by Kelsey King

The norm of humanitarian intervention at present is multilateral, intervention in nations without geostrategic or economic importance; however, the changing concept of humanity, specifically from the 19th century through present day, has shaped the norms of intervention.[1] While the concept of humanitarian intervention has existed for well over a hundred years, humanitarian intervention, as practiced in contemporary society, is a construct of the post-Cold War civil society.

Starting with the Greek War for Independence and ending with the Bulgarian agitation, the norm of intervention in the 19th century defined intervention as necessary when Muslims killed Christians; however, Christian slaughter of Muslims constituted victory rather than a tragedy. [2] Intervention in the 19th century is interesting as the commonalities of intervention on behalf of Christians against the Ottoman Turks show a very clear definition of who was human by Western European standards. European interveners were willing to overlook atrocities committed by Christians against the Turks, however atrocities committed against Christians (either in response to attack or unprovoked) were cause to disregard Ottoman sovereignty and enact humanitarian interventions. [3] This is not to say that the interventions of the 19th century lacked geostrategic importance, however, the geostrategic importance of intervention was not the deciding factor in these humanitarian intervention.

This common norm of intervention on the side of Christianity faltered late in the 19th century as a norm of non-intervention began to emerge. During the majority of the 19th century, religious ties were the common factor in humanitarian intervention; however, with non-intervention in the case of Armenia- no Christian western European nations gave aid or intervened against the Ottoman Turks- the norm of intervention begins to change.[4]

Throughout the majority of the 20th century, humanitarian nonintervention remained the norm, especially during the Cold War. By definition, no humanitarian intervention took place during the Cold War; rather there were political interventions and unilateral actions. Multilateralism in humanitarian intervention is a lasting norm of intervention that grew out of the interventions of the 19th century and has continued today in the post-Soviet era.[5] While humanitarian crises motivated a number of the unilateral actions of the Cold War, the lack of multilateralism in terms of intervention prevented the classification of these conflicts humanitarian interventions.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the norms regarding sovereignty shifted once again as humanitarian intervention returned as a major concern in the international community. The concept of humanity shifted beyond the narrow definition that included only Europeans, Christians, or European-Christians, rather the definition of humanity now included people of all races and religions from all around the world. The expansion of the definition of humanity directly influenced the type of humanitarian interventions that emerged in the late 20th century. Scholars have attributed the shift in the definition of the "human" and "humanity" to the social consciousness movements of the 19th and 20th century. Specifically, the changing definition of humanity was born out of the anti-slavery and the decolonization movements of the 19th and the 20th centuries. The anti-slavery moment showed the emergence of the expansion of the definition of humanity. The expanded definition of humanity legitimized the concerns of people who were previously invisible to the West.