American humanitarian interventions

• Thesis title in English: American humanitarian interventions
• Key words: Foreign Policy - Globalization - Humanitarianism - Comparative study - Criteria of interventions
• English key words: Foreign Policy - Globalization - Humanitarianism - Comparative study - Criteria of interventions
• Academic year of topic announcement: 2013/2014
• Thesis type: diploma thesis
• Thesis language: angličtina
• Department: Department of Political Science (23-KP)
• Supervisor: RNDr. Jan Kofroň, Ph.D.
• Author: hidden - assigned by the advisor
• Date of registration: 05.06.2014
• Date of assignment: 04.01.2016
• Date and time of defence: 04.02.2016 00:00
• Venue of defence: IPS FSV UK, U kříže 8/661 158 00 Praha 5 – Jinonice
• Date of electronic submission: 04.01.2016
• Date of proceeded defence: 04.02.2016
• Opponents: doc. Martin Riegl, Ph.D.

Guidelines

The thesis will have the following outline:

1. Introduction
1.1 Significance of the Topic
1.2 Questions
1.3 Goals
1.4 Plan of the Book
2. Theoretical underpinning
2.1 Neoclassical realism
2.2 Hypothesis
3. Methodology
3.1 Limitations
4. Empirical Section
4.1 Case study 1
4.2 Case study 2
4.3 Case study 3
5. Conclusion

References

Alan J. Kuperman (2008): The Moral Hazard of Humanitarian Intervention: Lessons from the Balkans. In International Studies Quarterly 52 (1), pp. 49–80.
Alex J. Bellamy (2005): Responsibility to Protect or Trojan Horse? The Crisis in Darfur and Humanitarian Intervention after Iraq. In Ethics & International Affairs 19 (2), pp. 31–54.
Alynna J. Lyon and Chris J. Dolan (46–78): American Humanitarian Intervention: Toward a Theory of Coevolution. In Foreign Policy Analysis 3.
Andreas Krieg (2013): The Motivation for Humanitarian Intervention. Theoretical and Empirical Considerations: Springer Netherlands.
Benjamin R. Banta (2008): Just War Theory and the 2003 Iraq War Forced Displacement. In Journal of Refugee Studies 21 (3), pp. 261–284.
C. A. J. Coady (2002): The Ethics of Armed Humanitarian Intervention. In United States Institute of Peace.
David N. Gibbs (2000): Realpolitik and Humanitarian Intervention: The Case of Somalia. In International Politics 37, pp. 41–55.
Didier Fassin (2012): Humanitarian Reason, A Moral History of the Present: University of California Press.
Dr. Dominik Balthasar (2014): Oil in Somalia. Adding Fuel to the Fire?
Henry F. Carey (2001): U.S. Domestic Politics and the Emerging Humanitarian Intervention Policy: Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. In World Affairs 164 (2), pp. 72–82.
Ian Smillie and Larry Minear (2004): The Charity of Nations: Humanitarian Action in a Calculating World: Kumarian Press.
Ivan Manokha (2008): The Political Economy of Human Rights Enforcement. Moral and Intellectual Leadership in the Context of Global Hegemony: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kelly Kat and David P. Forsythe (1993): Human Rights, Humanitarian Intervention, and World Politics. In Human Rights Quarterly 15 (2).
Neil MacFarlane, Carolin J Thielking & Thomas G Weiss (2004): The responsibility to protect: is anyone interested in humanitarian intervention? In Third World Quarterly 25 (5), pp. 977–992.
Richard Wilson (2005): Human Rights in the 'War on Terror': Cambridge University Press.
Ruth Gordon (1996): Humanitarian Intervention by the United Nations: Iraq, Somalia, and Haiti. In Texas International Law Journal 31 (1), pp. 43–56.
Seung-Whan Choi (2013): What determines US humanitarian intervention? In Conflict Management and Peace Science 30 (2), pp. 121–139.
Sujit Datta (2014): Humanitarian Military Intervention in Kosovo and Libya: An Assessment on Relevant Theories of International Relations. In European Scientific Journal.
Taylor B. Seybolt (2008): Humanitarian Military Intervention. The Conditions for Success and Failure. With assistance of Stockholm International Peace Research Institute: Oxford University Press.
Terry Nardin (2002): The Moral Basis of Humanitarian Intervention. In Ethics & International Affairs 16 (1), pp. 57–70.
Terry Nardin (2005): Humanitarian Imperialism. In Ethics & International Affairs 19 (2), pp. 21–26.
Thomas G. Weiss (1999): Principles, Politics, and Humanitarian Action. In Ethics & International Affairs 13, pp. 1–22.

