GO131:International Relations

Professor Walter HatchColby College

Interventions Old and New

The Westphalian System

But what if an otherwise sovereign state has “failed?”

Or if genocide results?

Should “we” intervene?

How to Intervene

Suasion Heavy Coercion

Voice of America Czechoslovakia

Why Intervene?

“The Old Interventionism”Security reasons

“The New Interventionism”Humanitarian reasons

International Lawand

Military InterventionStates should respect sovereignty of other states

"All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security … are not endangered.” (Article 2.3 of the UN Charter) “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state …” (Article 2.4)

States should work together to repel aggression. Even here, though, UN’s authority in “collective security” is circumscribed.

“Nothing in the charter shall authorize the UN to intervene in matters within the domestic jurisdiction” of states. (Article 2.7)

A Loophole

“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations …” (Article 51)

May justify “Old Interventions”

Review: Cold War

U.S. interventionsPreserving its “sphere of influence”

Containing Communism

Soviet interventionsPreserving its “sphere of influence”

Promoting Communism

Review:Pre-emption as Gray Area

Israel and the Osirak reactor (1981)

U.S. and the Iraq war (2003)

New (Humanitarian) Intervention

Germany into Czechoslovakia (1939)Rescuing Germans in the Sudetenland?

India into East Pakistan (1971)Defending Bengalis fighting for independence?

Vietnam into Cambodia (1978)Closing the Khmer Rouge “killing fields?”

Tanzania into Uganda (1979)Protecting citizens against Idi Amin?

International Law Redux

1948 Convention on Genocide“crime against humanity”

but …. how to stop it?

Intervention only permitted in event of a “threat to international peace and security” (UN Charter, Article 39)

Expanding the definition of “threat”

Sovereignty or Human Rights?

RealistsIntervention justified only to maintain order (balance of power)

CosmopolitansIntervention justified to ensure justice (human rights)

Somalia (1992-3)

Background

Civil strife since 1991, when Siad Barre regime ousted

Rival warlords contested for power in the south• Mohamed Farah Aidid vs. Ali Mahdi

War led to famine, humanitarian crisis

Famine in Somalia

Humanitarian intervention

UN spent $675 million

GHW Bush: 25,000 US troops

Clinton: Taking Mogadishu (October 1993)18 U.S. Rangers killed

Blackhawk Down

Haiti (1994)

Background

Aristide elected presidentPopulist priest

Ousted in military coup

Violence between army and pro-Aristide Aristide supporters

Refugees flee Haiti

Floating to U.S.

Humanitarian Intervention

Clinton deploys troops

Aristide restored to power

Troops leave in 1999

Aristide wins new election in 2000

Back to Haiti (2004)

Bosnia (1992-5)

Background

New republics break away from former Yugoslavia (dominated by Serbs)

Slovenia

Croatia

And, in 1992, Bosnia-Herzegovina• 44% Muslim; 31% Serbian; 17% Croatian

War erupts after Bosnian Muslims and Croats vote for independent state

“ethnic cleansing” by Serbs

Humanitarian Quasi-Intervention

Srebrenica

Violence Ends the Violence

NATO

Croat-Muslim offensive

Dayton Peace Accord

Kosovo (1999)

“Ethnic Cleansing” Redux

Role of the Media

NATO Strikes Back

NATO airstrikes on Serb targets

NATO ground troops enter Kosovo

Serbian minority flees in face of reprisals

A New Exodus

The Iraq War

New or old intervention?