012’
phenomenon:
- Watch the ‘Kony 2012’ video (30 minutes) at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc
.
NOTE: Parts of the video are graphic and the issues it covers are quite upsetting. If you
don’t want to watch the video, you may wish to read the ‘Kony 2012’ Wikipedia page for
context, as well as the below two articles.
- Teju Cole (2012) ‘The White Saviour Industrial Complex’, The Atlantic, 21
March 2012. Available at:
<https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/the-white-saviorindustrial-complex/254843/>
- Adam Taylor (2014) ‘Was #Kony2012 a failure?’, The Washington Post, 16
December 2014. Available at:
11
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/12/16/ waskony2012-a-failure/
Additional readings:
- Alex de Waal (1997) Famine Crimes: Politics and the Disaster Relief Industry
in Africa, Indiana University Press.
- William Easterly (2006) The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to
Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good, Penguin.
- Graham Hancock (1989) The Lords of Poverty: The Power, Prestige, and
Corruption of the International Aid Business, Atlantic Monthly Press.
- Liesbet Heyse (2013) ‘Tragic Choices in Humanitarian Aid: A Framework of
Organizational Determinants of NGO Decision Making’, Voluntas, Vol. 24, pp.
68–92.
- R. Glenn Hubbard and William Duggan (2009) The Aid Trap: Hard Truths
about Ending Poverty, Columbia University Press.
- Dambisa Moyo (2009) Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a
Better Way for Africa, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
- Linda Polman (2010) The Crisis Caravan: What’s Wrong with Humanitarian
Aid?, Metropolitan Books.
- David Rieff (2003) A Bed for the Night: Humanitarianism in Crisis, Simon &
Schuster.
- Elisa Sandri (2018) ‘“Volunteer Humanitarianism”: volunteers and humanitarian
aid in the Jungle refugee camp of Calais’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration
Studies, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 65-80.
- Fiona Terry (2002) Condemned to Repeat? The Paradox of Humanitarian
Action, Cornell University Press.
- Thomas G. Weiss (2007) Humanitarian Intervention, Polity Press, pp.141-52.
12 October: READING WEEK - no classes
Topic 6: State-led interventions during and after the Cold War
The lecture looks at leading world powers, both global and regional, and examines how
they handle issues of humanitarian intervention. Our focus is on the post-WWII world,
both during and after the Cold War.
Questions to consider:
 How do states respond to humanitarian crises in other states? How ought they
respond?
 Which factors affect whether or not a situation is framed by states as a
‘humanitarian crisis’?
 How have states’ attitudes to humanitarian intervention changed since the end
of the Cold War?
 Is humanitarian intervention legal? Is it morally right?
Core readings:
12
- Carrie Booth Walling (2015) ‘Human Rights Norms, State Sovereignty,
and Humanitarian Intervention’, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp.
383-413.
- Daniel Bessner (2019) ‘The Fog of Intervention’, The New Republic, 4
September 2019. Available at: https://newrepublic.com/article/154612/educationidealist- samantha-power-book-review
.
NOTE: Bessner’s article is a critical review of the memoirs of Samantha Power,
who was Obama’s ambassador to the UN. She is now in charge of USAid, the
country’s development aid organistion. For a more positive take on her prointerventionist position, see Thomas Friedman (2019) ‘What Samantha Power
Learned on the Job’, New York Times, 10 September 2019. Available at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/10/books/review/the- education-of-an-idealistsamantha-power.html
Additional readings:
- George J. Andreopoulos (2004) ‘Violations of Human Rights and
Humanitarian Law and Threats to International Peace and Security’, in Ramesh
Thakur and Peter Malcontent (eds.), From Sovereign Impunity to International
Accountability: The Search for Justice in a World of States, United Nations
University Press, pp. 80-100.
- Simon Chesterman (2002) ‘Legality Versus Legitimacy: Humanitarian
Intervention, the Security Council, and the Rule of Law’, Security Dialogue, Vol.
