Assessing the motivations of New Zealand’s International Interventions: From Practice to Theory

<p>Since the end of the Cold War New Zealand has participated in numerous international interventions, both within the Asia-Pacific region and further afield. As a small state with limited resources and influence what have been the primary motivating factors that have influenced New Zealand’s decisions to intervene? Can the decisions to intervene be best explained by realism, liberalism, constructivism, or a combination of these theories? This essay will assess the motivating factors for New Zealand’s involvement in international interventions by analysing four case studies where New Zealand participated in an intervention – Bosnia, East Timor, Afghanistan, and the Solomon Islands. This essay will also assess whether the motivating factors for intervening within New Zealand’s geographic region differ from those outside its region, and whether there is a difference in approach taken by the two main political parties in New Zealand – Labour and National. The essay concludes that while there were elements of realism and constructivism in the decisions to intervene, liberalism provides that best explanation for the decision to intervene in three of the four case studies. The fourth case study, the Solomon Islands, is best explained by the realist factors of regional security and upholding New Zealand’s relationship with Australia. The essay finds that while the motivations for intervening in three of the four case studies were similar, the motivations for intervening within the Asia-Pacific region were slightly more realist. The motivations to intervene were similar regardless if National or Labour were in government.</p>

Assessing the motivations of New Zealand’s International Interventions: From Practice to Theory

<p>Since the end of the Cold War New Zealand has participated in numerous international interventions, both within the Asia-Pacific region and further afield. As a small state with limited resources and influence what have been the primary motivating factors that have influenced New Zealand’s decisions to intervene? Can the decisions to intervene be best explained by realism, liberalism, constructivism, or a combination of these theories? This essay will assess the motivating factors for New Zealand’s involvement in international interventions by analysing four case studies where New Zealand participated in an intervention – Bosnia, East Timor, Afghanistan, and the Solomon Islands. This essay will also assess whether the motivating factors for intervening within New Zealand’s geographic region differ from those outside its region, and whether there is a difference in approach taken by the two main political parties in New Zealand – Labour and National. The essay concludes that while there were elements of realism and constructivism in the decisions to intervene, liberalism provides that best explanation for the decision to intervene in three of the four case studies. The fourth case study, the Solomon Islands, is best explained by the realist factors of regional security and upholding New Zealand’s relationship with Australia. The essay finds that while the motivations for intervening in three of the four case studies were similar, the motivations for intervening within the Asia-Pacific region were slightly more realist. The motivations to intervene were similar regardless if National or Labour were in government.</p>

French Interventions in the Sahel

This chapter examines the impact of external actors in the Sahel, with a focus on the regional crisis since 2012 and the subsequent French and US interventionism. At first glance, France and the United States have been the key strategic actors in the crisis. These two countries have reshaped political and military dynamics, and convinced other states and international agencies to play a role in the crisis. Yet the stakes are very different for each, and certainly more strategic for the French given their military role via Operation Serval and Operation Barkhane. The chapter also discusses other countries that have regularly acted as gatekeepers for international policies in the Sahel and their regional rivalries. Algeria and Morocco have long rivaled each other for influence, and their competition is a determining element in shaping the international interventions and what are optimistically described as the “solutions” for the regional crisis. At the heart of the region itself, Burkina Faso has also played an important intermediary role at various stages.

Interventions and repression following civil conflict

Civil conflicts inevitably have negative consequences with regards to respect for human rights within affected states. Unfortunately, the violation of human rights often does not end with the conflict. What factors explain variation in state repression in post-civil conflict societies? Can international interventions, both civilian and military, improve human rights in states with a history of conflict? Does the size of the intervention matter? We argue that international interventions, including peacekeeping missions and officially directed foreign aid, can reduce physical integrity abuses. This process occurs by simultaneously increasing protections for civilians while also raising the costs of repression to both government leaders and their agents. Human rights abuses will also decrease when there are legal remedies available to vulnerable populations which are bolstered by a strong judicial system. A robust civil society can also discourage human rights abuses by shedding light on these events and providing human rights education. In line with our theoretical argument, we focus on UN peacekeeping missions, especially those with human rights teams, and officially directed foreign aid for legal and security sector reform and NGOs. Using both a treatment effects approach and a continuous dose–response model, we find much support for the implications of our argument.

Resilience and the Rise of Speculative Humanitarianism: Thinking Difference through the Syrian Refugee Crisis

This article explores the nature of resilience-informed international interventions today by thinking about ‘difference’. Up to the 1990s, international interventions were often characterised by a patronising tone in which backward others needed help to develop. Some 20 years later, key lessons learned were that others were so fundamentally different that efforts to assist them invariably failed. This article argues that contemporary approaches seeking to foster resilience are simultaneously propelled by both approaches. They are thus underpinned by two conflicting understandings of difference: the other that is in need and the other that cannot be attended. Even more, we contend that this contradiction is put to productive use in resilience-building: protracted crises today demand practitioners to ‘be there’, engaged permanently, to speculate, experiment, and affirm radical uncertainty. In order to analyse the novel features of resilience, we draw on Graham Harman’s speculative realism and look at policy programming of the Syrian refugee crisis.

What is the distinction?

Chapter 2 introduces, but does not resolve, the conundrum of what the idea of distinction is that is circulating in international practices and how it relates to the IHL targeting rule. The main point conveyed is that distinction in the conduct of hostilities sense is in play, but that it is being deployed in ways we might not expect. Actors routinely move the line to assert intra-civilian distinctions, and collapse IHL’s principle of distinction together with other values, ideas and principles to compose the ‘distinction vernacular’. The muddling of distinction is easier to observe in the training spaces than in South Sudan, as conversations about IHL are more explicit in the former. Trainees can be found struggling to locate a civilian–combatant binary in the conduct of hostilities sense, and they extend this fuzzy treatment to their categorization of humanitarian actors. The chapter also outlines the comprehensive ethos that guides contemporary international missions, explaining how the ‘working together’ mentality shapes international interventions. From the perspective of international humanitarian actors, international military and peacekeeping actors are encroaching upon them and blurring the lines. The discussion of the Intellectual realm examines the status of the main actors, canvasses civil-military guidance documents, and considers high-level pronouncements about distinction. Attention is drawn to slippage between a civilian–combatant distinction and other fault lines, as distinction’s haziness prevails at this normative level.

The chase for legal timber: Developments in the commercial trade of timber in Ghana

The quest for timber and timber resources and its corollary effects on forest degradation has in the last decade contributed to a series of concerted local and international interventions aimed at addressing the situation. These interventions have taken the character of domestic policies, international agreements and pacts and to some extent, domestic legislative reforms. The plethora of interventions have created a horde of laws and agreements with varying scopes and applications, multiple institutions with interlocked and overlapping responsibilities and uncoordinated and often undocumented practice in the commercial trade of timber. The focus of this article is to prod through the domestic and international legal and institutional architecture on the regulation of the trade of timber and timber resources. The article hopes to unearth the challenges in complying with these obligations and propose recommendations on the way forward.