Branding And Differentiating Genocide, War Crimes And Crimes Against Humanity
Crimes Against Humanity The Worst Of all Human Crimes
In this theoretical paper I will be extending on the notion of the perpetual seek for Human Rights preservation by analyzing the effects associated to the issues post the end of the Cold War and by questioning human rights violations through the acts of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. How hard it might seem, this paper does not intent to “box-in” any theory into any category, but to try to evaluate valid points of how the idea to excuse out theories to justify war for peace in the realms of HR.
Human Rights are staged as a fairly new concept that begun consequently to the atrocities of WWI
…show more content…
The United Nations stipulate genocide is defined in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948. Entitled to but to limit any act of harm from one group to another in order to liquidate its existence through different methods such as physical harm, ethical, psychological, manipulation of science and economies to destroy others. However, war crimes are thought crimes. More descriptively, the act to lead by a formal or recognize regiment representing a group or state involved in crimes against peace and crimes against humanity. Meaning just a little lesser that a genocide act, but just as bad. However, being the nature of intra-state laws the UN Security Council created in 2010 the international crime’s body system for calling the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (MICT), predecessor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Note that all the criminal tribunal execute its policies against crimes committed against the peace and human rights of groups by non recognize groups and for crimes during …show more content…
In which, although he was not a political philosopher, he was able to observe what has become the “ins-and-outs” of international relation policy making through the means of war on regards of what eventually will become the base for human rights post WWI and WWII. For Thucydides it was clear that politicians acted in an egoistic manner as they abused of their authoritarian state powers, (please let keep in mind that these people were the “educated-intellectuals” of society), by disregarding inter-relations with other states and carry-on with their self-interest, questioning on a moral or amoral principle of human nature's knowledge of right or wrong doing, as this was shadow by an inner vein superior strength. It is important to mention two may concepts that are apply, one is the idea of national security as this promotes the perpetual struggle of states inter-cooperation in the long term in their pursue of a strong economy and military power provoking a paranoia reaction where every state looks for its welfare. The second idea is the concept of maintaining a balance of power between international powers by making use of Realpolitik theory and developing inter-state policies on the basis of pragmatism other than ideological in an effort to promote peace, equality of rights, in avoidance