Humanitarianism and Third-Party Military Interventions in Civil Wars. A study of their relationship

Michael Neureiter

2020年12月 · GRIN Verlag

电子书

页

符合条件

评分和评价未经验证了解详情

关于此电子书

Master's Thesis from the year 2015 in the subject Sociology - War and Peace, Military, grade: 1,0, University of Pittsburgh, language: English, abstract: This study aims at examining the reasons why foreign countries (or third parties) militarily intervene in civil conflicts. To better illustrate its argument, I begin with a brief discussion of two contrasting examples: the Sierra Leone Civil War (1991-2002) and the Casamance Conflict in Senegal (1982-2014). Sierra Leone and Senegal are very similar on a number of dimensions. Both countries are located in West Africa, possess ample natural resources including diamonds and gold (but no oil), and are former colonies of Western powers. In addition, both Sierra Leone and Senegal have small economies without significant ties to the West, are militarily weak, and have little geopolitical importance. Therefore, if we only focus on such material factors, as Realists often do, it seems somewhat puzzling that the civil war in Sierra Leone triggered a military intervention by its former colonizer, Great Britain, whereas the one in Senegal did not. If we extend our focus beyond material factors, one can see that the Sierra Leone Civil War differed from the Casamance Conflict in one important respect, which might help explain the difference in intervention outcomes: the level of violence against civilians. While all intrastate wars are tragic and involve substantial human suffering, there is substantial variation in the extent and nature of the atrocities committed by the warring parties. Some civil conflicts experience widespread and even systematic violence against civilians such as rape, torture, and targeted killings, whereas in others this kind of violence is relatively rare. The Sierra Leone Civil War is an example of the former type of conflict. More than 50,000 people died as a result of the war, the majority of them civilians. The years between 1997 and 2000 were marked by systematic atrocities committed against the civilian population, to the extent that some observers called it genocidal violence. In contrast, the Casamance Conflict was an intense but rather localized civil war. Fighting was largely restricted to the southern part of Senegal, and both warring parties showed relatively great restraint in their targeting of civilians.