While some suggestions have been made as to how the duty to undertake humanitarian intervention should be assigned to specific states, the question of how to assign the duty to carry the economic and material costs remains underexplored. In this paper, I argue that the most plausible answer to this question is found in a pluralist approach. First, we should look to the Contribution to Problem Principle, according to which the costs are shared based on the historical responsibility of states for the occurrence of atrocities. For the many cases where this principle does not apply or needs to be supplemented, I suggest a novel alternative in the Entitlement-adjusted Ability Principle, according to which costs should be distributed based on states' levels of resources that have been tainted by historical rights violations.
BaatzC (2013) Responsibility for the past? Some thoughts on compensating those vulnerable to climate change in developing countries. Ethics, Policy and Environment16(1): 94–110.
2.
BaerD (2011) The ultimate sacrifice and the ethics of humanitarian intervention. Review of International Studies37(1): 301–326.
3.
BagnoliC (2006) Humanitarian Intervention as a perfect duty: A Kantian argument. In: NardinTWilliamsMS (eds) Nomos XLVII: Humanitarian Intervention, New York: New York University Press, pp. 117–142.
4.
BarryCKirbyR (2017) Scepticism about beneficiary pays: A critique. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 34(3): 285–300.
BirC (1997) Interoperability and intervention operations. The RUSI Journal142(6): 22–26.
7.
BoveVRuggeriA (2016) Kinds of blue: Diversity in UN peacekeeping missions and civilian protection. British Journal of Political Science46(3): 681–700.
8.
BroomeJ (1990) Fairness. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society91: 87–101.
9.
BuchananA (1999) The internal legitimacy of humanitarian intervention. Journal of Political Philosophy7(1): 71–87.
10.
ButtD (2014) ‘A doctrine quite new and altogether untenable’: Defending the beneficiary pays principle. Journal of Applied Philosophy31(4): 336–348.
11.
BykvistK (2007) The benefits of coming into existence. Philosophical Studies135(3): 335–362.
12.
CammaertP (2008) A peacekeeping commander's perspective. The RUSI Journal153(3): 68–71.
13.
CaneyS (2005a) Cosmopolitan justice, responsibility, and global climate change. Leiden Journal of International Law18(4): 747–775.
14.
CaneyS (2005b) Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15.
CaneyS (2006) Environmental degradation, reparations, and the moral significance of history. Journal of Social Philosophy37(3): 464–482.
16.
CaneyS (2010) Climate change and the duties of the advantaged. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy13(1): 203–228.
17.
ChestermanS (2003) Hard cases make bad law: Law, ethics and politics in humanitarian intervention. In: LangA (ed.) Just Intervention, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 46–61.
18.
Duus-OtterströmG (2014) The problem of past emissions and intergenerational debts. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy17(4): 448–469.
19.
DworkinR (1981) What is equality? Part 1: Equality of welfare. Philosophy and Public Affairs10(3): 185–246.
20.
EvansGJ (2008) The Responsibility to Protect: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
21.
FabreC (2012) Cosmopolitan War, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
FroweH (2013) The Ethics of War and Peace: An Introduction, London: Routledge.
23.
GoodinRE (2013) Disgorging the fruits of historical wrongdoing. American Political Science Review107(3): 478–491.
24.
GrossML (2008) Is there a duty to die for humanity?: Humanitarian intervention, military service and political obligation. Public Affairs Quarterly22(3): 213–229.
25.
HjorthenFDDuus-OtterströmG (2016) Humanitarian intervention and historical responsibility. Journal of Global Ethics12(2): 187–203.
26.
HoltugN (2001) On the value of coming into existence. The Journal of Ethics5(4): 361–384.
27.
HonoréT (1999) Responsibility and Fault, Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
28.
HultmanLKathmanJShannonM (2013) United Nations peacekeeping and civilian protection in civil war. American Journal of Political Science57(4): 875–891.
29.
HusebyR (2015) Should the beneficiaries pay?. Politics, Philosophy and Economics14(2): 209–225.
