ABSTRACT
This chapter addresses three categories of objection to the use of coercive force for humanitarian reasons. They are practical feasibility, moral acceptability and political viability. One could provide all sorts of arguments as to why humanitarian intervention might, under some circumstances, be a moral requirement but people are generally not swayed by ethical arguments alone. The principle of non-intervention for anything other than the defence of sovereignty is central to what most people understand to be international law. The sovereignty of statehood is a cornerstone of international law and non-intervention expresses a correlative duty to respect sovereignty. The international community must stop seeing military intervention as some sort of quick fix for deep-seated ethnic, cultural and ideological problems that have been festering for centuries. There is not an iron clad guarantee that military intervention will be successful either militarily or from a humanitarian perspective.
