Understanding global security - Peter Hough

SOCIAL IDENTITY AS A THREAT TO SECURITY
Table 5.4 (continued)
Intervention Interveners Humanitarian spur
Somalia 1992–93 UN Restore order amid Civil War
Haiti 1994–97 UN Restore democracy and order
following military coup
Sierra Leone 1997 ECOWAS Restore order amid Civil War
Kosovo (Yugoslavia) 1999 NATO Protect Kosovar Albanians from
Serb massacres
East Timor (Indonesia) 1999
INTERFET a
(Australia, UK, Thailand,
Philippines and others)
Maintain order in transition to
independence
Note: a International Force East Timor. Also involved were Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, Fiji, France, Germany,
Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Singapore and
the United States.
and the convention on non-interference in another state’s affairs but Chapter 7
suggests that extreme humanitarian abuses can constitute a ‘threat to peace’,
legitimizing intervention.
The main arguments against humanitarian intervention can be summarized as
follows.
Abuse of the concept
One man’s humanitarian intervention is always another man’s imperialist or balance
of power-inspired venture. All the interventions listed in Table 5.4 were opposed by
some states, unconvinced by moral assuasions of the intervener. In all cases other
motivations for intervention can easily be found. The Tanzanian and Vietnamese
interventions of the late 1970s overthrew two of the vilest governments in history
but were almost universally condemned in the democratic world, assuming the
missions were driven by power (in the former) and both power and ideology (in the
latter). It was notable that NATO’s 1999 action in Yugoslavia was ‘sold’ to the general
public of the intervening countries more on the grounds of maintaining European
order than as averting humanitarian catastrophe. Some measure of self-interest,
alongside compassion for others, appeared to be necessary to justify going to war.
Inconsistency in application of the concept
The various European interventions in the Ottoman Empire which set the precedent
for applying Grotian morality in international affairs also helped to undermine the
concept of humanitarian intervention and increase cynicism about it as a workable
119