Mary Robinson Quotes

I think it's appropriate for the international community in situations like this to intervene in Kosovo. I am in favor of an intervention. On some level, you have to say that at least somebody is doing something.

When our vital interests are challenged, or the will and conscience of the international community is defied, we will act; with peaceful diplomacy whenever possible, with force when necessary.

If military action in Iraq is launched without a new U.N. resolution, Canada will not participate.

There are both things in international law: the principle of territorial integrity and right to self-determination.

The world is full of nations that are part of the community of nations that don't respect rights.

The international community unfortunately did take sides in Libya, and we would never allow the Security Council to authorise anything similar to what happened in Libya.

Unilateral preemption should not in any way be the model for how we conduct international relations.

It is one thing to be against unilateralism and against nonhumanitarian interventionism - but it is quite another thing to be against humanitarian interventionism.

I refer to calls for humanitarian intervention in the affairs of another state - a new idea, this - even when they are made under the pretext of defending human rights and freedoms.

All members will refrain in their international relations from the threat or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

We are pursuing what I trust is a correct course from the point of international law, and we are not intervening in the internal affairs of this country …

If the American people are to say yes to U. N. peace keeping, the United Nations must know when to say no.

International law seeks to avoid the use of force but does not preclude it.

Would it not be worthwhile to pause a moment before we commit ourselves to war at the pleasure of other nations in whose councils we shall have but one vote?

Americans must not be given the impression that they have a duty to go to war against every evil leader in the world and against every transgression of the international order.

International policy does not aim at exploiting local, specific conditions to widen zones of influence and create difficulties for another country. The goal of international policy is to insure universal fulfillment of the "Declaration of the Rights of Man" and to prevent a sharpening of international tensions and a strengthening of militarist and nationalist tendencies.

Is a military solution the only way to stop nations from doing bad things?

A multipolar world means more compromise [on Human Rights violations]… more back-scratching and less principled denunciation.

There may be circumstances in which damaging our relationship with countries over human rights is counterproductive and the benefits to human rights may be very small because of our limited capacity to enforce our stance. That was the dilemma the United States faced after Tiananmen Square.

Both China and Russia felt duped by the U.N. 'no-fly' zone resolution regarding Libya in 2011 that eventually led to the ouster of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. China and Russia had abstained from the Libyan resolution, and neither country plans to make what they regard as a similar mistake again.

When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action.

We always say we have wishful thinking that the Unites States would be unbiased, respect the international law, doesn't interfere in other countries around the world, and of course to stop supporting terrorists in Syria.

North Americans do not understand that you do not throw down human rights like bombs on the Iraqis.

On humanitarian intervention in general, I guess my view is not unlike the view that was attributed to Gandhi, accurately or not, when he was supposedly asked what he thought about western civilization. He is supposed to have said that he thought it would be a good idea. Similarly, humanitarian intervention would be a good idea, in principle.

I'm very pleased this military engagement together with a political road map that we developed, we were able to continue. We want to bring about a political solution there. We worked very closely together [with Barack Obama] on the issue of annexation of Crimea and Russia's attempt to actually conquer Ukraine and actually, they did so, conquer part of the territory. We tried to come to a peaceful settlement here on this.