The Responsibility to Protect in a Changing World Order: Twenty Years since Its Inception

Ignatieff, Michael

doi:10.1017/s0892679421000228

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, the 1990s and 2000s saw a boom of IO-led interventions that has only slightly decreased in the 2010s, with little indication that these interventions will cease to be conducted. General public opinion as well still seems to favor the idea that third-party intervention to protect civilians is a moral obligation, despite occasional ebbs and flows in support and an everchanging international environment that has moved away from the original conditions undergirding the Responsibility to Protect norm, which has not developed as strongly as its founders may have hoped, but is by no means defunct (Finnemore 1996;Ignatieff 2021;Kreps and Maxey 2018;Western 2009). For humanitarian purposes especially, states and their publics prefer to intervene as one part of an international mission as it distributes costs while providing the opportunity to make a positive humanitarian impact (Recchia 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The efficacy of third-party interventions: international organization-led interventions into ongoing and post-conflict situations

Dicke¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The past 30 years have seen the international system undergo definite change in both the nature of conflict and the way in which it is responded to by international actors. Interstate wars have largely given way to civil conflicts, which have themselves arguably changed in character over the last few decades. International responses have turned towards third-party military interventions; although not a new expression of force, the rules upon which these interventions are based have changed, and so correspondingly have their form and targets. These military incursions by states, coalitions, and International Organizations (IOs) external to the conflict have taken on a new importance, an increasingly multilateral character, and a (nominally and truly) humanitarian bent. This increasing prevalence in IO-led interventions in particular has tapered off slightly since its peak in the 2000s, but the persistence of these missions around the world speaks volumes of their continued importance. Since the conditions prompting intervention have not been eradicated, and states and IOs still appear to be invested in intervening in these situations, understanding what a successful outcome looks like and what factors influence the effectiveness of these interventions is a task that holds not only theoretical but also practical value. This dissertation contributes to this strand of literature by explicitly theorizing about what effective means, introducing the explanatory variable level of formalization, and incorporating multiple IOs into a single analysis. Because the time horizons of an intervention into an ongoing conflict and a post-conflict situation are different, the measures of what makes an intervention "effective" and the factors influencing its effectiveness will also necessarily be different. Ongoing conflicts have shorter, more urgent time frames and shorter-term goals: reducing civilian casualties and achieving victory for whichever side is supported if the intervention in biased. Post-conflict situations have less urgent time frames and longer-term goals: rebuilding physical and political/social infrastructure. Fulfilling the mission's mandate applies to both ongoing and post-conflict missions. The level of formalization of an IO varies based on the unity and clarity of the mission's command and control structures, the severity of national caveats, and the number and integration of troop-contributing countries. Essentially, higher formalization shows a unity of effort that means the IO is able to effectively utilize the resources at its disposal to create a mission that is more than the sum of its parts. Greater levels of formalization increase the likelihood of the intervention achieving its goals, the ability to quickly and decisively determine where resources are best applied and move those resources where they are needed increases the mission's ability to reduce civilian casualties, help a chosen side achieve victory, fulfill its mandates, and rebuild the host state's infrastructure. To fully develop and test this theory, this dissertation uses a mixed-methods approach, first presenting a quantitative analysis that operationalizes the key concepts and explores through simple and multiple regression the relationship between a mission's level of formalization and to what extent it achieves its goals. This time-series cross-sectional analysis shows promise, but necessitates further research. To that end, the following chapters are case studies of interventions into Bosnia-Herzegovina in the early 1990s and Kosovo starting in the late 1990s respectively. Tracing each UN, NATO, and EU mission's level of formalization across its lifespan and how that relates to the mission's outcomes is one benefit of utilizing case study research, and in this instance, shows more clearly and in greater detail how higher levels of formalization increase a mission's ability to achieve its goals, while lower levels of formalization can make a mission less effective.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%