The Limitations of the UN's Practice of "New Interventionism": Observing Political Power Relations from the Military Trade and Economic Trade between 1990 And 2019

After the end of the Cold War, the greatest threat to peace and security is humanitarian disasters caused by ethnic conflicts or civil wars within the country. However, in the international intervention of conflict cases, not all countries will be subject to strong intervention by the United Nations (UN). For example, the UN stationed troops to intervene during the Kosovo and Libya conflicts. In contrast, the organization only expressed condemnation against the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The practice of new-interventionism has not been universal, and there must be factors that affect resolutions of the UN Security Council. From the perspective of realism, the behavior of the international organization is nothing more than the pursuit of "interests." The researcher thus proposes that when there is a humanitarian crisis in a country, the level of UN intervention is relevant to the level of military and economic partnership between intervened countries and member states. In this paper, fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) is used to conduct a causal analysis of two factor variables (military trade and economic trade) and outcome variables (intervention level). Topics on fair treatment of intervened countries and limitations of the UN Security Council in the practice of new interventionism are also discussed.