Betts Richard "The Delusion of Impartial Intervention" preaches the ideal "do no harm" belief but says that the cold war unanimously gave the UN and the US the power and responsibility to intervene in world conflicts and wars. Argues that in order to take control or to intervene abroad, the US and the UN more than often do more harm than good because of the fundamental ideology that you cant intervene in certain wars impartially and expect to end the war. In the examples of Bosnia Somalia and Haiti, US involvement only prolonged fighting and suffering in the end, however, had they taken the side of the predicted victor, fighting would have ended sooner o Leaves the moral question of when is moral rectitude more important the ending violence and carnal injustice. o Emphisyses that impartial involvment nearly never solves the problem, and ideally the UN could simply overthrow curropt governments the way they did in Cambodia however, for many reasons that is unreasonable They replaced it with an arguably unstable govt not having solved the root problem Too expensive for the UN to handle every case that way Too much responsibility away from the individual nation Sets a poor precident examples: o Bosnia Had the UN directly supported the Serbs (the stronger faction) the war would have ended immediately cutting down on killing and immediate suffering. Instead the UN/US partially took sides with the Muslims and Croats however only humanitarian-ly not militarily The economic sanctions on the country worked against the Serbs and the arms embargoes worked against the Mustlims, prolonging the war and suffering. o Somalia Us peacekeeping troops cost exhobirtant amount of money and arguably did not help end fighting and suffering. Instead prevented early invasion of French and british troops which may have ended the way, and prevented communication among the factions o Haiti The US took the side of Aristide clearly, which was unusual, However the sanctions placed on the people intended to root out the Janta only ended up hurting the common people and aiding the Janta in the long run.
-
-
-
Michael W Boyle and Nicolas Sambanis
"Making War and Building Peace" "peace building triangle" o does the UN have the resources to instill a lasting peace o what is the economic and social fundamentals of a country o does the international community have the resources to build a peace and deal with a post civil war country underlines that money incentives for creating and maintaining peace are integral THE 7 STEPS TO MAINTING AND ACHIEVING PEACE IN A NATION AT WAR: o 1. Peace must first establish a clear winner o 2. Regional security must compliment interntional security and neighbors must leave nation alone temporarily so that it can rebuild. o 3. Quick military wins regardless of politics o 4. Right to property ownership and providing/ allowing even the poor, assets, helping to create and maintain a market and an economy. o 5. Creating law and a constituion and legal understandings and potential for stability o 6. Democracy and participatory governments are more likely to foster peace in the long run o 7. Moral and psychological reconciliation comes last; AFTER law is established and economy is stable and war crimes punished only then can the moral of the people improve upon something significant
-
Evelyn Fortuna Peace Time "Peace Mechanisms: What Works and What Does Not" -Discusses notion of durable peace -withdrawl from territory does not garuntee peave, but failure to withdraw is almost positive to bring about more fighting -Demilitarized zones have proven create to a good buffer or manageable territory, however often create power vacuums and more power struggles. -Arms control can help police buffer zones providing additional protection but not an effective way of maintinging peace -Peacekeeping by international troops and aid can be effective, however, it is fragile and once it has been undermined by continued fighting, keeping troops in place is simply detrimental to the wellbeing of the people and the credibility of the outside peacekeeping aid or attempted help (commonly the UN). Kimberly Marten Zisk Enforcing Peace: Learning from the Past "Peace or Change?" - examines the use of military troops by liberal democratic states to keep peace and rebuild order in foreign societies with a focus on the opporations carried out by
-
-
-
the UN Security Council in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo an East Timor. Also the US Occupation of Afganistan and Iraq. Likens foreign occupancy in the mid 1990's to the colonialism of the 20 th century. Explains that the problem is that in countries such as Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan and Iraq, factions still do not recognize the legitimacy of foreign troop presence in their country. Bosnia Kosovo and Haiti post military coups the people badly needed protecting and saving from international forces who would have to intervene in a benevolent occupationally way with liberal democratic philosophies in mind However not using force and occupying anyway is reminiscent of imperialist assersion of power. Although motivations may be humanitarian there is almost always national interest involved in foreign involvement Liberal democracies often believe that it is their duty to intervene where fighting and bloodshed is taking place, however, their effectiveness is often very illusory Multilateralism must be used as a means to an end, not an end in itself.
Jack Snyder and Leslie Vinjamuri Trials and Errors "Principle and Pragmatism in Stratagies of International Justive" - Argues that Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International often do little good because they have little understanding of realist politics in war-situations. - Amnesties, however, they argue are often very effective and prove to be good peace keepers as seen in El Salvador and Mozambique. "Justice does not lead; it follows. We argue that a norm-goverened political order must be based on a political baragin among contending groups and on the creation of robust administrative institutions that can predictably enforce the law. Preventing astrocities and enhancing respect for the law will frequently depend on striking politically expedient bargains that create effective political coalitions to contain the power od portentioan perpetrators of abuses." argues for the constructivist philosophy of NGO's however disagrees with implimentation o example of Kosovo, Yugoslavia and Milosovic and how war trials and international threats while he was alive did nothing o advocate the constructivist view that the people must emotionally agree and blame one party or faction to overcome a trauma--the unity of blame and catharsis will unite the country and encourage stability. views human rights abuses as the biggest problem "empirical hypotheses underpinning pragmatism and the logic of consequences fare better" the international criminal justice regime should permit the use of amnesties when spoilers are stron and when the new regime can use an amnesty to decisively remove them from power.
-
-
Purely pragmatic approaches are inadequate if they do not address the long-term goal of institutionalizing the rule of law in conflic prone societies.