Indirect Interventions in Civil Wars
Current research on motivational sources of military interventions in civil wars frequently assumes that states intervene due to direct interests in the civil war country. However, this study argues that there exists a subset of interventions in which weaker powers intervene on behalf of interests...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institute of International Relations Prague
2019-12-01
|
| Series: | Czech Journal of International Relations |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ojs3.iir.cz/index.php/cjir/article/view/109 |
| Summary: | Current research on motivational sources of military interventions in civil
wars frequently assumes that states intervene due to direct interests in the
civil war country. However, this study argues that there exists a subset of
interventions in which weaker powers intervene on behalf of interests
which great powers hold vis-à-vis the civil war country. Using the logic of
principal-agent theory in combination with arms trade data allows one to
identify 14 civil wars which experienced the phenomenon of indirect
military interventions. This type of intervention features a weaker power
providing troops for combat missions, whereas its major arms supplier is
only involved with indirect military support. The analysis is complemented
with two brief case studies on the Moroccan intervention in Zaire (1977) and
the Ugandan intervention in the Central African Republic (2009). Both case
studies corroborate expectations as deduced from the proxy intervention
framework.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0323-1844 2570-9429 |