10-4-3-success-of-military-aid

Cost of Military Aid

• The recent history of military interventions suggest that there are significant costs involved, leading to the loss of human rights and sovereignty

• These long-term costs (civilian deaths, number of refugees, monetary, damage to the infrastructure) generally outweigh the short-term gains (avoiding genocide)

• Direct intervention of sending troops and equipment to fight leads to:

  • Loss of lives on both sides (soldiers and civilians) e.g. 2001 Afghanistan war – 149,000 civilians died

  • Physical and mental injuries

  • Costs a lot of money e.g. the 2003 Iraq war cost $2 trillion

• Indirect intervention of providing economic or military assistance:

  • Preferable option for many governments

  • Involves lower risk and cost

The costs of the Iraq war

• In 2003, the US, with coalition allies including the UK, made the decision to invade Iraq and remove the dictator, Saddam Hussein

• The justification for the invasion was that:

  • Saddam, a brutal dictator, was developing weapons of mass destructions (chemical and biological) 

  • There was much evidence that Saddam was violating many Iraqi human rights, including the use of these weapons against his people

Impacts of the invasion on Iraq

Non-military Interventions

• Non-military interventions can be more effective in improving human rights and development, such as the United Nations (UN) peacekeeping missions

UN peacekeeping missions

• UN Peacekeeping uses three main principles: 

  • Consent of all parties in the conflict 

  • Impartiality 

  • Non-use of force except in self-defence and defence of the mission

• The UN:

  • Shares the costs among the UN member states

  • Draw on troops and police from around the world to provide its peacekeeping forces

  • Integrates civilians into the forces

• There are currently 12 UN peacekeeping operations in action across three continents, mainly in Africa and the Middle East

Un Peacekeeping in Côte d’Ivoire

• Côte d’Ivoire (West Africa) gained its independence from French colonial rule in 1960

• For 30 years it maintained political stability and a sound economy

Consequences of Lack of Action

• All military interventions can have negative impacts

• Not intervening at all can have more significant negative consequences on the environment, politics and social development (human wellbeing and human rights) of countries around the world

The effects of no military action in Zimbabwe

• Zimbabwe is a former British colony, it achieved independence in 1980

• It is a country with a history of human rights’ abuses against its citizens

  • President Mugabe (1980 – 2017) remained in power due to violent, corrupt elections

    • He was viewed as a dictator and ordered military operations within Zimbabwe, resulting in thousands of civilians’ deaths

  • Opponents to the government were attacked, tortured and imprisoned

  • Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people were threatened with beheading

• Zimbabwe suffers from great poverty – it is ranked 146 of 191 on the Human Development Index

• Despite its lack of development and frequent human rights’ violations, international organisations have not intervened:

  • Western nations, such as the UK, are sensitive to intervention linked to former colonies

  • Several neighbouring African nations (e.g. South Africa) argued Mugabe was not a threat, so without their support, Western countries would not intervene

The impacts of the lack of military intervention on Zimbabwe

• The lack of military intervention by the international community in Zimbabwe shows that the UN and world leaders are prepared to act in some situations but tolerate others

• The survival of the human race could actually be threatened without some global intervention on the state of the environment, meaning human rights would no longer matter or be relevant