Power is shifting:
-
Laterally: first economic then political, from the Atlantic and Mediterranean to the wider Pacific Rim, giving us much less capacity to push Western liberal values
-
Vertically: out of structures we created to control it, like from states to ‘global space’
-
Where power goes, governments must follow. Problems, too, are globalised. So we must move towards global governance.
International intervention – not always military – is now normal. It has happened on average once every six months since 1992. We have cut the number of conflicts and casualties. We know how to do it:
-
Prevent the conflict if possible
-
Plan for reconstruction
-
Give people security, then the rule of law, get the economy going, build institutions
-
Leave elections as late as you decently can, otherwise the state is criminally captured. Be culturally sensitive to local forms of democracy
-
NGOs have a right to be part of the military planning
The doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is not easy to enact. It will be built up untidily. China’s view is shifting, especially on Darfur.
There will be exceptions to R2P, some of them immoral. Sometimes we will have to contain a situation because we can’t do anything else, where we can’t succeed in intervention but we can’t afford to ignore it, like in Northern Ireland.
Criteria for a legitimate intervention, drawing on Aquinas and Kant:
-
Contravention of international law
-
Regional or international instability
-
All other means exhausted
-
Proportionate means
-
Legitimised by the proper authority
-
Reasonable prospect of success
Responsibility to protect has ruled out number 2 – it is no longer necessary.
Comment
Little of what Lord Ashdown presents is new, and that which is new is poorly conceived. He sees hope in international intervention, yet at the same time concedes that power is shifting to countries (China, for one) that baulk at the idea of Responsibility to Protect as a norm. NGOs would not be happy to be involved in military planning, either: this would collapse the distinction between civilian and military on which humanitarian operations are based.
comments