The humanitarian crisis in Kosovo

The humanitarian crisis in Kosovo Introduction The usage of force as a tool of humanitarian war has been a subject of contention in years since the First World War. Some schools of thought argue that it is not legally acceptable to use violence in trying to achieve particular humanitarian objectives. On the other hand, there are some scholars who believe that in some cases it is virtually impossible to solve humanitarian crises without the using forceful strategies.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The humanitarian crisis in Kosovo specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More This essay seeks to illustrate that the usage of war in addressing humanitarian issues can be unjustified in some grounds while at the same time justifiable in other bases. To this end, a review of the Kosovo invasion by NATO shall be conducted to illustrate the extents to which forceful means were used in addressing the humanitarian crisis in the region. The research for this essay was base d on secondary data collection. Data was extracted from various journals, articles and books. The criteria of selection for the literature was relevance to the research topic and the year of publication. Both public and private libraries as well as online libraries were visited to access the data. Some of the online databases that were accessed include Ebsco, Questia, Emerald and Science Direct among others. This research was partly evidence based and partly founded on professional research by professionals in the field. Various articles were studied in order to provide background information which will essentially give credibility to the final essay. Information from the books will serve to provide explanation as regards to the NATO invasion of Kosovo. This was very vital information that made the research appeal to both professionals and the general public. For the latter, it required that some of the information obtained from the books and other publications be broken down into s imple language and at the same time illustrations drawn from data on the Kosovo invasion by NATO. Proper citation of the sources of information as well as the applicable UN conventions was also given proper concentration in the final presentation. Can use of Force be justified as a Humanitarian War? A humanitarian war is generally defined as the trans-boundary use of military force for the main purpose of protecting citizens undergoing abuse from their government, either directly, or by allowing and aiding extreme mistreatment (Heinze 8).Advertising Looking for essay on government? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The invasion of Kosovo by NATO military forces in 1999 is widely perceived by many as the almost perfect example of a humanitarian war given that it is the first war to have been declared on humanitarian grounds (Bacevich and Cohen 79). It is therefore the best war to analyze and investigate to find out if t he use of force can be justified as a humanitarian war. In March 1999, the forces of NATO under the command of General Wesley Clark of the US army started a bombing campaign against Serbia particularly targeting the region’s military forces with the aim of rescuing innocent civilians from a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing (Badsey and Latawski 135). As much as the war was staged based on genuine humanitarian concerns, it is widely acknowledged that, as a legal matter, NATO indeed violated chapter seven of the UN Charter by using force without authorization from the UN Security Council (Segell 210). Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force on humanitarian grounds although there are exceptions included in the Charter which allow for the employment of force. As noted by Malone (30), chapter seven of the Charter allows for force by any member of the UN in situations that threaten international security and peace. Article 51 also allows for the use of force if it is for the purpose of self-defense. NATO’s use of force did not satisfy any of the above conditions. This therefore implies that when the war is examined from a legal perspective, the use of force in the invasion was as a matter of principle, in breach of international law and therefore was unjustified (Wilson 49). The invasion was even criticized by China and Russia, though they lost the vote to stop the invasion (Rushefsky 142), and after the invasion, NATO was accused of falsifying genocide charges so it could find the excuse to engage in the war. Be that as it may, by examining the invasion from a moral perspective, the illegality of the war can be challenged. To determine whether the use of force was justified morally, one has to examine whether or not a humanitarian emergency existed before the intervention by NATO forces, and whether a humanitarian crisis would have taken place, perhaps over a number of years had the situation been left to continue without intervent ion. A close examination of the situation in Kosovo results in an affirmative answer for both considerations. This is so because tensions between the communities in Kosovo and Serbia were present for a lengthy time period in the 20th century and at times, these tensions culminated into wars (Totten and Parsons 441). Just before the invasion, the administration of President Milosevic was accused of carrying out cruel acts against innocent citizens (Ham and Medvedev 17).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The humanitarian crisis in Kosovo specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More There were reports of mass killings and numerous refugees seeking solace from the oppression they were being subjected to by the Serbians and this clearly indicated a humanitarian emergency. At the rate at which the seriousness of the situation was escalating, had NATO had not intervened, there is high chance that many more in innocent civilians would ha ve ended up being refugees and at work been killed by the Serbs. This therefore leads to the conclusion that the invasion of Kosovo through the use of military force by NATO, though unjustified under international laws, was justified on moral grounds. Bacevich, Andrew and Cohen, Eliot. War over Kosovo: Politics and strategy in a global age. New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2001. Badsey, Stephen and Latawski, Paul. Britain, NATO, and the lessons of the Balkan conflicts, 1991-1999. London, Taylor Francis, 2004. Ham, Peter and Medvedev, Sergei. Mapping European security after Kosovo. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002. Heinze, Eric. Waging humanitarian war: the ethics, law and politics of humanitarian intervention. New York, NY: SUNY Press, 2009. Malone, Linda. International Law. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers, 2008.Advertising Looking for essay on government? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Rushesfsky, Mark. Public policy in the United States: at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2002. Segell, Glen. Disarming Iraq. London: Glen Segell Publishers, 2004. Totten, Samuel and Parsons, William. Century of genocide: critical essays and eyewitness accounts. London: Taylor Francis, 2008. Wilson, Stephanie. Effectiveness, Legitimacy, and the Use of Force in Modern Wars: The Relentless Battle for Hearts and Minds in NATOs War Over Kosovo. Berlin: VS Verlag, 2009.

