In recent years some human rights scholars, journalists, activists, and policy makers have advocated the use of military intervention against violent mass human rights violations by governments or other perpetrators in societies with governments that are unable or unwilling to prevent the violence.1 This push is a response to the failures of outside powers that appeared militarily capable of intervening in, for instance, the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia in the 1990s. While many such advo- cates also recognize the importance of long-term prevention efforts and non-military options, they argue that there will be cases in which prevention efforts will fail and violent mass human rights violations against vulnerable groups will become a serious threat, if they do not actually take place. In such instances, military inter- vention from the outside is the legitimate last resort.2
Theriault, Henry C.
"The MARO Handbook: New Possibilities or the Same Old Militarism?,"
Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal:
Available at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/gsp/vol6/iss1/3