Why does my heart sink when I hear the current UN-mandated action in Libya described as “humanitarian intervention”? After all, over the last 20 years the term has acquired currency — not only among Western politicians but also academics — as a description of coercive, usually military, intervention ostensibly for humanitarian purposes.
While the lessons of the Libyan crisis for international relations are many, the most important lesson is the need to change the way that humanitarian interventions are conducted, as the violence experienced by civilians since the foreign intervention has increased substantially.
Although all wars may represent a failure of diplomacy, war is often the last resort of diplomacy. This paradox results from two competing ideas of what the supreme objective of diplomacy should be: peace at any cost, or peace by any means. This is the paradox of Libya. The international military intervention resulted from a mixture of an arguably successful strategy of coercive diplomacy at the UN, and a failure of third-party mediations.
The relations within and between the British and Irish islands are now routinely described as never having been better; a description regarded as a cliché. A cliché? Good. It was not so long ago that such a belief would have been dismissed as an attempt at humour.
In four books from 1997 to 2008 Zbigniew Brzezinski outlined a comprehensive American foreign posture around the geopolitical grail of Central Asia. Since 1945 the United States has been largely defined as the first non-Eurasian thalassocracy to prevail in the Great Game, yet for how long?
African societies are already suffering from poverty, inequality and weak social cohesion. Since its emergence, HIV/AIDS has added a multifaceted layer of new dimensions to the former. It impacts on the economy, education and the food security of the household, creating a paradigm in which poverty is a challenge in stopping the HIV/AIDS epidemic and HIV/AIDS is a challenge in stopping poverty.
Despite a considerable advantage in terms of manpower, weaponry, funding and logistics, the international military presence in Afghanistan has been unable to defeat the Taliban insurgency. In fact, it could perhaps be argued that the presence of foreign troops on Afghan soil has been the instrumental factor in allowing the Taliban to not only survive, but to expand and prosper.
Whilst Libya is no doubt important, it is but the tip of the iceberg. In the long run, timely and decisive action such as the international action in Libya will continue to be a recurrent but painful necessity. Yet, we will make most progress towards a world without mass atrocities by reducing the number of cases that become so acute and preventing crises from escalating to the point of imminent catastrophe.
The fact that the debate over whether Islam and human rights discourse are compatible is an example of how states in the Middle East continue to go through a transitional phase in regard to reforming laws and policies which infringe upon peoples rights. Post election violence in Iran and Iraq suggests that there is still a long way to go in terms of securing peace in security in the region.
Globalization has entrenched and encouraged liberal democracy where it resides but in isolation can take little credit for spreading democracy globally. Moreover, globalization has been found to have a more pivotal and detrimental role in undermining democracy by providing networks and resources for anti-democratic forces.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