25 Words and Their Prepositional Pals

25 Words and Their Prepositional Pals 25 Words and Their Prepositional Pals 25 Words and Their Prepositional Pals By Mark Nichol You probably know a preposition a word that shows a relationship between two words or phrases by demonstrating place, time, or another quality when you see it, but that’s grammar. What about usage? Which prepositions go with a given verb or adjective, and when? Some choices are no-brainers, but others can present a challenge. Here’s a guide to various words that require writers to choose from more than one preposition depending on meaning and sentence construction: 1. Abide â€Å"with us for a while,† â€Å"by the rules† (or â€Å"I can’t abide him†). 2. Answer â€Å"to him for what you’ve done,† â€Å"for what you’ve done.† 3. Caution â€Å"about unsafe conditions,† â€Å"against the rash proposal.† 4. Compare â€Å"with other products that make the same claims,† â€Å"apples to oranges.† 5. Confide â€Å"in her about my problems,† â€Å"to him what I really think.† 6. Conversant â€Å"about climate change,† â€Å"in several languages,† â€Å"with aspects of technology.† 7. Differ â€Å"from other species in their diet,† â€Å"with them about the cause of the company’s failure,† or â€Å"about public policy,† â€Å"on public policy,† or â€Å"over public policy.† 8. Different â€Å"from what he was used to,† â€Å"than he was used to.† From is the preferred usage, but than substitutes for â€Å"from what.† (â€Å"Different to† is a Britishism.) 9. Dissent â€Å"against the status quo,† â€Å"from the majority opinion.† (To or with are not considered standard usage.) 10. Dissimilar â€Å"to her previous sculpture.† (From is considered incorrect.) 11. Enamored â€Å"of every woman he meets.† (With is considered incorrect.) 12. Equivalent â€Å"in amounts,† â€Å"to the earlier result.† (With is not considered standard usage.) 13. Excerpt â€Å"from their book was reprinted without their permission.† (Of is considered incorrect.) 14. Forbid â€Å"him from attending,† â€Å"him to attend.† (To is considered the more correct of the two choices.) 15. Identical â€Å"to the one she saw yesterday,† â€Å"with the one she saw yesterday.† (Language purists consider with more correct, but use of to is significantly more common.) 16. Independent â€Å"of the group, he protested the plan.† (From, as in â€Å"Independent from her family,† is considered incorrect.) 17. Instilled â€Å"instilled a few drops of the solution into the wound,† â€Å"in him a drive to succeed.† (With, as in â€Å"Instilled with a drive to succeed,† is considered incorrect.) 18. Oblivious â€Å"of the warning signs,† â€Å"to the noise†; the choices are often interchangeable. (About is often used in association with oblivious, but it’s not considered standard usage.) 19. Vexed â€Å"about her behavior,† â€Å"at her behavior.† The correct preposition to use with the following words depends on whether the object is a person or a thing: 20. Comment â€Å"about her† or â€Å"to you about what happened,† but â€Å"on the issue.† 21. Impatient â€Å"with him,† but â€Å"about the delay,† â€Å"at the delay,† or â€Å"with the delay.† 22. Inquired â€Å"of him where he was going† and â€Å"after her whereabouts,† but â€Å"into their progress† or â€Å"about the vacant apartment.† 23. Mastery â€Å"over all other competitors,† but â€Å"of the skill.† 24. Reconcile â€Å"with her boyfriend,† but â€Å"to the loss of her boyfriend.† 25. Succeed â€Å"as a businessperson,† but â€Å"to the position.† Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Expressions category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Fly, Flew, (has) FlownFlied?36 Poetry TermsThe 7 Types of Possessive Case