30.
ICISS (2001) The responsibility to protect. Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
JonesBD (1995) Intervention without borders: Humanitarian intervention in Rwanda, 1990–94. Millennium: Journal of International Studies24(2): 225–249.
33.
JonesBD (2007) Rwanda. In: BerdalMEconomidesS (eds) United Nations Interventionism 1991–2004, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 139–167. .
34.
KrainM (2005) International intervention and the severity of genocides and politicides. International Studies Quarterly49(3): 363–388.
35.
LefkowitzD (2011) On a duty of humanitarian intervention. In: TripoldiRWolfendaleJ (eds) New Wars and New Soldiers: Military Ethics in the Contemporary World, Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 87–101.
36.
Lippert-RasmussenK (2017) Affirmative action, historical injustice, and the concept of beneficiaries. Journal of Political Philosophy25(1): 72–90.
37.
McMahanJ (2010) Humanitarian intervention, consent, and proportionality. In: DavisNAKeshenRMcMahanJ (eds) Ethics and Humanity: Themes from the Philosophy of Jonathan Glover, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 44–72.
38.
MillerD (2001) Distributing responsibilities. The Journal of Political Philosophy9(4): 453–471.
39.
MillerD (2007a) National Responsibility and Global Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
Miller D (2007b) The Responsibility to Protect Human Rights. Centre for the Study of Social Justice and Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford. Working Paper Series SJ006, 2007, pp.1–14.
41.
MillerD (2011) Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: Who should intervene? By James Pattison. Global Discourse: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Current Affairs and Applied Contemporary Thought2(1): 205–208.
42.
NozickR (1974) Anarchy, State, and Utopia, New York, NY: Basic Books.
43.
PageEA (2011) Climatic justice and the fair distribution of atmospheric burdens: A conjunctive account. The Monist94(3): 412–432.
44.
PageEA (2012) Give it up for climate change: A defence of the beneficiary pays principle. International Theory4(2): 300–330.
45.
ParfitD (1984) Reasons and Persons, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46.
ParrT (2016) The moral taintedness of benefiting from injustice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice19(4): 985–997.
47.
PasternakA (2014) Voluntary benefits from wrongdoing. Journal of Applied Philosophy31(4): 377–391.
48.
PattisonJ (2010) Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: Who Should Intervene?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
PattisonJ (2011) The rights and duties of humanitarian intervention: Who should intervene? A reply to two critics. Global Discourse: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Current Affairs and Applied Contemporary Thought2(1): 213–217.
50.
PattisonJ (2013) Is there a duty to intervene? Intervention and the responsibility to protect. Philosophy Compass8(6): 570–579.
51.
PattisonJ (2015a) Jus post bellum and the responsibility to rebuild. British Journal of Political Science45(3): 635–661.
52.
PattisonJ (2015b) Mapping the responsibilities to protect: A typology of international duties. Global Responsibility to Protect7(2): 190–210.
53.
ReganPM (1996) Conditions of successful third-party intervention in intrastate conflicts. The Journal of Conflict Resolution40(2): 336–359.
54.
ReitbergerM (2008) Poverty, negative duties and the global institutional order. Politics, Philosophy and Economics7(4): 379–402.
55.
SeyboltTB (2007) Humanitarian Military Intervention: The Conditions for Success and Failure, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
56.
SherG (2005) Transgenerational compensation. Philosophy and Public Affairs33(2): 181–200.
57.
TanK-C (2006) The duty to protect. In: NardinTWilliamsMS (eds) Nomos XLVII: Humanitarian Intervention, New York: New York University Press, pp. 84–116.
58.
TesónFR (2005) Humanitarian Intervention: An Inquiry into Law and Morality, Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.
59.
TesónFR (2011) Humanitarian intervention: Loose ends. Journal of Military Ethics10(3): 192–212.
60.
TesónFR (2014) The moral basis of armed humanitarian intervention revisited. In: ScheidDE (ed.) The Ethics of Armed Humanitarian Intervention, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 61–77.
