Vladimir Dmitriev

2016. No. 2. P. 160–170 [issue contents]
The issues related to the legality of international intervention in internal conflicts are often part of serious discussions both in international law and the theory of international relations. However, insufficient attention is drawn to the research of forms and types of specific measures which may be taken by the UN Security Council or with its sanction by regional organizations to respond to challenging humanitarian crises, mass and gross violations of human rights occurring within state territories. The paper attempts to classify coercive measures eligible in terms of the current common and conventional norms of modern international law. The measures are classified by the means of their implementation (military or non-military), their aim (targeting prevention, suppress and restoring) and which international body applies these measures. A focus is made on the coercive military measures, their forms and types depending the intensity and aims of coercive intervention. Besides, the paper attempts to examine their efficiency on the international expertise. This makes a conclusion that applying military coercive measures (military sanctions) should be primarily of auxiliary nature, which is determined by the impossibility to solve a crisis situation in the long run relying only on coercive instruments. Non-military coercive measures (political, diplomatic, economic) are assessed. Hence, with a significant political complexity of the situations which in practice cause mass gross violations of human rights (ethnic cleansings, mass deportations, genocide, military crimes etc.), the development of international law in the sphere should develop with a focus on regulation and implementation of a wider range of measures targeting some aspects of the crisis situations in question.
Rambler's Top100 rss