Over the past two decades, the United Nations Security Council has responded more strongly to some humanitarian crises than to others. This variation in Security Council action raises the important question of what factors motivate United Nations intervention. This article offers a configurational explanation of selective Security Council intervention that integrates explanatory variables from different theories of third-party intervention. These variables are tested through a comparison of 31 humanitarian crises (1991–2004) using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. The analysis shows that a large extent of human suffering and substantial previous involvement in a crisis by international institutions are the key explanatory conditions for coercive Security Council action, but only when combined with negative spillover effects to neighboring countries (path 1) or with low capabilities of the target state (path 2). These results are highly consistent and explain 85% of Security Council interventions after the end of the Cold War. The findings suggest that the Council’s response to humanitarian crises is not random, but follows specific patterns that are indicated by a limited number of causal paths.
ArchibugiDaniele (2004) Cosmopolitan guidelines for humanitarian intervention. Alternatives29(1): 1–21.
2.
BarnettMichael N (1998) The limits of peacekeeping, spheres of influence, and the future of the United Nations. In: LepgoldJosephWeissThomas G (eds) Collective Conflict Management and Changing World Politics. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 83–103.
3.
BeardsleyKyleSchmidtHolger (2012) Following the flag or following the charter? Examining the determinants of UN involvement in international crises, 1945–2002. International Studies Quarterly56(1): 33–49.
4.
BellamyAlex J (2010) The responsibility to protect: Five years on. Ethics & International Affairs24(2): 143–169.
5.
BinderMartin (2009) Humanitarian crises and the international politics of selectivity. Human Rights Review10(3): 327–348.
6.
BoettcherWilliam ACobbMichael D (2009) ‘Don’t let them die in vain’: Casualty frames and public tolerance for escalating commitment in Iraq. Journal of Conflict Resolution53(5): 677–697.
7.
BouldenJane (2006) Double standards, distance and disengagement: Collective legitimization in the post-Cold War Security Council. Security Dialogue37(3): 409–423.
8.
BraumoellerBear FGoertzGary (2000) The methodology of necessary conditions. American Journal of Political Science44(4): 844–858.
9.
BurgSteven L (2004) Intervention in internal conflict: The case of Bosnia. In: LahnemanWilliam J (ed.) Military Intervention: Cases in Context for the Twenty-First Century. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 47–66.
10.
ChomskyNoam (1999) The New Military Humanism: Lessons from Kosovo. Monroe, ME: Common Courage.
11.
CrockerChester A (2001) Intervention: Towards best practices and a holistic view. In: CrockerChester AHampsonFen OslerAallPamela R (eds) Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 229–248.
12.
CunninghamDavid EGleditschKristian SkredeSalehyanIdean (2013) Non-state actors in civil wars: A new dataset. Conflict Management and Peace Science30(5): 516–531.
13.
De Jonge OudraatChantal (1996) The United Nations and internal conflict. In: BrownMichael E (ed.) The International Dimensions of Internal Conflict. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 489–535.
14.
DeRouenKarlHeoUk, eds (2007) Civil Wars of the World: Major Conflicts since World War II. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.
15.
DowtyAlanLoescherGil (1996) Refugee flows as grounds for international action. International Security21(1): 43–72.
16.
DoyleMichael WSambanisNicholas (2006) Making War and Building Peace: United Nations Peace Operations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
FesteKaren A (1992) Expanding the Frontiers: Superpower Intervention in the Cold War. New York: Praeger.
18.
FinnemoreMartha (2003) The Purpose of Intervention: Changing Beliefs about the Use of Force. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
19.
FortnaVirginia P (2004) Does peacekeeping keep peace? International intervention and the duration of peace after civil war. International Studies Quarterly48(2): 269–292.
20.
GhosnFatenPalmerGlennBremerStuart A (2004) The MID3 Data Set, 1993–2001: Procedures, coding rules, and description. Conflict Management and Peace Science21(4): 133–154.
21.
GilboaEytan (2005) The CNN Effect: The search for a communication theory of international relations. Political Communication22(1): 27–44.
22.
GilliganMichael JStedmanStephen J (2003) Where do the peacekeepers go?International Studies Review5(4): 37–54.
23.
HaassRichard N (1999) What to do with American primacy. Foreign Affairs78(5): 37–49.
24.
