When to Intervene Forcibly in Interstate Relations, a Conversation with Prof. Michael Doyle

Summary

David Malone from the United Nations University interviews Michael Doyle, a distinguished political scientist, on the topic of international intervention, with a focus on John Stuart Mill's 19th-century ideas. They explore Mill's principles of humanitarian protection, self-determination, and national security, and discuss how these ideas are relevant to modern debates on non-intervention, international peacekeeping, and the responsibility to protect (R2P). The conversation highlights the evolution of global norms since the 1990s, including the role of the UN, the Security Council, and the International Criminal Court in addressing sovereignty and human rights.

Takeaways

• 🌍 Michael Doyle is a distinguished American political scientist with expertise in multiple disciplines, currently a professor at Columbia University.
• 🏛️ Doyle has significant experience with the UN, having served as Assistant Secretary-General and policy advisor to Kofi Annan, and vice president of the International Peace Academy.
• 📜 The discussion focuses on John Stuart Mill’s thoughts on intervention and how those ideas are still relevant to modern international relations and humanitarian debates.
• 📅 Mill’s essay on intervention, written in 1859, explored the balance between British power, self-determination, and humanitarian intervention, a debate that remains crucial today.
• 🛡️ Kofi Annan was deeply affected by the failures to prevent genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia and felt the international community needed better tools to address such crises.
• ⚖️ Doyle highlights Mill’s framework of three principles: humanitarian protection, self-determination, and national security—principles that often conflict in intervention decisions.
• 🕊️ In 2005, the UN adopted the 'Responsibility to Protect' (R2P) doctrine, a significant step toward addressing humanitarian crises while respecting state sovereignty.
• ⚔️ The R2P framework balances humanitarian intervention with respect for sovereignty, with intervention only as a last resort and preferably through the UN Security Council.
• 👩‍⚖️ The International Criminal Court (ICC) is another tool aimed at holding leaders accountable for extreme abuses, though it remains limited by state participation and political realities.
• 📜 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, has since sparked the development of international norms and frameworks that address global humanitarian issues.

Q & A

Who is the main speaker in the transcript and what is his professional background?

The main speaker is Michael Doyle, a distinguished American political scientist and professor at both Columbia University's Law School and School of International and Public Affairs. He has also served as Assistant Secretary-General and policy advisor to Kofi Annan at the United Nations and has expertise in conflict resolution and international affairs.

What is the primary topic of the discussion in the transcript?

The primary topic is international intervention, rooted in the ideas of John Stuart Mill, particularly focusing on the moral and political dilemmas of intervention in the context of both historical and modern international conflicts.

Why is John Stuart Mill’s work on intervention important in the context of this discussion?

John Stuart Mill’s work is important because it provides a framework for understanding the moral and political calculations involved in intervention. Mill articulated principles like humanitarian protection, self-determination, and national security, which are still relevant when considering modern international interventions.

What historical events led to the modern debate on intervention, according to the discussion?

The modern debate on intervention was shaped by the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia in the 1990s, along with the events in Kosovo. These highlighted the international community's lack of effective tools to address such crises and prompted figures like Kofi Annan to push for a reevaluation of intervention principles.

How did Kofi Annan respond to the challenges of intervention during his time at the United Nations?

Kofi Annan was deeply affected by the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia and believed the international community had a responsibility to prevent such atrocities. He was a proponent of the 'responsibility to protect' doctrine, which sought to balance humanitarian concerns with respect for state sovereignty.

What are the three principles John Stuart Mill highlighted regarding intervention?

Mill highlighted three key principles: humanitarian protection (the moral obligation to prevent human suffering), self-determination (the right of people to rule themselves), and national security (the need for states to protect themselves). These principles often come into conflict when deciding on intervention.

What was the significance of the 2005 international community outcome regarding intervention?

The 2005 outcome was significant because it represented a reconciliation of the conflicting principles of humanitarian protection, state sovereignty, and security. The international community unanimously agreed on a framework known as the 'responsibility to protect,' which outlined when intervention might be necessary in extreme cases like genocide, while still prioritizing national sovereignty.

What role did Canada play in advancing the debate on intervention?

Canada played a key role by setting up the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which contributed to the development of the 'responsibility to protect' framework. This commission helped refine the standards for humanitarian intervention, focusing on extreme abuses and the importance of seeking Security Council approval before intervening.

How does the International Criminal Court (ICC) fit into the global response to extreme human rights abuses?

The ICC provides an alternative mechanism for addressing extreme human rights abuses by creating individual liability for perpetrators, thus bypassing the need for collective state intervention. However, its authority is limited by the fact that not all states, including major powers like the U.S., Russia, and China, are signatories.

What challenges remain regarding the enforcement of the 'responsibility to protect' doctrine?

One of the main challenges is the reluctance of many states to embrace intervention, even in extreme cases, due to concerns about sovereignty. Additionally, powerful states may still block action through mechanisms like the UN Security Council, and leaders who flout human rights often go unpunished due to political hesitations from potential interveners.