Neutrality, Solidaridy
- Submitted by: chrisss
- Views: 620
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 03/08/2010 11:02 AM
- Pages: 3
- Report this Essay
Before we go any further to answering our question, we need to briefly refer to the history of the Geneva Convention and to do that we must first refer to the International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
*New humanitarianism* is the *integration* of human rights and peace *building* into humanitarian orbit, the ending of the distinction between development and humanitarian *relief* and the rejection of the principle of neutrality that we mention above (Fox, 2001).
As far as the distinction between humanitarian goal and the human rights approach are concerned, the main goal of the humanitarian approach is to eliminate human suffering and problems in grave situations, whereas the human rights approach tends to emphasize the condition of such situations that relate to current or past violations of relevant legal obligations, such as to constitute abuse or denial of rights (Darcy, 2004)
Conventional humanitarianism is duty based rather than rights based. However, there is no inconsistency between rights and aims. In fact, they are both concerned with the prevention of purposeful violence, violation of human rights, assault, discrimination and it is ensured that the laws aiming at protecting people are enforced.
Development relief establishes a grave shift from older- more traditional humanitarian values to newer principles that give priority to saving lives. Additionally, according to the latest alterations, prevention of wars and enforcement of justice and fairness are the major means of protecting human lives.
The consequence of this modification is the need for adapting the older principles. However, a principle that should never be ignored is that of offering humanitarian aid whenever it is deemed necessary. For instance, in cases that people die because of inability to cover the necessities of life.
Furthermore, new humanitarianism is the concept of development relief. Fox, explain that relief and development during the Cold war was considered to be...
*New humanitarianism* is the *integration* of human rights and peace *building* into humanitarian orbit, the ending of the distinction between development and humanitarian *relief* and the rejection of the principle of neutrality that we mention above (Fox, 2001).
As far as the distinction between humanitarian goal and the human rights approach are concerned, the main goal of the humanitarian approach is to eliminate human suffering and problems in grave situations, whereas the human rights approach tends to emphasize the condition of such situations that relate to current or past violations of relevant legal obligations, such as to constitute abuse or denial of rights (Darcy, 2004)
Conventional humanitarianism is duty based rather than rights based. However, there is no inconsistency between rights and aims. In fact, they are both concerned with the prevention of purposeful violence, violation of human rights, assault, discrimination and it is ensured that the laws aiming at protecting people are enforced.
Development relief establishes a grave shift from older- more traditional humanitarian values to newer principles that give priority to saving lives. Additionally, according to the latest alterations, prevention of wars and enforcement of justice and fairness are the major means of protecting human lives.
The consequence of this modification is the need for adapting the older principles. However, a principle that should never be ignored is that of offering humanitarian aid whenever it is deemed necessary. For instance, in cases that people die because of inability to cover the necessities of life.
Furthermore, new humanitarianism is the concept of development relief. Fox, explain that relief and development during the Cold war was considered to be...