33, No. 3, pp. 293– 307.
- Simon Chesterman (2002) Just war or just peace? Humanitarian
intervention and international law, OUP.
- Cécile Fabre (2012) ‘Humanitarian intervention’, in Cécile Fabre,
Cosmopolitan War, OUP.
- George P. Fletcher and Jens David Ohlin (2013) ‘Humanitarian
Intervention’, in George P. Fletcher and Jens David Ohlin, Defending Humanity,
OUP.
- Ian Hurd (2011) ‘Is Humanitarian Intervention Legal? The Rule of Law
in an Incoherent World’, Ethics and International Affairs, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 293313.
- Brendan Simms and D.J.B. Trim (eds.) (2011) Humanitarian
intervention: A history, CUP.
- Nicholas J. Wheeler (2000) Saving strangers: Humanitarian
intervention in international society, OUP.
PART III: Evolving international norms - R2P and international criminal justice
Topic 7: Responsibility to Protect: Towards a new norm?
This lecture looks at the emergence and development of a new norm of
humanitarian intervention in the twenty-first century: The Responsibility to Protect
(R2P).
Questions to consider:
13



What is R2P? How did it emerge and why?
Has the R2P norm failed? Why or why not?
Why was R2P applied in Libya but not in Syria?
Core readings:
- Aidan Hehir (2015) ‘Introduction’, in Aidan Hehir and Robert Murray (eds.),
Libya, the responsibility to protect and the future of humanitarian intervention,
Palgrave Macmillan.
- Alex J. Bellamy (2013) ‘The Responsibility to Protect: Added value or hot air?’,
Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 333–357.
- Elizabeth O’Shea (2012) ‘Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in Libya: Ghosts of
the Past Haunting the Future’, International Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 1,
No. 1, pp. 173-190.
Additional readings:
- For articles on detailed aspects of R2P, see the journal Global
Responsibility to Protect (launched in 2009, and unfortunately not yet available
through HKU Libraries). For many UN documents and other articles, see Global
Policy Forum, Humanitarian Intervention?
http://www.globalpolicy.org/qhumanitarianq-intervention.html
- Alex J. Bellamy (2013) Responsibility to Protect, Wiley.
- Alex J. Bellamy, “Whither the Responsibility to Protect? Humanitarian
Intervention and the 2005 World Summit”, Ethics and International Affairs 20:2
(2006), 143-69.
- Frazer Egerton and Nicholas Wheeler (2009) ‘The Responsibility to
Protect: ‘Precious Commitment’ or a Promise Unfulfilled?’, Global Responsibility
to Protect, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.70-89.
- Jared Genser, Irwin Cotler, Desmond Tutu, and Vaclav Havel (2011) The
Responsibility to Protect, OUP.
- Luke Glanville (2013) ‘In Defense of the Responsibility to Protect’,
Journal of Religious Ethics, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.169-182.
- Ian Johnstone (2011) ‘Responsibility to protect’ in Ian Johnstone, The
Power of Deliberation, OUP.
- Brett R. O'Bannon (2015) Reassessing the Responsibility to Protect:
Conceptual and Operational Challenges, Taylor and Francis.
- Esther D. Reed (2013) ‘Responsibility to Protect and Militarized
Humanitarian Intervention’, Journal of Religious Ethics, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.183208.
- Ramesh Thakur (2015) Theorising the Responsibility to Protect, CUP.
- Paul Williams and Alex J. Bellamy (2005) ‘The Responsibility to protect
and the Crisis in Darfur’, Security Dialogue, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 27-47.
- Jennifer M. Welsh, “‘Implementing the ‘Responsibility to Protect’:
Where Expectations Meet Reality”, Ethics and International Affairs 24:4 (2010),
415-30.
