SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 2

A Neo-Realist Case Study of U.N.-Authorized Humanitarian Interventions in The Post-Cold War World

Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Dünyada BM Tarafından Yetkilendirilmiş İnsani Müdahaleler Üzerine Neo-Realist Bir Örnek Olay İncelemesi

Şahin Eray KIRDIM
Pages
615–632
Publication Date
2017-09-08
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, when the practice of humanitarian intervention after the Cold War is examined, it is seen that not only altruistic motives were effective for states, but they also aimed at maximizing their self-interest and that the main concept of the neo-realist theory is still valid.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:As the Neo-realist theory in international relations suggests, international political system presents an anarchic environment.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, due to ever-increasing importance of human rights issues in the 21st century, the Westphalian understanding of state sovereignty in international affairs has gradually eroded and turned into a new one in which states intervene in each other’s domestic jurisdictions especially regarding human rights issues.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, when the practice of humanitarian intervention after the Cold War is examined, it is seen that not only altruistic motives were effective for states, but they also aimed at maximizing their self-interest and that the main concept of the neo-realist theory is still valid.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Neo-realist teori · İnsani müdahale · İnsan hakları

Abstract

As the Neo-realist theory in international relations suggests, international political system presents an anarchic environment. In other words, since there is no formally recognized supreme authority among equally sovereign units, states generally act in “self-help” to maximize their national interests. However, due to ever-increasing importance of human rights issues in the 21st century, the Westphalian understanding of state sovereignty in international affairs has gradually eroded and turned into a new one in which states intervene in each other’s domestic jurisdictions especially regarding human rights issues. The extremist practice of this intervention is humanitarian interventions. However, when the practice of humanitarian intervention after the Cold War is examined, it is seen that not only altruistic motives were effective for states, but they also aimed at maximizing their self-interest and that the main concept of the neo-realist theory is still valid.

Özet

Uluslararası ilişkilerdeki neo-realist teorinin önerdiği üzere, uluslararası politik sistem anarşik bir görünüm arz eder. Diğer bir değişle, egemen eşitler arasında üst bir otorite olmadığı için, devletler genel olarak kendi kendine yetme motivasyonu ile hareket ederek, kendi çıkarlarını maksimize etmeye çalışırlar. 21. yüzyılda insan haklarına verilen önemin artmasıyla beraber, uluslararası sistemde Westfalyan anlayış yerini, devletlerin insan hakları ihlalleri söz konusu olduğunda birbirlerinin içişlerine müdahale ettiği bir anlayışa bırakmıştır. Bu müdahalenin en uç uygulaması ise insani müdahaledir. Ancak, Soğuk Savaş sonrası insani müdahale uygulamaları incelendiğinde, devletlerin savaşa girmeleri için yalnızca özgecil motivasyonların tek başına yeterli olmadığı, bununla beraber kendi çıkarlarını önceleyebildikleri, dolayısıyla neo-realist teorinin hala geçerliliğini koruduğu görülür.

🔖

Cite This Article

KIRDIM, Ş. E. (2017). A Neo-Realist Case Study of U.N.-Authorized Humanitarian Interventions in The Post-Cold War World. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 2, 615–632. https://ajindex.com/articles/14101

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. World Summit Outcome, G.A. Res. 60/1, U.N. Doc. A/RES/60/1 (Oct. 24. 2005).
  2. ABIEW, F. K. (1999). The Evolution of the Doctrine and Practice of Humanitarian Intervention, Kluwer Law International, The Netherland. AREND, Anthony Clark. (1993). “The United Nations and the New World Order”, Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 81, Issue 3 pp. 491-534.
  3. ASH, T. G. (1993). In Europe's Name: Germany and the Divided Continent, Random House, New York. Ban, Ki-moon. (2011). Statement by the Secretary-General on Libya, http://www.un.org/sg/statements/?nid=5145.
  4. BAUM, Matthew A. (2004). “How Public Opinion Constrains the Use of Force: The Case of Operation Restore Hope”, Presidential Studies Quarterly, Vol. 34, Issue 2, pp. 187-226.
  5. BENJAMIN, Barry M. (1992). “Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention: Legalizing the Use of Force to Prevent Human Rights Atrocities”, Fordham International Law Journal 16(1), pp. 120-158.
  6. BLAKLEY, Mike. (1999). “Haiti”, The Costs of Conflict: Prevention and Cure in the Global Arena, (Ed.) Michael E. Brown and Richard N. Rosecrance, Rowman & Littlefield, USA, pp. 91-108.
  7. CLARK, Jeffrey. (1993). “Debacle in Somalia”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, Issue 1, pp. 109-123.
  8. DATTA, Sujit. (2014). “Humanitarian Military Intervention in Kosovo and Libya: An Assessment on Relevant Theories of International Relations”, European Scientific Journal, Special Edition, May 2014, pp. 381-388.
  9. DES FORGES, A. (1999). Leave None to Tell the Story Genocide in Rwanda, Human Rights Watch, USA. DIPRIZIO, R.C. (2002). Armed Humanitarians: U.S. Interventions from Northern Iraq To Kosovo, Johns Hopkins University Press,
  10. Baltimore. DONNELLY, J. (2000).
  11. Realism and International Relations, University Press,
  12. Cambridge. DUFFIELD, John S. (1994). “NATO's Functions after the Cold War”, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 109, Issue 5, pp. 763-787.
  13. EVANS, Gareth. (2011). “Interview: The R2P Balance Sheet after Libya”, The Responsibility to Protect: Challenges & Opportunities in Light of the Libyan Intervention, e-International Relations, http://www.e-ir.info/wp-content/uploads/R2P.pdf, pp. 34-42.
  14. FALK, Richard. (1995). “The Haiti Intervention: A Dangerous World Order Precedent for the United Nations”, Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 26, Issue 2, 341-358.
  15. FINEMAN, Mark. (1993). “The Oil Factor in Somalia”, http://articles.latimes.com/1993-01-18/news/mn-1337_1_oil-reserves (01.09.2016). G.A. Res 46/7, U.N. Doc. A/RES/46/7 (1991).
  16. GARWOOD-GOWERS, Andrew. (2013). “The Responsibility