In Africa Īmong African nations, Nigeria has shown the will to intervene in the affairs of other sub Saharan African countries since independence. Research by Nigel Lo, Barry Hashimoto, and Dan Reiter has contrasting findings, as they find that interstate "peace following wars last longer when the war ends in foreign-imposed regime change." However, research by Reiter and Goran Peic finds that foreign-imposed regime change can raise the probability of civil war. Regime change thus drives a wedge between external patrons and their domestic protégés or between protégés and their people." These divergent preferences place imposed leaders in a quandary: taking actions that please one invariably alienates the other. Second, externally-imposed leaders face a domestic audience in addition to an external one, and the two typically want different things. First, the act of overthrowing a foreign government sometimes causes its military to disintegrate, sending thousands of armed men into the countryside where they often wage an insurgency against the intervener. "The strategic impulse to forcibly oust antagonistic or non-compliant regimes overlooks two key facts. Studies by Alexander Downes, Lindsey O'Rourke, and Jonathan Monten indicate that foreign-imposed regime change seldom reduces the likelihood of civil war, violent removal of the newly imposed leader, and the probability of conflict between the intervening state and its adversaries, and does not increase the likelihood of democratization unless regime change comes with pro-democratic institutional changes in countries with favorable conditions for democracy. A 2021 review of the existing literature found that foreign interventions since World War II tend overwhelmingly to fail to achieve their purported objectives. Multilateral interventions that include territorial governance by foreign institutions also include cases like East Timor and Kosovo, and have been proposed (but were rejected) for the Palestinian territories. A 2016 study by Carnegie Mellon University political scientist Dov Haim Levin (who now teaches at the University of Hong Kong) found that the United States intervened in 81 foreign elections between 19, with the majority of those being through covert, rather than overt, actions. Īccording to a dataset by Alexander Downes, 120 leaders were removed through foreign-imposed regime change between 18. Historians have noted that interventionism has always been a contentious political issue among public opinion of countries which engaged in interventions. Modern interventionism grew out of Cold War policies, where the United States and the Soviet Union intervened in nations around the world to counter any influence held there by the other nation. The New Imperialism era saw numerous interventions by Western nations in the Global South, including the Banana Wars. Interventionism has played a major role in the foreign policies of Western powers, particularly during and after the Victorian era. Interventions may just be focused on altering political authority structures, but also be conducted for humanitarian purposes, as well as debt collection. Military intervention, as the main issue, has been defined by Martha Finnemore in the context of international relations as "the deployment of military personnel across recognized boundaries for the purpose of determining the political authority structure in the target state". Economic interventionism is a different practice of intervention, one of economic policy at home. Interventionism is a political practice of intervention, particularly to the practice of governments to interfere in political affairs of other countries, staging military or trade interventions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |