نوع المستند : مقالة علمية و بحثية
المؤلفون
1 طالب الدكتوراه، القسم الدولي، كلية القانون، جامعة قم، قم، إیران
2 استاذ مشارک، قانون الدولي، كلية قانون، جامعة قم، قم، ايران
المستخلص
الكلمات الرئيسية
عنوان المقالة [English]
المؤلفون [English]
Humanitarian intervention remains one of the most prominent controversial issues in contemporary international law due to the structural conflict between the principle of state sovereignty—the pillar of the international system—and the necessity of protecting human rights from gross violations. The core problematic of this research lies in providing an in-depth analysis of the pivotal role played by the UN Security Council in legislating and framing humanitarian intervention in light of the UN Charter, utilizing the Iraqi case as a comprehensive model given its complexity and prolonged timeframe spanning over a quarter of a century.The study aims to evaluate the Security Council's resolutions concerning Iraq across four pivotal phases: Resolution 688 (1991) regarding safe havens, the Oil-for-Food Programme (Resolution 986), Resolution 1483 (2003) during the occupation period, and Resolution 2249 (2015) aimed at confronting the ISIS terrorist organization. It also examines the reliance of these resolutions on Chapters VI and VII and the fulfillment of Article 39 conditions, analyzing their conflict with classical theories of national sovereignty and domestic jurisdiction.Adopting a descriptive-analytical and historical methodology, the research reviews precedents of humanitarian intervention in countries like Somalia and Rwanda, juxtaposing them with the Iraqi case. The study concludes that the Security Council effectively contributed to reinterpreting the Charter to transcend the absolute concept of sovereignty, practically paving the way for the crystallization of the "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) doctrine. However, practical implementation revealed clear politicization and a profound intersection between humanitarian considerations and the geopolitical interests of permanent member states, engendering double standards that undermined the moral legitimacy of certain interventions. Ultimately, the research concludes that the future of humanitarian intervention depends on the Security Council's strict adherence to Chapter VII boundaries and a precise, objective balance between protecting human rights and respecting state sovereignty, free from political selectivity and the exploitation of human suffering to advance strategic agendas.
الكلمات الرئيسية [English]
)