Topic 8: The rise of China, R2P and humanitarian intervention
14
This lecture looks at how the rise of China has affected, and will continue to affect, ideas
and practices of humanitarian intervention.
Questions to consider:
 How does the rise of China impact humanitarianism and humanitarian
intervention?
 What is China’s attitude towards interventionist norms, such as R2P?
 What roles does China play as a humanitarian actor?
Core readings:
- Courtney Fung (2020) ‘Providing for Global Security: Implications of
China’s Combat Troop Deployment to UN Peacekeeping’, Global Governance,
Vol. 25, pp. 509-534.
- Pak K. Lee, Gerald Chan and Lai-Ha Chan (2012) ‘China in Darfur:
Humanitarian Rule-maker or Rule-taker?’, Review of International Studies, Vol.
38, No. 2, pp. 423-44.
Additional readings:
- Sarah Teitt, “The Responsibility to Protect and China’s Peacekeeping
Policy”, International Peacekeeping 18:3 (2011), 298-312.
- Allen Carlson, “Helping to Keep the Peace (Albeit Reluctantly): China’s
Recent Stance on Sovereignty and Multilateral Intervention”, Pacific Affairs 77:1
(2004), 9-27.
- Michael C. Davis, “The Reluctant Intervenor: The UN Security Council,
China’s Worldview, and Humanitarian Intervention”, in Michael C. Davis,
Wolfgang Dietrich, Bettina Scholdan, and Dieter Sepp (eds), International
Intervention in the Post-Cold War World: Moral Responsibility and Power
Politics (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 2004), 241-53.
- Moisés Naím, “Rogue Aid”, Foreign Policy 159 (2007), 95-6.
- Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt and Andrew Small, “China’s New
Dictatorship Diplomacy”, Foreign Affairs 87:1 (2008), 38-56.
- G. John Ikenberry, “The Rise of China and the Future of the West”,
Foreign Affairs 87:1 (2008), 23-37.
- Jia Qingguo, “China”, in Watanabe Kōji (ed.), Humanitarian
Intervention: The Evolving Asian Debate (Tokyo: Japan Center for International
Exchange, 2003), 19-32. !18
- Jerome Alan Cohen, “China and Intervention: Theory and Practice”,
University of Pennsylvania Law Review 121 (1972-73), 471-505.
- Michael Barnett and Jack Snyder, “The Grand Strategies of
Humanitarianism”, in Michael Barnett and Thomas G. Weiss (eds),
Humanitarianism in Question: Politics, Power, Ethics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 2008), 143-71.
- Sarah Teitt, “Assessing Polemics, Principles and Practices: China and the
Responsibility to Protect”, Global Responsibility to Protect 1:2 (2009), 208-36.
- Ngaire Woods, “Whose Aid? Whose Influence? China, Emerging
Donors and the Silent Revolution in Development Assistance”, International
Affairs 84:6 (2008), 1205-21.
15
- James Reilly, “A Norm-taker or a Norm-maker? Chinese Aid in
Southeast Asia”, Journal of Contemporary China 21:73 (2012), 71-91.
- Ruben Gonzalez-Vicente, “China’s Engagement in South America and
Africa’s Extractive Sectors: New Perspectives for Resource Curse Theories”,
Pacific Review 24:1 (2011), 65-87.
- Gregory Chin, “Two-way Socialization: China, the World Bank, and
Hegemonic Weakening”, Brown Journal of World Affairs 19:1 (2012), 211-30.
- Peter Ferdinand and Jue Wang, “China and the IMF: From Mimicry
towards Pragmatic International Institutional Pluralism”, International Affairs
89:4 (2013), 895-910
- Courtney J. Fung, "China's Troop Contributions to U.N. Peacekeeping,"
Peace Brief (2016), http://www.usip.org/publications/2016/07/26/china-s-troopcontributions-un-peacekeeping
- Courtney J. Fung, "China and the Responsibility to Protect: From
Opposition to Advocacy," Peace Brief (2016),
http://www.usip.org/publications/2016/06/08/china- and-the-responsibilityprotect-opposition-advocacy
Topic 9: International criminal justice as a form of intervention
This lecture looks at how international criminal justice (i.e. war crimes trials) can be used
in conjunction with other intervention strategies and as an intervention strategy in their
own right.
