International Relations 101: International Security - Civil Wars and Interventions Intrastate Conflict Peacekeeping Humanitarian Intervention

What This Is

Civil wars and interventions are a crucial aspect of international relations, as they involve the breakdown of state authority and the involvement of external actors to restore order or protect human rights. This topic matters because it affects global stability, human security, and the effectiveness of international institutions. A concrete example is the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where the international community's response was shaped by a complex interplay of realism, liberalism, and humanitarian intervention.

Key Theories, Concepts & Thinkers

• Realism (Morgenthau, Waltz): States are the main actors in an anarchic system, and their primary concern is survival and power – explains why arms races persist despite peace talks. Contemporary relevance: The ongoing great power competition between the US, China, and Russia.
• Liberalism (Doyle, Keohane): Democracies are more peaceful and cooperative, and international institutions can promote peace and stability – underpins foreign policy doctrines of democracy promotion and NATO enlargement. Contemporary relevance: The EU's efforts to promote democracy and stability in Eastern Europe.
• Humanitarian Intervention (Walzer, Rieff): External intervention is justified to prevent human rights abuses and protect civilians – has been used to justify interventions in Libya, Syria, and Yemen. Contemporary relevance: The ongoing debate over the legitimacy and effectiveness of humanitarian intervention.
• Peacekeeping (Boutros-Ghali, Brahimi): UN peacekeeping can help stabilize conflict-affected areas and protect civilians – has been used in numerous conflicts, including the Balkans and Africa. Contemporary relevance: The ongoing peacekeeping efforts in the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan.
• Civil War Theory (Fearon, Laitin): Civil wars are caused by a combination of factors, including economic inequality, ethnic divisions, and state weakness – has been used to explain the outbreak of civil wars in Syria and Libya. Contemporary relevance: The ongoing civil wars in Yemen and Somalia.
• New Wars (Kaldor): Modern conflicts are characterized by the blurring of lines between war and crime, and the involvement of non-state actors – has been used to explain the nature of conflicts in the Balkans and Africa. Contemporary relevance: The ongoing conflicts in the Sahel region and the Middle East.
• Stability-Instability Paradox (Jervis): External intervention can sometimes destabilize a conflict-affected area, rather than stabilizing it – has been used to explain the unintended consequences of intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq. Contemporary relevance: The ongoing debate over the effectiveness of US military interventions in the Middle East.

Step-by-Step Analysis

1. Identify the conflict: Clearly define the conflict in question, including the parties involved and the nature of the conflict.
2. Analyze the causes: Use civil war theory to identify the underlying causes of the conflict, including economic inequality, ethnic divisions, and state weakness.
3. Evaluate the role of external actors: Use realism and liberalism to evaluate the role of external actors in the conflict, including their motivations and the impact of their actions.
4. Assess the effectiveness of peacekeeping: Use peacekeeping theory to assess the effectiveness of UN peacekeeping efforts in stabilizing the conflict-affected area and protecting civilians.
5. Consider the humanitarian implications: Use humanitarian intervention theory to consider the humanitarian implications of the conflict and the potential for external intervention to prevent human rights abuses and protect civilians.
6. Evaluate the long-term consequences: Use the stability-instability paradox to evaluate the long-term consequences of external intervention and consider the potential for unintended consequences.

Common Misconceptions

• Misconception: "The United Nations is a world government."
• Correction: The UN is an international organization that provides a forum for states to cooperate on global issues, but it is not a world government. The UN has no authority to enforce its decisions, and its member states retain their sovereignty.
• Misconception: "Sovereignty means absolute freedom to do anything."
• Correction: Sovereignty refers to the authority of a state to govern itself, but it does not imply absolute freedom to do anything. States have a responsibility to respect the sovereignty of other states and to comply with international law.
• Misconception: "All conflicts are about religion or culture."
• Correction: While religion and culture can be factors in conflicts, they are not the only causes. Economic inequality, ethnic divisions, and state weakness are also common causes of conflict.

Exam / Essay Tips

• Deploy theories in an argument: Use IR theories to explain the causes and consequences of a conflict, and to evaluate the effectiveness of external intervention.
• Integrate historical and current examples: Use historical examples to illustrate the application of IR theories, and current examples to demonstrate their relevance to contemporary conflicts.
• Be aware of tricky distinctions: Be aware of the distinction between anarchy and chaos, balance of power and bandwagoning, and hard power and soft power.
• Use IR language: Use IR language and concepts to describe the conflict and the external actors involved.

Quick Practice Scenario

Scenario: The government of a small island nation in the Pacific is facing a severe economic crisis, and the opposition is threatening to overthrow it. Using realism, explain the likely outcome. Which other IR theory would predict a different outcome and why?

Answer: Realism would predict that the government would likely use its military to suppress the opposition, as it would be motivated by a desire to maintain its power and survival. Liberalism would predict a different outcome, as it would suggest that the government would be more likely to engage in dialogue with the opposition and compromise on economic reforms.

Last-Minute Cram Sheet

• Key theorists: Morgenthau, Waltz, Doyle, Keohane, Walzer, Rieff, Boutros-Ghali, Brahimi, Fearon, Laitin, Kaldor, Jervis.
• Treaties: Geneva Conventions, UN Charter, Dayton Accords, Paris Agreement.
• Dates: 1648 (Westphalia), 1914 (World War I), 1945 (UN Charter), 1991 (Gulf War).
• Acronyms: UN, NATO, EU, IMF, World Bank.
• Trap distinctions: Anarchy vs chaos, balance of power vs bandwagoning, hard power vs soft power.