Search

Begin New Search Topic Intervention

51. Subsidizing Rebels, Taxing Atrocities: Saving Lives in Civil Wars

Author:
Andrew Kydd
Publication Date:
08-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
The Syrian civil war has lasted over five years and has resulted in the deaths of over 400,000 civilians. The relatively restrained policy of the US toward Syria has sometimes been criticized as inadequate. Would a limited intervention motivated by humanitarian concerns have reduced the death toll at an acceptable cost? Limited intervention would affect the conflict primarily by strengthening the rebel side and raising the cost to the regime of attacking civilians. I show using a game theoretic model that fostering a balance of power between the government and the rebels would only lead the government to commit more atrocities and prolong the war. Raising the cost to the government of committing atrocities, however, could be beneficial under certain conditions. I then discuss four policy options considered during the Obama administration and assess their likely effects.
Topic:
Civil War, Syrian War, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Atrocities, Game Theory, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Middle East, Syria, and United States of America

52. Assessing the Impact of Development Cooperation in Northeast Afghanistan: Approaches and Methods

Author:
Jan Koehler, Christoph Zürcher, and Jan Böhnke
Publication Date:
02-2013
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 700
Abstract:
This report is a documentation of the methodological approach for an impact assessment of development intervention in conflict zones. We designed this approach for one specific region, Northeast Afghanistan, but we believe that it can easily be adapted to other regions and other contexts. This report is one result of an eight-year cooperative research project conducted by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), evaluation division, and Freie Universität Berlin’s Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 700. The overall objectives of this project are, first, to develop a method for assessing the impact of development cooperation in conflict zones, and second, to apply this method in Northeast Afghanistan. The experiences from the first round of the emerging longitudinal impact assessment were taken into consideration in the present report. The basic question that we seek to address is whether development cooperation positively affects the stabilization of a conflict zone through a positive impact on general attitudes toward foreign intervention, on the legitimacy of the Afghan state, and on perceived security threats.
Topic:
Security, Development, International Cooperation, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and South Asia

53. Forcing Democracy: Is Military Intervention for Regime Change Permissible?

Author:
Müge Kınacıoğlu
Publication Date:
01-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:
Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:
This article intends to go beyond the consequentialist utilitarian ap- proaches to forcible regime change by addressing the question of forcing democracy-building from an angle of appropriateness. It aims to analyze the admissibility of pro-democratic military interventions in international society by focusing on the UN and state practice. Is military intervention to remove a tyrannical regime permissible in international law? To what extend does international society condone an outside force to impose a democratic regime? Does the practice of the UN Security Council in promotion of democracy by force point to an emerging norm with regards to expansive concept of humanitarian intervention? To analyze such questions, this article first provides for a discussion of the concept of intervention. Second, it overviews the normative framework of the use of force in international relations. It continues with the analysis of unilateral and multilateral pro-democratic military interventions, and the UN Security Council practice of condemning, authorizing or consequently endorsing democratic regime change in the target states. In the conclusion part, the article assesses the legality and legitimacy issue regarding the pro-democratic intervention and regime change in light of main norms enshrined in the UN Charter and in general international law.
Topic:
United Nations, Regime Change, Democracy, Military Intervention, UN Security Council, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Global Focus

54. Rethinking “Nation-Building:” The Contradictions of the Neo-Wilsonian Approach to Democracy Promotion

Author:
Roberto Belloni
Publication Date:
01-2007
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
International intervention in weak states is the post–Cold War response to fragmentation and conflict. International operations have been deployed across much of the world, from Afghanistan to Bosnia, Cambodia, Kosovo, East Timor, Iraq, and Somalia, to cite just a few of the most prominent cases. These operations have taken place in different circumstances, with some of them justified in the name of the War on Terror, and others more broadly conducted in view of implementing recently achieved peace agreements. All of these operations face similar constraints and dilemmas. The context in which international intervention takes place is one of extreme political, economic, and social instability. Years of war destroy physical and economic infrastructure, provoke massive human displacement, and leave the population traumatized. Moreover, rarely does war end with a clear victory for one of the parties involved. Instead, conflicts frequently terminate with the signing of a peace agreement, which reflects a difficult and unstable compromise. Perhaps unsurprisingly, half of the countries emerging from conflict revert to violence within five years. Even when a return to violence is averted, these countries remain politically, economically, and socially volatile. Accordingly to one estimate, at present around seventy current or potential conflicts exist across the world.1 This situation calls for both a theoretically informed understanding of the goals, possibilities, and limits of international intervention in support of peace processes as well as country-specific knowledge to tailor such intervention so as to maximize its effectiveness. Unfortunately, even the basic vocabulary used to describe international involvement is contested and confusing, with analysts using terms such as “peace-building,” “nation-building,” and “state-building” to describe the same general phenomenon of international intervention in weak states. This paper begins with a brief attempt at conceptual clarification. Second, it explores the limits of the template adopted by international interveners. Wilsonianism, named after the American President who argued that democracy and self-determination are necessary conditions for domestic and international peace and stability, offers a basic model for contemporary international missions. While Wilsonianism was generally successful in the aftermath of World War I and World War II, this has not been the case for more recent attempts. Contemporary neo-Wilsonianism focuses on political and economic liberalization as means to build viable democracies. As increasingly highlighted by a new generation of democracy analysts, such a formula is often unsuitable for war-torn countries plagued by scarce domestic resources and continuing competition between groups wishing to control the state. At least in the short term, liberalization dangerously heightens competition among groups, thus increasing the possibility of a relapse into war. Third, this paper investigates the less often noted contradictions of neo-Wilsonianism. Not only do political and economic liberalization risk promoting further conflict, they are also at odds with other important goals of international intervention in weak states; in particular, the attempt to uphold individual and group rights. In addition, the potentially positive impact of international intervention is limited by the need to demonstrate concrete and visible results in a very short time frame. The paper concludes with a brief exploration of the alternatives to the prevailing practice of international intervention, with particular reference to the newly created United Nations Peacebuilding Commission.
Topic:
Fragile States, Intervention, Post-Cold War, and Nation-building
Political Geography:
Global Focus

55. Grants Vs . Investment Subsidies

Author:
Ashok S. Rai and Tomas Sjöström
Publication Date:
12-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
Abstract:
How should a government intervene to help the credit constrained poor? We study an economy where productivity and wealth are unobserved, and loans must be collateralized. We show that the e¢cient policy typically consists of o¤ering both a grant and an investment subsidy. Everybody will take the grant and only the relatively productive will take the subsidy. This policy reduces but does not eliminate investment distortions.
Topic:
Poverty, Investment, Collateral, Credit Constraints, Intervention, and Loan Subsidy
Political Geography:
Global Focus