The Intervention Trinity: A New Way to Think about Military Intervention Abroad
Abstract
The United States can be caught between conflicting desires: a desire to help others and allay human suffering and the desire to avoid getting entangled in forever wars and risk excessive costs of blood and treasure for interests that are not vital to U.S. security. The U.S. must have a guide to help its political and military leaders decide when to intervene militarily abroad. The Weinberger and Powell Doctrines favor military intervention only when vital interests are at risk and even then, only with the maximum use of force to ensure a quick, decisive victory. What about interventions abroad when vital interests are not at stake? This paper will demonstrate that there is a set of criteria (dubbed the Intervention Trinity here) that should be met before military intervention is considered. First, there must be a persistent humanitarian need where military support can be used to alleviate civilian deaths and suffering. Next, there must be broad international support for military intervention. Finally, the responsibility and burden of military intervention must also be shared by the United States and its coalition partners.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- May 10, 2023
- Accession Number
- AD1209874
Entities
People
- Leigh R. Tate
Organizations
- Naval War College