Humanitarian and Peacekeeping Forces
Our conclusion so far is that the United States should maintain two kinds of military forces. The first is a nuclear force sufficient to deter any country or combination of countries from launching an attack with nuclear weapons, to be dealt with in Chapter 25. The second is an antiescalation force armed with conventional weapons that can intervene to stop a rogue country from building nuclear forces and that can bring to a halt any wars that have the potential of spiraling into much bigger wars and thus into nuclear war itself. The nature of this second force will be addressed in Chapter 24.
The question in this chapter is where to lodge responsibility for two other kinds of interventions, if and when they are needed. The first is a purely humanitarian intervention. An example is the original mission in Somalia to protect the distribution of food and medical supplies. The second is a slightly different kind of humanitarian intervention, a peacekeeping intervention with military force to stop the killing and bring about peace in an ongoing conflict that has little or no potential for spiraling into a bigger war. The most recent example is the intervention in Bosnia in late 1995 and early 1996 by the United States, its NATO Allies, and Russia, in which Clinton sent a force with severely circumscribed rules of engagement.
The vast majority of interventions with military force in history had their roots in rivalries between states. Most of the recent military interventions by the United States have such roots. For interventions that are either humanitarian or peacekeeping, the best place to look is in the history of the United Nations. 1
The first thing one notices about the list of U.N. humanitarian and peacekeeping operations is how extensive they have become. U.N. forces are engaged in almost every corner of the globe. What is more, one of the first responses to