This book offers the first book-length explanation of the UN’s politics of selective humanitarian intervention. Over the past 20 years the United Nations has imposed economic sanctions, deployed peacekeeping operations, and even conducted or authorized military intervention in Somalia, Bosnia, or Libya. Yet no such measures were taken in other similar cases such as Colombia, Myanmar, Darfur—or more recently—Syria. What factors account for the UN’s selective response to humanitarian crises and what are the mechanism that drive—or block—UN intervention decisions? By combining fuzzy-set analysis of the UN’s response to more than 30 humanitarian crises with in depth-case study analysis of UN (in)action in Bosnia and Darfur, as well as in the most recent crises in Côte d’Ivoire, Libya and Syria, this volume seeks to answer these questions.

Explores the UN's track record of military action, from cold war 'brushfire' peacekeeping to the fractured globalisation of the contemporary worldMacQueen assesses armed humanitarian intervention on a region-by-region basis, from the Balkans to Africa, the Middle East to Southeast Asia. Using empirical evidence, he compiles a 'balance sheet' of the UN's successes and failures and asks hard questions about humanitarian intervention's short and long-term value.* Presents a concise analytical overview of the theoretical, moral and practical issues* Case study chapters on sub-Saharan Africa, the Balkans and East Timor* Confronts hard questions about the short and long-term value of these interventions

Over the centuries, societies have gradually developed constraints on the use of armed force in the conduct of foreign relations. The crowning achievement of these efforts occurred in the midtwentieth century with the general acceptance among the states of the world that the use of military force for territorial expansion was unacceptable. A central challenge for the twenty-first century rests in reconciling these constraints with the increasing desire to protect innocent persons from human rights deprivations that often take place during civil war or result from persecution by autocratic governments. Humanitarian Intervention is a detailed look at the historical development of constraints on the use of force and at incidents of humanitarian intervention prior to, during, and after the Cold War.

Humanitarian professionals are on the front lines of today's internal armed conflicts, working with politicians and diplomats in countries wracked by violence, in capitals of donor governments that underwrite humanitarian work, as well as within the United Nations Security Council and providing information to the media. This publication sets out a compendium of essays written by 14 senior humanitarian practitioners who led humanitarian operations in settings as diverse as the Balkans and Nepal, Somalia and East Timor, and across a time frame from the 1970s in Cambodia and 1980s in Lebanon to more recent engagement in Colombia and Iraq.

Proceedings of a conference sponsored by Procedural Aspects of International Law Institute and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, held in Charlottesville on March 11-12, 1972.

Military intervention in a conflict without a reasonable prospect of success is unjustifiable, especially when it is done in the name of humanity. Couched in the debate on the responsibility to protect civilians from violence and drawing on traditional 'just war' principles, the centralpremise of this book is that humanitarian military intervention can be justified as a policy option only if decision makers can be reasonably sure that intervention will do more good than harm. This book asks, 'Have past humanitarian military interventions been successful?' It defines success as saving lives and sets out a methodology for estimating the number of lives saved by a particular military intervention. Analysis of 17 military operations in six conflict areas that were thedefining cases of the 1990s-northern Iraq after the Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Rwanda, Kosovo and East Timor-shows that the majority were successful by this measure. In every conflict studied, however, some military interventions succeeded while others failed, raising the question, 'Why have some past interventions been more successful than others?' This book argues that the central factors determining whether a humanitarian intervention succeeds are theobjectives of the intervention and the military strategy employed by the intervening states. Four types of humanitarian military intervention are offered: helping to deliver emergency aid, protecting aid operations, saving the victims of violence and defeating the perpetrators of violence. Thefocus on strategy within these four types allows an exploration of the political and military dimensions of humanitarian intervention and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each of the four types.Humanitarian military intervention is controversial. Scepticism is always in order about the need to use military force because the consequences can be so dire. Yet it has become equally controversial not to intervene when a government subjects its citizens to massive violation of their basic humanrights. This book recognizes the limits of humanitarian intervention but does not shy away from suggesting how military force can save lives in extreme circumstances.