Suchergebnisse

Despite abundant debates on humanitarian military interventions, there is yet little empirical knowledge about these operations and their effects due to a lack of systematized data. To stimulate the necessary comparative research, this article introduces a new data set on all humanitarian military interventions between 1946 and 2015. The data set outlines the interveners' proclaimed aims, mandates, and activities. Documentation of events in the target countries prior to, during, and after the interventions facilitates their evaluation. The data set consists of data matrices and structured case descriptions that document all coding decisions. A review of the spatial and temporal distribution of interveners and interventions refutes the prevalent view that the vast majority of humanitarian military interventions are conducted by Western states and that such missions subsided after the interventions in Afghanistan and Libya. The data set enables a wide range of quantitative and qualitative research. Despite its limited number of cases, it can reveal whether humanitarian military interventions generally decrease the duration and intensity of violence. Among other applications, it can help identify the conditions under which such interventions lead to an escalation or de-escalation of deadly violence.

The article offers a much-needed impulse to the debate on humanitarian military interventions, which is characterized by conceptual confusion and a lack of comparative research. Based on a comprehensive review of the literature, we identify the most important definitional controversies and discuss the conceptual pros and cons of the respective positions. We illustrate how definitional choices affect comparative research using a new dataset covering all humanitarian military interventions since the Second World War. Classic definitions based on ideal types might have normative merits, but they cannot ground an empirical research programme because they vacate the universe of cases. However, military interventions for declared humanitarian purposes are here to stay, and they should be analysed instead of defined into oblivion. Thus, the definition should reflect the practice of humanitarian military interventions, not subordinate the humanitarian purpose to violations of sovereignty and international law. The definition must not be restricted to interventions reacting to death tolls that 'shock the conscience of mankind'; it must also consider interventions in the early stages of conflict. Moreover, military interventions should not be disregarded when the humanitarian motive is not exclusive or predominant.

NATO's 1999 intervention in Kosovo was highly contested and seen as a turning point in international responses to mass violence. Making use of a new dataset on so-called "humanitarian military interventions" since the Second World War, the author examines the extent to which the Kosovo intervention has indeed initiated new trends. A comparison with other cases shows that NATO's Operation Allied Force differed from other military interventions with a declared humanitarian purpose. Moreover, the author introduces a typology of humanitarian military interventions and proposes a new measurement of their outcome that can facilitate comparative research.

NATO's 1999 intervention in Kosovo was highly contested and seen as a turning point in international responses to mass violence. Making use of a new dataset on so-called "humanitarian military interventions" since the Second World War, the author examines the extent to which the Kosovo intervention has indeed initiated new trends. A comparison with other cases shows that NATO's Operation Allied Force differed from other military interventions with a declared humanitarian purpose. Moreover, the author introduces a typology of humanitarian military interventions and proposes a new measurement of their outcome that can facilitate comparative research.

Rationalistische Theorien liefern wichtige Er­kennt­nisse darüber, wieso Kriege aus­brechen, fort­dauern und enden. Doch erklären sie nicht je­gliches Kriegs­geschehen. Dies zeigt der Report am Bei­spiel des Friedens­pro­zesses in Kroatien, der im Jahr 1995 zu­sammen­brach. Lange weigerte sich die ser­bische Seite, nach einem Waffen­still­stand über einen Friedens­plan zu ver­handeln. Thorsten Gromes ana­ly­siert Do­ku­mente der pro­klamierten, inter­national nie an­erkannten Republika Srpska Krajina sowie Aus­sagen vor dem Inter­na­tionalen Kriegs­ver­brecher­tri­bunal für das ehe­malige Jugos­lawien. Wie er zeigt, wider­sprach die serbische Politik in großen Teilen ra­tio­na­listischen Grund­an­nahmen. Damit stehen auch die Erfolgs­aus­sichten von Strategien der Konflikt­regelung in­frage, die solche An­nahmen vor­aus­setzen.