Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Happiness is the Wrong MetricThe Case for Decoupled Armed Interventions

Happiness is the Wrong Metric: The Case for Decoupled Armed Interventions [This chapter suggests that if the humanitarian goals of armed interventions are decoupled from coerced regime change and nation building, they can be carried out effectively and at rather low costs. In addition, it contends that the standard for justifying humanitarian interventions must be well-articulated and set at a high level, for normative reasons, not merely prudential ones. The thesis for narrowly crafted armed humanitarian interventions is supported in the following pages by showing that a mixture of idealism and hubris drives the West to assume that it can achieve much more than it is equipped to, and that its repeated failure to accomplish these expansive goals is leading to a consensus around avoiding armed humanitarian interventions altogether— tragically including those missions whose normative standing is strong and which can be carried out effectively. The observation that nations can employ nonlethal (normative and economic) means to promote human rights and democracy further supports the thesis that the use of force should be reserved to large-scale saving of life and not to be allowed to morph into coerced regime change, not to mention futile attempts at nation building.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Happiness is the Wrong MetricThe Case for Decoupled Armed Interventions

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/happiness-is-the-wrong-metric-the-case-for-decoupled-armed-ja9mIZ1J3f

References (14)

Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Copyright
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018. This book is an open access publication.
ISBN
978-3-319-69622-5
Pages
219 –231
DOI
10.1007/978-3-319-69623-2_14
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[This chapter suggests that if the humanitarian goals of armed interventions are decoupled from coerced regime change and nation building, they can be carried out effectively and at rather low costs. In addition, it contends that the standard for justifying humanitarian interventions must be well-articulated and set at a high level, for normative reasons, not merely prudential ones. The thesis for narrowly crafted armed humanitarian interventions is supported in the following pages by showing that a mixture of idealism and hubris drives the West to assume that it can achieve much more than it is equipped to, and that its repeated failure to accomplish these expansive goals is leading to a consensus around avoiding armed humanitarian interventions altogether— tragically including those missions whose normative standing is strong and which can be carried out effectively. The observation that nations can employ nonlethal (normative and economic) means to promote human rights and democracy further supports the thesis that the use of force should be reserved to large-scale saving of life and not to be allowed to morph into coerced regime change, not to mention futile attempts at nation building.]

Published: Jan 9, 2018

Keywords: Human Rights; Expansionist Goals; Nation Building; International Commission On Intervention And State Sovereignty (ICISS); Forced Regime Change

There are no references for this article.