HasencleverAndreas (2001) Die Macht der Moral in der internationalen Politik[The power of morality in international politics]. Frankfurt aM: Campus.
25.
HewittJ Joseph (2003) Dyadic processes and international crises. Journal of Conflict Resolution47(5): 669–692.
26.
JakobsenPeter V (1996) National interest, humanitarianism or CNN: What triggers UN peace enforcement after the Cold War?Journal of Peace Research33(2): 205–215.
27.
JakobsenPeter V (2000) Focus on the CNN effect misses the point: The real media impact on conflict management is invisible and indirect. Journal of Peace Research37(2): 131–143.
28.
KlotzAudie (1995) Norms reconstituting interests: Global racial equality and US sanctions against South Africa. International Organization49(3): 451–478.
LuardEvan (1984) Collective intervention. In: BullHedley (ed.) Intervention in World Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 137–179.
31.
LyonAlynna JDolanChris (2007) American humanitarian intervention: Toward a theory of coevolution. Foreign Policy Analysis3(1): 46–78.
32.
MahoneyJamesGoertzGary (2006) A tale of two cultures: Contrasting quantitative and qualitative research. Political Analysis14(3): 227–249.
33.
MaloneDavid M (2004) Introduction. In: MaloneDavid M (ed.) The UN Security Council: From the Cold War to the 21st Century. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1–15.
34.
MarchJames GOlsenJohan P (2006) The logic of appropriateness. In: MoranMichaelReinMartinGoodinRobert E (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 689–708.
MasonAndrewWheelerNicholas J (1996) Realist objections to humanitarian intervention. In: HoldenBarry (ed.) The Ethical Dimensions of Global Change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 94–110.
37.
McAfeeR PrestonMialonHugo MMialonSue H (2010) Do sunk costs matter?Economic Inquiry48(2): 323–336.
38.
MearsheimerJohn J (2003) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton.
39.
MorgenthauHans Joachim (1967) To intervene or not to intervene. Foreign Affairs45(3): 425–436.
40.
MullenbachMark J (2005) Deciding to keep peace: An analysis of international influences on the establishment of third-party peacekeeping missions. International Studies Quarterly49(3): 529–555.
41.
NeackLaura (1995) UN peace-keeping: In the interest of community or self?Journal of Peace Research32(2): 181–196.
42.
PiersonPaul (2004) Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
43.
RaginCharles C (2000) Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
44.
RaginCharles C (2008) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
45.
RamsbothamOliverWoodhouseTom (1996) Humanitarian Intervention in Contemporary Conflict: A Reconceptualization. Cambridge: Polity.
46.
RihouxBenoîtRaginCharles C, eds (2009) Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
RobinsonPiers (2001) Operation Restore Hope and the illusion of a news media driven intervention. Political Studies49(5): 941–956.
48.
RobinsonPiers (2011) The CNN effect reconsidered: Mapping a research agenda for the future. Media, War & Conflict4(1): 3–11.
49.
SalehyanIdean (2009) Rebels Without Borders: Transnational Insurgencies in World Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
50.
SalehyanIdeanGleditschKristian Skrede (2006) Refugees and the spread of civil war. International Organization60(2): 335–366.
51.
SchneiderCarsten QWagemannClaudius (2012) Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52.
StinchcombeArthur L (1968) Constructing Social Theories. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
53.
VäyrynenRaimo (2000) Complex humanitarian emergencies: Concepts and issues. In: Wayne NafzigerEStewartFrancesVäyrynenRaimo (eds) War, Hunger, and Displacement: The Origins of Humanitarian Emergencies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 43–89.
54.
Von HippelKarin (1996) Sunk in the Sahara: The applicability of the sunk cost effect to irredentist disputes. Journal of North African Studies1(1): 95–116.
55.
WallensteenPeterJohanssonPatrik (forthcoming) The UN Security Council: Trends in decisions and actions. In: EinsiedelSebastian vonMaloneDavid MUgarteBruno Stagno (eds) The Security Council during the 21st Century. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
56.
WaltzKenneth N (1979) Theory of International Politics. Boston, MA: MacGraw-Hill.
57.
WalzerMichael (2000 [1977]) Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. New York: Basic Books.
58.
WeissThomas G (2004) The humanitarian impulse. In: MaloneDavid M (ed.) The UN Security Council: From the Cold War to the 21st Century. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 37–54.
59.
WheelerNicholas J (2000) Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
