It is even possible to speak of a distinctively Canadian school of rights philosophy that includes Klymicka, Charles Taylor, James Tully, Peter Russell, Stephane Dion, and Guy Laforest. These thinkers are making a theory out of the elemental experience of Canadian politics: the adjudication of rights claims between national minorities, aboriginal groups and individuals.That is a prestigious group for Mr. Dion to be included in. The implications of the compliment paid to Dion during the course of the past 3 years are interesting to reflect upon given the following events from Dion's Convention win to the election and the questioned support by Ignatieff and the premature ouster of Dion last December.
That's the first condition that must be met if interventions are justified: victims must be demanding our help. Other conditions follow: the abuses must be gross and systematic; they must be spilling over into other countries,causing refugee flows and instability in nearby states; and intervention must stand a genuine chance of stopping the abuses. Intervention has no justification as punishment; its only purpose is to protect. Another condition is that intervention must be a last resort....Those who intervene must also seek the consent of the international community, preferably the UN'S Security Council. We don't want a world in which human-rights principles end up justifying unilateral military interventions by single states....Finally, human-rights principles can never justify a permanent military occupation of another people's territory. If we intervene, we have to get out once the job is done, once victims have been returned to their homes, once the killing has stopped.