Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Abstract

The present recurrence of mass atrocity crimes, though shocking, is nothing new. With conflict raging in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar, Sudan, and elsewhere, why have actors or coalitions outside the authority of the United Nations not emerged to exercise a credible deterrent and halt the bloodshed? Much of the answer lies within the framework of international law. This article seeks to understand whether the law serves as constrainer or enabler of unauthorised humanitarian interventions. I argue that the integrity of international law is best preserved by maintaining the illegality of unauthorised, militarily-coercive interventions. Simultaneously I posit that states should take the coercive actions necessary to end large-scale killing and that their actions should be considered and authorised, ex post facto, by the Security Council based on contextual “exceptionality.”