Military Intervention after the Cold War (review)

Andrea Kathryn Talentino has produced an intriguing offering concerning how and why the United Nations, NATO, and national governments use military force in foreign interventions. Talentino employs a case study methodology to argue that human rights and responsible governance became central in defining international security concerns after the Soviet Union's demise. During the Cold War, military interventions occurred primarily after justifying security concerns or as an outcome of competition within the international system. Once Cold War bipolarity collapsed along with the Berlin Wall in 1989, a new intervention view emerged, raising "principle above power" and redefining "legitimacy in the context of responsibility" (p. 277). In sum, post–Cold War interventionists realized that the military was not only a coercive force but also one that achieved moral objectives, such as easing human suffering. To Talentino, this new thinking roots itself within globalization, a normative force that emphasizes "the protection of individuals and substantive qualities of governance" (p. 4).

To support her thesis, Talentino devotes several initial chapters to explaining various international relations theories, sections more useful to military historians or practioners concerned with strategic organizations than those interested in operational or tactical details. Later chapters include case studies of more historical concern—Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Sierra Leone, and Kosovo—with each representing a well-researched, scholarly inquiry that treats the origins of the conflict, motives for intervention, a synopsis of what occurred and outcomes, as well as a detailed map.

Talentino's scholarly contribution is at least two-fold. The book situates itself alongside similar works by Richard Haass and Karin von Hippel that seek to explore interventions and their outcomes. More importantly, Talentino's book also explains a change in international perceptions of the use of military power, a shift that occurred partly because globalization increased public pressure to do something to end violence, protect citizens, and redress instability. Other forces than public outcry were certainly at work but domestic pressure and an international willingness to act in an era of post–Cold War instability contributed toward increased military intervention.

The military history audience may find the international relations writing quirky and the competing theories problematic, especially since it is not always apparent which theory applies in each case study and why. But if one pushes that obstruction aside, an historical pattern of military intervention emerges that bears consideration. Talentino demonstrates that each of her intervention cases, successful or not, share a common thread in that various entities perceived that something must be done to alter an ongoing humanitarian crisis and that coalitions, not individual countries, became the instrument of choice in doing so. She challenges historians to situate humanitarian motives within the larger span of military intervention history and thereby assess whether or not the post–Cold War is a break with or a continuation of the past. The book merits academic consideration and sheds further light upon post–Cold War military intervention behavior.