| Description |
The objective of this research project is to determine which specific organizational structures and characteristics increase the likelihood that a humanitarian intervention will occur and result in success. With that goal in mind, I develop two main hypotheses which I then test against carefully chosen, controlled case studies representative of previous interventional efforts carried out by the United Nations, NATO, the European Union, and the African Union. My first hypothesis states that international organizations with smaller memberships composed of like-minded states are more likely to initiate and carry out prompt, successful interventions. This hypothesis suggests that smaller, less diverse international organizations are more likely to reach agreements regarding proposed actions than are their larger, more diverse counterparts. In testing this hypothesis, I utilize process tracing methodologies to examine the specific influence independent variables such as shared ideals and membership size have upon the enactment of interventions and their later success. Second, I hypothesize that among international intervening organizations, the presence of a global military superpower will increase the capacity of such organizations to intervene and do so successfully in humanitarian crises. This suggests that the increased military capabilities, resources, and the overall influence of global military superpowers will enhance organizational abilities to effectively enact and carry out interventions. In testing this hypothesis, I again utilize process tracing methodologies to determine the effects of these independent variables. |
