Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
International Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Piiparinen, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Rescuing Thousands, Abandoning a Million: What Might an Emancipatory Intervention Have Looked Like in Rwanda?

Touko Piiparinen

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Finland

The conceptual analysis of an ‘emancipatory intervention’, one that frees the people from repressive or genocidal political forces, has attracted scant attention in the debate on international relations. This has been partly due to the fact that the term has been hijacked by the pervasive liberal moral hubris which advocates greater missions1 under the guise of humanitarian intervention. This article aims to revive and reformulate the idea of emancipatory intervention by deriving lessons from Rwanda as an empirical case and by invoking humanitarian realism, which has the potential to move the vision of emancipatory intervention away from liberal interventionism. The ‘new yardstick’ of assessing emancipatory intervention is less ambitious, but more realistic: it is understood as the extent to which the intervening side might free itself from structural constraints in order to conduct a humanitarian intervention. In the Rwandan case, such possibilities specifically refer to structural cohesiveness, namely the capacity of the UN system to work efficiently when its powers are combined. They include not only the material powers of individual member states, as the mainstream literature has argued, but also rational-legal powers possessed by the UN Secretariat as well as control mechanisms. On this basis, the article constructs a vision of a ‘hammer and anvil’peacekeeping operation in Rwanda.

Key Words: conflict prevention • genocide • intervention • peacekeeping • Rwanda • United Nations

International Relations, Vol. 21, No. 1, 47-66 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0047117807073767


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?