Abstract

This article asks how success is defined and measured for humanitarian action and military interventions aimed at protecting civilians from violence and harm in situations of armed conflict. It starts by illustrating how humanitarian and military protection actors differ in their ability or willingness to mobilize coercive force to achieve their common goal of protecting civilians. As a second step, it classifies different types of protection activities implemented by these actors. A distinction is made between actions designed to mitigate protection threats and actions that aim at eliminating the underlying causes of violence against civilians. This classification is important for two reasons. First, it serves to narrow down the problem of complementarity and contradiction between military and humanitarian approaches to protection. Second, it helps to highlight methodological, ethical and epistemological barriers to demonstrating success for specific types of protection interventions. The article concludes by exploring how normative considerations may guide protection policy and practice in the absence of conclusive empirical evidence on what works in protecting civilians.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.