Hegemonic blackmail: entrapment in civil war intervention

How do alliance ties impact intervention decision-making? In the aftermath of the Arab Spring, the interventionist mantle was adopted by many of America's allies, from the French- and British-led intervention in Libya, to the heavy involvement of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar in Syria. In both...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCanadian foreign policy journal Vol. 23; no. 3; pp. 218 - 231
Main Author Ashford, Emma M.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Routledge 02.09.2017
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Subjects
Alliances
Arab Spring
Civil war
Decision making
Foreign policy
Hegemony
intervention
Manipulation
Mass media
Military intervention
Narratives
Public opinion
Small states
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:How do alliance ties impact intervention decision-making? In the aftermath of the Arab Spring, the interventionist mantle was adopted by many of America's allies, from the French- and British-led intervention in Libya, to the heavy involvement of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar in Syria. In both cases, the United States was eventually drawn into the intervention. This article lays the theoretical foundations for the logic of civil war entrapment, illustrating that alliance ties can be used by smaller states to induce their more militarily capable allies to join an intervention. This pressure - whether exercised through diplomatic pressure, manipulation of media narratives and public opinion, or through tactical manipulation of the war - constitutes a crude form of "hegemonic blackmail," allowing small states to entangle their more powerful allies in intervention.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1192-6422
2157-0817
DOI:10.1080/11926422.2017.1341843