Unilateral and Multilateral Military Intervention: Effects on Stability and Security

In: Democracy and security, Band 7, Heft 3, S. 227-257

Abstract

The success rate of military intervention has traditionally been judged by its ability to end conflict and/or serve intervener security interests. However, contemporary military intervention in troubled or collapsing states is often intended not only to increase security but also to establish conditions in which political reform or reconstruction can proceed. Judging the success of intervention therefore means isolating and measuring its impact on internal change. Scholars and policymakers have staked many assumptions on the belief that the motivation and form of military intervention might improve conditions for peacebuilding over time. Among these are expectations that multilateral interventions undertaken for purposes of social reconstruction and reform might be the best hopes for security and long-term stability. The data tested here generally give reason for pause in such assumptions. Our findings only slightly support neoliberal arguments and assumptions about the superiority of multilateral or neutral interventions in promoting postintervention peace, reform, and stability. Rather, our findings indicate that regardless of type of intervener, target state governance, physical quality of life, and economic growth are not much impacted by intervention. Adapted from the source document.