Humanitarian Intervention: Do covert economic and political motives override the overt goal of International Human Rights protection
Humanitarian intervention has always been a disputable issue and it often stays very close to the political and economic benefits of the states which intervene. Defining humanitarian intervention as a concept is a challenge as the degrees and approaches for intervention in crisis–facing states to curb human rights violations have varied throughout the years. Due to the absence of a rigid framework governing the actions of intervention, a trend of exploiting the present legal loopholes to suit political and economic benefits is seen by the intervening states. This Article tries to analyse the legality of humanitarian intervention according to the United Nations Charter and the principles of International Law, the Doctrine of Responsibility to Protect on member states of the UN and the clash of this responsibility with the sovereignty of the state in crisis, an attempt has been made through various examples where humanitarian intervention succeeded and where such measures have drastically failed taking into account the multiple dimensions of the issue.