From mediation to military intervention: An analysis of the conditions for the employment of coercive strategies by third parties in intrastate conflicts

AbstractWhat forms of U.S. intervention are likely to prove realizable and to be appropriate for facilitating the implementation of peace agreements and protecting human rights in Africa? The choices for action are certainly wider than the polar opposites of disengagement and large-scale military intervention. Because the United States can afford neither prolonged military hegemony nor the indulgence of neo-isolationism, it must find some form of creative engagement that fulfills its obligations to facilitate and protect in ways that are acceptable to both American and overseas opinion. Limited interests in Africa and the nature of public pressures leave little alternative to utilizing soft intervention approaches in most cases. Within the category of soft intervention, there appears to be a continuum of means leading to possible movement into muscular intervention. At one end, there is coercive diplomacy, which is associated with threats of military and economic sanctions; if these sanctions are actually used, the intervening state becomes involved in muscular intervention. At the other end is diplomacy associated not with threats, but with the promise of rewards. Between the two poles lies diplomacy that involves neither threats nor rewards (i.e., conciliation and mediation without the use of pressures and incentives). In real world contexts, third parties tend to apply mixed packages of non-coercive and coercive incentives, with coercive incentives becoming increasingly dominant as the costs of altering preferences and the intensity of conflict rise.

Download Full-text

The Role Of Third Parties In The Negotiation And Implementation Of Intrastate Agreements: An Experience-Based Approach To Un Involvement In Intrastate Conflicts

Implementing Negotiated Agreements ◽

10.1007/978-90-6704-599-5_9 ◽

2007 ◽

pp. 193-203

Author(s):

Francesc Vendrell

Keyword(s):

Third Parties ◽

Intrastate Conflicts

Download Full-text

Conditions of External Military Interventions in African Internal Conflicts: Complexity of Conflict Intensity, Social Dislocation and Raw Materials

Central European Journal of International and Security Studies ◽

10.51870/cejiss.a150202 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 (2) ◽

pp. 24-55

Author(s):

Martin Schmiedl ◽

Jan Prouza

Keyword(s):

High Intensity ◽

Military Intervention ◽

Raw Materials ◽

High Complexity ◽

Military Interventions ◽

Internal Conflicts ◽

Intrastate Conflicts ◽

The Military ◽

External Interventions ◽

Conflict Intensity

External interventions are one of the most important aspects of intrastate conflicts since a majority of them are significantly internationalised, especially in Africa where the interventions most often occur. Factors that lead to the military intervention remain, however, puzzling. The authors therefore apply the method of fs/QCA to understand not only conditionsbehind intervention into African intrastate conflicts, but also to catch interactions among them. The results show high complexity of various possible combinations, mainly of high intensity, massive social dislocation or presence of raw materials in case of interventions in African internal conflicts

Download Full-text

Malpractice & Negligence: State Supreme Courts Limit Therapists’ Duties to Third Parties

The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics ◽

10.1017/s1073110500012985 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

pp. 204-205

Author(s):

Megan Cleary

Keyword(s):

Sexual Abuse ◽

Child Sexual Abuse ◽

Supreme Court ◽

New Hampshire ◽

Third Parties ◽

State Supreme Courts ◽

Recovered Memories ◽

Supreme Courts ◽

Repressed Memory ◽

University Of Colorado

In recent years, the law in the area of recovered memories in child sexual abuse cases has developed rapidly. See J.K. Murray, “Repression, Memory & Suggestibility: A Call for Limitations on the Admissibility of Repressed Memory Testimony in Abuse Trials,” University of Colorado Law Review, 66 (1995): 477-522, at 479. Three cases have defined the scope of liability to third parties. The cases, decided within six months of each other, all involved lawsuits by third parties against therapists, based on treatment in which the patients recovered memories of sexual abuse. The New Hampshire Supreme Court, in Hungerford v. Jones, 722 A.2d 478 (N.H. 1998), allowed such a claim to survive, while the supreme courts in Iowa, in J.A.H. v. Wadle & Associates, 589 N.W.2d 256 (Iowa 1999), and California, in Eear v. Sills, 82 Cal. Rptr. 281 (1991), rejected lawsuits brought by nonpatients for professional liability.

Download Full-text