Twisting Arms and Flexing Muscles: Humanitarian Intervention and Peacebuilding in Perspective by Timothy M. Shaw

Author:Timothy M. Shaw [Shaw, Timothy M.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: International Relations, Political Science, General
ISBN: 9781351143820
Google: XLlHDwAAQBAJ
Goodreads: 38136553
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2018-01-18T00:00:00+00:00

Chapter 5

Twisting One Arm: The Effects of Biased Intervenors*

David Garment and Dane Rowlands1

There is a presumption that when coalitions of states attempt to reduce the level of conflict between other warring parties, they do so in a balanced and unbiased manner. This assumption of impartiality, however, is often inaccurate and misleading. The central characteristics of traditional peacekeeping missions - the use of force for self-defence only, the interposition of troops after a cease-fire and the maintenance of tactical and strategic impartiality - no longer define operational success. Part of the shift in intervention procedures is related to the increasing prevalence of intra-state conflicts, which have proven to be decidedly more complex and often more deadly for both belligerents and peacekeepers as well as ordinary citizens caught in the fray. In order to execute complicated functions such as guaranteeing the safe passage of humanitarian aid, assisting displaced persons, and stopping the killing of ordinary citizens, peacekeepers must now resort to forceful measures directed against a combatant.

Many observers have concluded that the key principles informing conventional, essentially peaceful, missions are problematic - if not anachronistic - in an era dominated by armed conflict within rather than between states.2 Recent studies on UN peacekeeping efforts, such as the Brahimi Report and the findings of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty,3 recommend the development of more meaningful criteria for distinguishing between the cases where intervention should be more forceful and when it should employ less dramatic means.4

Critical analyses have begun by examining the traditional principles upon which peacekeeping and more forceful measures are based in order to determine why the new breed of missions succeed or fail.5 The single most strongest explanation for the lacklustre efforts of recent missions is the problematic nature of forceful intervention in intra-state conflict. Some findings show that increases in the use of force may exacerbate tensions because of the incipient moral hazard problem.6 Others suggest that a lack of resolve and credibility within coalitions and security organizations create additional incentives for escalation and prolonged conflict.7

To guide the development of peacekeeping policies, additional research is required on a wide range of operational issues. In this chapter we examine the role of bias in two episodes: NATO’s intervention in Kosovo, and India’s intervention in Sri Lanka. These case studies are used to examine the preliminary hypotheses that have been developed in a formal model.8 There is, as yet, little consensus on whether impartiality is necessary for the successful management of today’s conflicts. A loss of impartiality and an increase in bias are often associated with more forceful and potentially risky and costly undertakings. Therefore, it is useful to know when forceful interventions are more likely to succeed by clearly specifying the conditions under which a biased intervention is likely to either inhibit violence or act as a catalyst to it.9

The substance of the chapter begins with a review of the literature on bias, followed by a heuristic description of the formal model of bias that appears in Carment and Rowlands (2000).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.