IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pepspp/v21y2015i1p111-152n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legitimacy of the “Humanitarian Military Intervention”: An Empirical Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Kinclová Lenka

Abstract

This article represents an innovative perspective on the controversial issue of legitimacy of the “humanitarian military intervention” (HMI), by situating the normative debate into a quantitative perspective. It evaluates legitimacy of HMI by assessing a degree of “humanitarianism” behind the “motives and means” and the “outcomes” of military interventions from the post-WWII era. The “motives and means” of the interveners are evaluated based on the theoretical framework of the Just War Theory (JWT), more particularly based on the quantified “jus ad bellum” JWT criteria; and they are compared with the existence of “humanitarian outcomes” of these interventions in the light of consequentialist ethics. An overall goal is to generate a comprehensive picture of the dynamics and relationships within the HMI concept based on the empirical evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Kinclová Lenka, 2015. "Legitimacy of the “Humanitarian Military Intervention”: An Empirical Assessment," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(1), pages 111-152, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:21:y:2015:i:1:p:111-152:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/peps-2014-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2014-0006
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/peps-2014-0006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elisabeth Gilmore & Nils Petter Gleditsch & Päivi Lujala & Jan Ketil Rod, 2005. "Conflict Diamonds: A New Dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(3), pages 257-272, July.
    2. Patrick M. Regan, 2002. "Third-party Interventions and the Duration of Intrastate Conflicts," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(1), pages 55-73, February.
    3. D. Scott Bennett & Allan C. Stam, 2000. "Eugene : A conceptual manual," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 179-204, March.
    4. Nils Petter Gleditsch & Peter Wallensteen & Mikael Eriksson & Margareta Sollenberg & Hã…Vard Strand, 2002. "Armed Conflict 1946-2001: A New Dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 39(5), pages 615-637, September.
    5. Lars-Erik Cederman & Simon Hug & Lutz F. Krebs, 2010. "Democratization and civil war: Empirical evidence," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 47(4), pages 377-394, July.
    6. Bethany Lacina & Nils Petter Gleditsch, 2005. "Monitoring Trends in Global Combat: A New Dataset of Battle Deaths," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 145-166, June.
    7. Elbadawi, Ibrahim A. & Sambanis, Nicholas, 2000. "External interventions and the duration of civil wars," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2433, The World Bank.
    8. Päivi Lujala & Jan Ketil Rod & Nadja Thieme, 2007. "Fighting over Oil: Introducing a New Dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(3), pages 239-256, July.
    9. Hahn, Jinyong & Ham, John C. & Moon, Hyungsik Roger, 2011. "The Hausman test and weak instruments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 160(2), pages 289-299, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:bpj:pepspp:v:18:y:2012:i:3:p:7:n:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Verme, Paolo & Schuettler, Kirsten, 2021. "The impact of forced displacement on host communities: A review of the empirical literature in economics," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    3. Adhvaryu, Achyuta & Fenske, James & Khanna, Gaurav & Nyshadham, Anant, 2021. "Resources, conflict, and economic development in Africa," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    4. Fjelde, Hanne, 2015. "Farming or Fighting? Agricultural Price Shocks and Civil War in Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 525-534.
    5. Michael G. Findley & Josiah F. Marineau, 2015. "Lootable resources and third-party intervention into civil wars," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(5), pages 465-486, November.
    6. Cemal Eren Arbatlı & Quamrul H. Ashraf & Oded Galor & Marc Klemp, 2020. "Diversity and Conflict," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 727-797, March.
    7. Sara Balestri & Mario A. Maggioni, 2021. "This Land Is My Land! Large-Scale Land Acquisitions and Conflict Events in Sub-Saharan Africa," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 427-450, May.
    8. Vincenzo Bove & Ron Smith, 2011. "The Economics of Peacekeeping," Chapters, in: Derek L. Braddon & Keith Hartley (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Conflict, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Langlotz, Sarah & Potrafke, Niklas, 2019. "Does development aid increase military expenditure?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 735-757.
    10. Sunde, Uwe & Cervellati, Matteo & Esposito, Elena & Valmori, Simona, 2016. "Malaria Risk and Civil Violence," CEPR Discussion Papers 11496, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Colin Hannigan, 2019. "Toward a holistic networks approach to strategic third-party intervention: A literature review," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 277-292, September.
    12. John D. Huber & Laura Mayoral, 2019. "Group inequality and the severity of civil conflict," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1-41, March.
    13. De Luca, Giacomo & Sekeris, Petros G. & Vargas, Juan F., 2018. "Beyond divide and rule: Weak dictators, natural resources and civil conflict," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 205-221.
    14. Morelli, Massimo & Rohner, Dominic, 2015. "Resource concentration and civil wars," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 32-47.
    15. Abu-Bader, Suleiman & Ianchovichina, Elena, 2019. "Polarization, foreign military intervention, and civil conflict," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    16. Christopher Blattman & Edward Miguel, 2010. "Civil War," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(1), pages 3-57, March.
    17. Ahlerup, Pelle & Baskaran, Thushyanthan & Bigsten, Arne, 2017. "Regional development and national identity in sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 622-643.
    18. Shenoy, Ajay, 2008. "The Devil's Calculus: Mathematical Models of Civil War," MPRA Paper 8895, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Haar Roberta & Krebs Lutz F., 2015. "Choosing to Intervene: US Domestic Politics and Moral Imperatives," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(4), pages 497-505, December.
    20. Bethany Lacina, 2006. "Explaining the Severity of Civil Wars," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(2), pages 276-289, April.
    21. Anderton,Charles H. & Carter,John R., 2009. "Principles of Conflict Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521875578, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:21:y:2015:i:1:p:111-152:n:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.