z-logo
Premium
The Road to Hell? Third‐Party Intervention to Prevent Atrocities
Author(s) -
Kydd Andrew H.,
Straus Scott
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
american journal of political science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.347
H-Index - 170
eISSN - 1540-5907
pISSN - 0092-5853
DOI - 10.1111/ajps.12009
Subject(s) - intervention (counseling) , political science , deterrence theory , deterrence (psychology) , third party , institution , law , criminology , political economy , sociology , psychology , internet privacy , psychiatry , computer science
Preventing large‐scale atrocities has emerged as an important policy goal of the post–Cold War period. However, a debate exists about the effects of creating an international institution to prevent atrocities. Advocates of intervention argue that a credible threat to intervene should deter perpetrators and stop atrocities when deterrence fails. Critics argue that third‐party intervention, by strengthening weak minority groups and lowering the cost of war, encourages rebellions and so makes war and atrocities more likely. We develop a model of intervention to analyze this debate. The model shows that the negative effects of intervention highlighted by critics can be mitigated if the third party is relatively neutral and if alternative costs are imposed on decision makers. We conclude that with appropriate institutional design, the net impact of stronger third‐party commitments to end atrocities will be to lower the expected level of atrocities.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here