Preliminary scope of work

Topic Characteristics:
In the wake of several recent humanitarian crises and varying responses to such situations, the scholarly debate with respect to American-led humanitarian interventions has grown dramatically. During the Cold War, policy decisions were seen as driven by the strategic aims of the major powers and framed by East–West tensions. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, humanitarian intervention became an important pillar in the emerging new world order. Security scholars have struggled to understand the nature of ‘‘humanitarianism’’ as an interest, often with the result that they simply discount it and emphasize other possible motivations for intervention. The analytic problem has been to understand why humanitarianism is such an inconsistent policy practice as international norms and laws are often not respected and humanitarian concerns do not always produce interventions. The selectivity of humanitarian operations has been interpreted as evidence that strategic interests continue to impact the decision-making process.
This study holds two goals. First, it seeks to move beyond the exploration of motivations to examine the selectivity of American humanitarianism. Second, it initiates a theory building process to outline a group of variables which will allow to explain why the United States launches some humanitarian interventions and avoids others.
Hypotheses:
- Humanitarian motives are not the only reasons for US military interventions
- The selection of the cases for humanitarian interventions could be explained by a set of variables

Methodology:
The thesis will use case studies method. These will help to infer and test how the Independent variables (international support, public support, marginal economic and strategic interests, historical precedent) causes the dependent variables (military humanitarian interventions). Applying this method, the research will be able to “process trace”, which means to examine the process whereby initial case conditions are translated into case outcome. The other method of inquiry to be implemented in the research is the comparative method which will allow to bring into focus suggestive similarities and contrasts among selected cases.

Preliminary scope of work in English

Topic Characteristics:
In the wake of several recent humanitarian crises and varying responses to such situations, the scholarly debate with respect to American-led humanitarian interventions has grown dramatically. During the Cold War, policy decisions were seen as driven by the strategic aims of the major powers and framed by East–West tensions. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, humanitarian intervention became an important pillar in the emerging new world order. Security scholars have struggled to understand the nature of ‘‘humanitarianism’’ as an interest, often with the result that they simply discount it and emphasize other possible motivations for intervention. The analytic problem has been to understand why humanitarianism is such an inconsistent policy practice as international norms and laws are often not respected and humanitarian concerns do not always produce interventions. The selectivity of humanitarian operations has been interpreted as evidence that strategic interests continue to impact the decision-making process.
This study holds two goals. First, it seeks to move beyond the exploration of motivations to examine the selectivity of American humanitarianism. Second, it initiates a theory building process to outline a group of variables which will allow to explain why the United States launches some humanitarian interventions and avoids others.
Hypotheses:
- Humanitarian motives are not the only reasons for US military interventions
- The selection of the cases for humanitarian interventions could be explained by a set of variables

Methodology:
The thesis will use case studies method. These will help to infer and test how the Independent variables (international support, public support, marginal economic and strategic interests, historical precedent) causes the dependent variables (military humanitarian interventions). Applying this method, the research will be able to “process trace”, which means to examine the process whereby initial case conditions are translated into case outcome. The other method of inquiry to be implemented in the research is the comparative method which will allow to bring into focus suggestive similarities and contrasts among selected cases.