Questions to consider:
 What is international criminal justice?
 What are the strengths and weaknesses of the ICC? Is it achieving international
criminal justice? Why or why not?
 Should heads of state and other senior government officials be immune from
prosecution for international crimes?
Core readings:
- Michael D. Biddiss (2004) ‘From the Nuremberg Charter to the Rome
Statute: A Historical Analysis of the Limits of International Criminal
Accountability’, in Ramesh Thakur and Peter Malcontent (eds.), From
Sovereign Impunity to International Accountability: The Search for Justice in
a World of States, United Nations University Press, pp. 42-60.
- Lucrecia García Iommi (2020) ‘Whose justice? The ICC ‘Africa problem’’,
International Relations, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 105-129.
Additional readings:
- Yusuf Aksar (2004) Implementing International Humanitarian Law: From the
Ad Hoc Tribunals to a Permanent International Criminal Court, Psychology
Press.
- Bruce Baker (2004) ‘Twilight of impunity for Africa’s presidential
criminals’, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 8, pp. 1487-1499.
16
- Lilian A. Barria and Steven D. Roper (2005) ‘How effective are
international criminal tribunals? An analysis of the ICTY and the ICTR’, The
International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 349-368.
- Bob De Graaff (2006) ‘The Difference between Legal Proof and
Historical Evidence. The Trial of Slobodan Milosevic and the Case of
Srebrenica’, European Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 499-512.
- Courtney Hillebrecht and Scott Straus (2017) ‘Who Pursues the
Perpetrators?: State Cooperation with the ICC’, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 39,
No. 1, pp. 162-188.
- Hyeran Jo and Beth A. Simmons (2016) ‘Can the International Criminal
Court Deter Atrocity?’, International Organization, DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0020818316000114, pp. 1-33.
- Michael R. Marrus (1997) ‘International Law: The Nuremberg Trial:
Fifty Years After’, The American Scholar, Vol. 66, No. 4, pp.563-570.
- Susanne D. Mueller (2014) ‘Kenya and the International Criminal Court
(ICC): politics, the election and the law’, Journal of Eastern African Studies, Vol.
8, No. 1, pp. 25-42.
- Makau Mutua (2000) ‘From Nuremberg to the Rwanda Tribunal: Justice
or Retribution?’, Buffalo Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 6, pp. 77-91.
- Steven R. Ratner and Jason S. Abrams (2001) Accountability for Human
Rights Atrocities in International Law: Beyond the Nuremberg Legacy, 2nd
edition, OUP.
- Kirsten Sellars (2010) ‘Imperfect Justice at Nuremberg and Tokyo’,
European Journal of International Law, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 1085–1102.
- Gerry Simpson (2007) Law, War and Crime: War Crimes Trials and the
Reinvention of International Law, Polity.
- Manisuli Ssenyonjo (2013) ‘The Rise of the African Union Opposition
to the International Criminal Court’s Investigations and Prosecutions of African
Leaders’, International Criminal Law Review, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 385-428.
- David Wippman (2004) ‘The International Criminal Court’, in Christian
Reus-Smit, Steve Smith and Thomas Biersteker (eds.) The Politics of
International Law, CUP.
PART IV: The humanitarian intervention case study
Topic 10: Case study - small group work, part 1
** No lecture. Class time will be used for groups to work on their intervention
strategy memos**
Topic 11: Case study - small group work, part 2
** No lecture. Class time will be used for groups to finalize their intervention
strategy memos**
Topic 12: Case study debrief + take home assessment revision
The format of the debrief + revision session will be notified closer to the date.
17
18