Publisher's Synopsis
Legal positivists dominate discussions concerning legitimacy in military operations. From their perspective, the only validform of legitimacy is an expression of will from sovereign rulers through international organizations. Thus, resolutions fromthe UN and regional organizations are important prerequisites for military operations. Unfortunately, such a strict focus onprocedural expressions of sovereign will leads to irreconcilable paradoxes such as the procedural norms of sovereignty andprotection of basic human rights. If states possess a sovereign right of non-interference from external intervention, how thendoes the international community intervene to protect populations from mass atrocities? Many times the contradiction is notadequately addressed and peacekeepers are deployed to figure it out as they conduct operations. The result is confusedoperational approaches that lead to decreased efficacy in responsibility to protect operations.
