Success of Military Aid (Edexcel A Level Geography)
Revision Note
Cost of Military Aid
The recent history of military interventions suggest that there are significant costs involved, leading to the loss of human rights and sovereignty
These long-term costs (civilian deaths, number of refugees, monetary, damage to the infrastructure) generally outweigh the short-term gains (avoiding genocide)
Direct intervention of sending troops and equipment to fight leads to:
Loss of lives on both sides (soldiers and civilians) e.g. 2001 Afghanistan war - 149,000 civilians died
Physical and mental injuries
Costs a lot of money e.g. the 2003 Iraq war cost $2 trillion
Indirect intervention of providing economic or military assistance:
Preferable option for many governments
Involves lower risk and cost
The costs of the Iraq war
In 2003, the US, with coalition allies including the UK, made the decision to invade Iraq and remove the dictator, Saddam Hussein
The justification for the invasion was that:
Saddam, a brutal dictator, was developing weapons of mass destructions (chemical and biological)
There was much evidence that Saddam was violating many Iraqi human rights, including the use of these weapons against his people
Impacts of the invasion on Iraq
Loss of sovereignty and human rights | Short-term gains versus long-term costs |
---|---|
|
|
Examiner Tips and Tricks
Do not think of military intervention as just the movement of troops into a conflict zone. It is much more than this and has significant consequences for the population.
Non-military Interventions
Non-military interventions can be more effective in improving human rights and development, such as the United Nations (UN) peacekeeping missions
UN peacekeeping missions
UN Peacekeeping uses three main principles:
Consent of all parties in the conflict
Impartiality
Non-use of force except in self-defence and defence of the mission
The UN:
Shares the costs among the UN member states
Draw on troops and police from around the world to provide its peacekeeping forces
Integrates civilians into the forces
There are currently 12 UN peacekeeping operations in action across three continents, mainly in Africa and the Middle East
Un Peacekeeping in Côte d’Ivoire
Côte d’Ivoire (West Africa) gained its independence from French colonial rule in 1960
For 30 years it maintained political stability and a sound economy
Consequences of Lack of Action
All military interventions can have negative impacts
Not intervening at all can have more significant negative consequences on the environment, politics and social development (human wellbeing and human rights) of countries around the world
The effects of no military action in Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe is a former British colony, it achieved independence in 1980
It is a country with a history of human rights’ abuses against its citizens
President Mugabe (1980 - 2017) remained in power due to violent, corrupt elections
He was viewed as a dictator and ordered military operations within Zimbabwe, resulting in thousands of civilians’ deaths
Opponents to the government were attacked, tortured and imprisoned
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people were threatened with beheading
Zimbabwe suffers from great poverty - it is ranked 146 of 191 on the Human Development Index
Despite its lack of development and frequent human rights’ violations, international organisations have not intervened:
Western nations, such as the UK, are sensitive to intervention linked to former colonies
Several neighbouring African nations (e.g. South Africa) argued Mugabe was not a threat, so without their support, Western countries would not intervene
The impacts of the lack of military intervention on Zimbabwe
Social impacts | Political impacts | Environmental impacts |
---|---|---|
|
|
|
The lack of military intervention by the international community in Zimbabwe shows that the UN and world leaders are prepared to act in some situations but tolerate others
The survival of the human race could actually be threatened without some global intervention on the state of the environment, meaning human rights would no longer matter or be relevant
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Sign up now. It’s free!
Did this page help you?