Lecture 4: Foreign Military Interventions Flashcards
Which eras saw most US interventions?
1946-1989, followed by 1865-1917
Definition: foreign military intervention (FMI)
The use of military force to intervene in the domestic affairs of another state
3 dimensions of FMI
- Type of military force (air strikes, special operations, proxy forces, own ground troops)
- Extent of involvement in domestic affairs (support minority, peacekeeping, counterinsurgency, regime change)
- Presence of allies (unilateral vs. multilateral)
Why do states intervene militarily?
To improve national security (but what is security, what’s a security issue, whose security, how can it be achieved?)
3 types of potential goals of military intervention
- (Geo)political (resolve territorial disputes, foreign policy reversal, regime change, democratization, support ally)
- Strategic (show resolve, demonstrate capability)
- Humanitarian (protect civilians and human rights)
4 secondary background factors that decrease/increase the likelihood of foreign intervention
- System-level (power transition theory, power cycles)
- State’s international environment (proximity, territorial disputes, capabilities, alliances, IO membership, colonial history)
- Domestic politics (regime type, checks on leaders’ power, characteristics of target state)
- Leadership (how leaders perceive threats, the location of the source of insecurity)
3 kinds of national interest
- Vital interests: of broad, overriding importance to survival, security, and territorial integrity
- Important interests: survival not a state, but affect national well-being and character of the world we live in
- Humanitarian interests: promoting national values around the world
Countries are more willing to spend money on which kind of national interest
Vital
According to realist approaches, national interest is determined by these 4
- Anarchic structure of the international system
- Uncertainty and security dilemma
- Security competition between states
- States seeking to maximize power/ensure survival
= interests shaped by distribution of material capabilities
According to constructivist approaches, national interests is determined by these 2
- Social constructions and the way states act toward each other (interests are not fixed)
- The possibility of transforming relationships from security dilemma to security community
According to liberal approaches, national interests are
Not something that really exists; states are political institutions which represent some political actors; thus states define their interests on the preferences of individuals and interest groups
Preventine vs. preemptive war
Preventive: waging way/intervention to make sure there is no future threat; make sure threats do not emerge later
Preemptive: not justifiable to engage in military intervention until you know for sure you will be attacked
6 rationales of the Iraq War
- Weapons of mass destruction
- Terrorism prevention
- Human rights
- Democratization
- Deterrence
- Oil
4 motives of the Iraq War
- 9/11
- Regional balance of power
- Because we can
- Because we should (neoconservative)
Operation Iraqi Freedom - 2 points
- Motivated by US desire to show US military could be effective with smaller numbers of troops and reliance on technology
- Strategy of leadership decapitation
Fall of Baghdad
April 9, 2003: regime falls, Bush declares victory
4 points about the following occupation of Iraq
- Coalition Provisional Authority as government
- Transforming political landscape through De-Ba’thification (removing former party officials from government), new constitution and elections
- Reconstruction
- Insurgency and sectarian war
How does bargaining theory explain the Iraq War?
Saying it was a failure and inefficient way to settle dispute and occurs because:
- Commitments were not credible
- States possess private information about their costs of fighting and have incentives to misrepresent this
- States are uncertain over their probability of victory
4 lessions GS learned from Iraq
- Costs of war should always include post-war costs
- Real-world interventions involve more than 2 actors contrary to theory (Hussein did not clearly indicate they did not have WMD because of concerns for other regional rival states and threats within Iraq)
- Domestic politics are important in determining national interests
- Decision-making biases affect governments’ behavior (leading to incorrectly assessing own cost of fighting and resolve of others)
Reading: Democracy by Force: US Military Intervention in the post-cold war world - Karen von Hippel
US has embraced policy of cautious engagement since botched Somalia intervention in 1992 - but US has not abandoned its approach to nation-building. I has been involved in nation-building and promoting democracy since 19th century
Significant change in non-interventionary norm since humanitarian concern emerged
Reading: Two cheers for bargaining theory - David Lake
Rationalist explanations are useful to understand Iraq War: US went to war because they believed Iraq were producing WMD and posed a threat to their security (e.g pursuit of self-interest led to war to protect national interest). US used strong military power to get other countries to join them in the war
But rationalist theories fail to take domestic politics and ideology into decision-making, as well as non-state actors
Reading: America Now Solves Problems with Troops, not Diplomats - Monica Duffy Toft
There has been a decline in traditional diplomacy as seen in Venezuela as US responded with sending troops. Escalation over time of how many troops US sends. This is caused by 1) lack of political will to do diplomacy, 2) belief that military is more effective, and 3) desire to project American power
Shift from traditional diplomacy to kinetic diplomacy (“diplomacy” by armed force unsupported by local knowledge - she calls it bullying). This strategy is not paying off as US is increasingly seen as bigger threat to global peace
US abandoned principles of legitimacy (hypocrisy of treating foreign soldiers how they want, detaining people without trial, separating young children)
