Sverige och Humanitära Interventioner - en kritisk granskning av den svenska regeringens ställningstagande till humanitära interventioner
Political and administrative sciences
Law and Political Science
Full recordShow full item record
AbstractThe increasing importance of human rights within the international community over the past fifteen years has raised the issue of humanitarian intervention. This concept is a complex one, and in the debate surrounding this issue can be heard arguments from and within legal, political and ethical standpoints. There is not yet a unified definition or agreement as to the nature of humanitarian intervention but it is clear that it is an important issue internationally and it is therefore interesting to see how this has affected the debate within individual countries. This study will thus examine the international development surrounding humanitarian intervention in relation to the official position taken by the Swedish government. The developments and discussion surrounding humanitarian intervention internationally and two central difficulties within this concept, legality vs. legitimacy and human rights vs. state sovereignty will be put in relation to the Swedish governments? argumentation and discussion on four chosen interventions. These are the interventions in Iraq 1991, Kosovo 1999, Afghanistan 2001 and finally the intervention in Iraq 2003. The aim is to critically assess the argument and debate surrounding the Swedish government's standpoint in relation to these interventions in order to determine what that position is and if there is a tendency of change within their stance. These standpoints will be analysed according to a model divided into pluralists and solidarists. In this study we have found that the Swedish government's official standpoint in relation to humanitarian interventions has changed. In short, the Swedish governmental position can be said to have changed from demanding all interventions to have a mandate from the United Nations Security Council, to condoning intervention in times of extreme humanitarian need. Passivity can not be accepted mandate or no mandate.