Critical Reflections on MARO: The View from Argentina

Introduction

The following commentary aims to analyze the main characteristics of intervention described in MARO: Mass Atrocity Response Operations; A Military Planning Handbook and to also provide a legal and historical context in which to address that work. In other words, we believe that in order for the inner value of MARO to be assessed, the handbook should be contextualized with the history of American intervention and several aspects of international law.

First, it is important to provide the context in which this article was produced. On the one hand, we promote interdisciplinary work, especially work on law and history, since it enriches perspectives, contributions, and opinions. On the other hand, because we are from Argentina we might offer a different perspective on intervention operations in general and on MAROs in particular. That is to say, living in and being part of a developing region give us the opportunity to offer different opinions on intervention practices. It is also necessary to make it clear that because our professional training is not of a military nature we are not able to provide an indepth analysis of the action plan described in MARO, particularly regarding the operative aspects that were formulated by military strategy experts. These limitations, however, do not push us away from our objective; rather, they bring us closer to it. This commentary does not intend to provide instructions on how to conduct a military operation in cases of massive crimes; rather, it intends to investigate whether a MARO constitutes an ethical and moral option and whether it is the best practical way to avoid, prevent, and control crimes against humanity (such as genocides, massacres, and war crimes). Although MARO intends to describe the military actions to be taken in cases of massive crimes, there is a lack of introspective and self-reflexive analysis of American interventions in the handbook along with a unilateral view, created by US military forces, of the operating methods in these situations. Both of these aspects compel us to combine a historical perspective with a legal one in our consideration of MARO.

Taking into account the observations made above, we divided this commentary into three sections and a final conclusion. In the following section we provide a short analysis of different American military interventions, focusing on the way they unfold in the intervention regions. The second section deals with intervention and considers the legal contributions and change in paradigm after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The last section concentrates on the concept of a MARO, providing a critical analysis of the contents of the book in question, especially of the role of international organizations and local agencies. Apart from reconsidering action plans and interventions in cases of mass crimes against civil society for future discussions, we discuss the controversy that surrounds this issue.

A Short History of American Interventions

The United States is the country that has intervened most often in the affairs of other states in the world. Those interventions were responses, in general terms, to interests related to external policies and/or economic interests over the affected nation.

The purpose of this section is to place MARO into a historical context. By doing so, we may find that MARO has hidden intentions under its pragmatic proposal to provide instructions on "how" to militarily intervene in cases of massive crimes against a civil society.

We can go back in history to the year 1916 as the starting point of this issue. Beginning in this year, American military forces occupied the Dominican Republic for eight years because it got into arrears with a loan. The formal declaration stated:

Dominican Republic is in a state of military occupations . . . and remains submitted to the military government and to the exercise of the military Law applicable to such occupation. This military occupation has not the purpose of destroying Dominican Republic sovereignty, but on the contrary, is intended to help the country to recover the internal order condition, what will be helpful to fulfill provisions stated on the named Convention, and also to comply with all obligations that may...