Abstract
There is no denying that human rights are nowadays part and parcel of international relations. The humanitarian crises in Iraq, Rwanda, Bosnia, or Kosovo have obviously shown that humanitarian intervention proves to be a controversial right. In this subject it is essential to analyze the current situation all over the world as far as respect of human rights is concerned. Needless to say that between western economic powers that are able to intervene in a foreign country and human rights norms-violating underprivileged countries there is a huge gap to bridge. This state of fact is due to the emergence of a new world order in which values like democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights were supposed to be top priorities. And the debate about the concept of humanitarian intervention is in a way a piece of evidence that international actors need clear definitions of both the notion of sovereignty and of a duty to set up humanitarian interventions. In fact, I am personally convinced that humanitarian intervention is based on a moral and ethical right. That is why I will try to show to what circumstances this obligation to protect human rights can apply. The first part of this essay will define the concept of sovereignty by highlighting its controversial nature. In a second part I will try to state the consequences that such a definition has on the political context of a humanitarian intervention. This will bring me thirdly to draw the line between real crisis, that is to say states of emergency, and situations that do not require humanitarian interventions.
