The concept of humanitarian intervention and US interventionism after 9/11

Increased humanitarian crises in various parts of the world Post-Cold War, strengthened the belief that the international community is responsible for the gross human rights violations imposed by a state on its citizens. The concept of the humanitarian intervention owes its place in the literature of international relations to these developments. Researching the historical and philosophical origins of this concept made it possible to relate it just war theory. Throughout history, there have been discussions about the reasons for the use of force, in which situations it could be justified and what its borders are. With the principle of sovereign equality of states, steps were taken to limit of use of force, use of force was clearly prohibited in Charter of United Nations. Because of the use of force, the concept of humanitarian intervention is covered by this prohibition and for an intervention to be compliance with laws, it must be authorized by the Security Council. The Bush Doctrine, which was put forward within the framework of the changing US perception of security and foreign policy after 9/11, clearly declares war on terrorism. In this context, it is important that the interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq are based on a number of humanitarian reasons and without the authorization of the Security Council. In this study, the concept of humanitarian intervention and its place in international law will be examined and US interventionism after 9/11 will be evaluated within the framework of the United Nations legal system and the concept of humanitarian intervention. Keywords: Humanitarian Intervention, Just War, Use of Force, United Nations, 9/11, Bush Doctrine, War on Terrorism, US Interventionism