Showing posts with label Humanitarian Interventions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Humanitarian Interventions. Show all posts
Sunday, April 28, 2019
The Big and Bad Ones
Bad Ideas Led to Libya Civil War, Newsday, April 28, 2019. "In 2011, the United States led an intervention that deposed Libyan dictator, terrorist, and crackpot Muammar Gaddafi. Since then, U.S. and Western policy toward Libya has embodied every big, bad idea in our arsenal."
Friday, December 13, 2013
Ten Years After Saddam's Fall
Lesson of Saddam’s Fall is that War Can Be Best Way to Justice, Yorkshire Post, December 13, 2013. "It was only a decade ago that US forces pulled Saddam Hussein out of his spiderhole at a farmhouse in ad-Dawr, near his home town of Tikrit. That success – indeed, that war – seems now to belong to another century. But it’s not so far removed from today’s travails."
Labels:
Humanitarian Interventions,
ICC,
Iran,
Iraq War,
John Stuart Mill,
Sanctions,
Syria,
Yorkshire Post
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
On Weak British Election Analysis in Foreign Affairs
What the British Elections Were All About, New Ledger, May 12, 2010. "It’s not fair to say that Mark Blyth and Jonathan Hopkin’s piece in Foreign Affairs on “Labour Pains: Why the British General Election is a Referendum on Its Past,” is the worst piece of commentary I’ve read on the subject."
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Does Free Trade Promote Democracy? Yes But.
Free Trade, But Not Only Free Trade, New Ledger, May 6, 2010. "Let me begin by agreeing, in part, with Greg Scoblete’s response on Real Clear World to my piece on humanitarian intervention and sovereignty in TNL last week. I’m happy to add freer trade to my list of ways that, depending on the circumstances, we may be able promote democratic change in foreign tyrannies or autocracies. Indeed, as I’ve pointed out elsewhere, a free and open economy is not just good at generating economic growth: it’s also a broader social and political good."
Friday, April 30, 2010
Reply to Larison
Charles Lindbergh, Call Your Office, New Ledger, April 30, 2010. "Earlier this week, I published a piece [1] in TNL on “Sovereignty and Humanitarian Interventions.” In it, I argued that Prof. Mark Mazower’s “new realism” – as I put it – “comes down to a quest for stability and unenforced ‘legal norms’ at the expense of human rights. It is a call for détente with the world’s dictators, . . . .if U.S. policy is not based on a preference for democracy over dictatorship, the pursuit of stability will lead the U.S. to cold shoulder its friends and sidle up to its enemies." Daniel Larison has taken considerable exception to my thesis in a piece in the American Conservative."
Labels:
Humanitarian Interventions,
New Ledger,
Sovereignty
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Back to First Principles on Sovereignty
Sovereignty and Humanitarian Interventions, New Ledger, April 28, 2010. "Mark Mazower is a distinguished historian of Europe, and a professor of history at Columbia University. He has a piece in the latest World Affairs that sheds useful light on the rise and fall of the concept of humanitarian interventions. But it also reveals some common misconceptions about the relationship between sovereignty and international institutions, and presents a thoroughly contradictory vision of the road forward."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)