|Keywords:||Intervention; Sudan; Libya; Syria; Iraq; R2P; Europe; Social Sciences; Political Science; Samhällsvetenskap; Statsvetenskap; samhälle/juridik; Social and Behavioural Science, Law; Internationella relationer; International Realtions|
|Full text PDF:||http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-26041|
This is a study that aims to look at the violence occurring in Sudan and Libya in 2011. It asks the question why there was an intervention in the latter case but not the former. The analysis will use an integrated theoretical framework, looking at national interests, power balance and international norms to explain the behavior and decision-making of states in these particular cases. The fact that so little has been done or said about the conflict in Sudan is troubling, and deserves an explanation, especially considering the very different reaction to similar situations like Libya at the time. This study uses a comparative method to map the differences and similarities between the two cases using both statistical numbers and facts, as well as a <strong>content analysis </strong>to examine the discourse and media coverage on the two conflicts. The analysis may seem very broad and complex, but the same can be said about world politics in general. It is a very complex thing, and sometimes a complex explanation is required. Very rarely is there just one answer to a question like this, but many different perspectives that are often equally legitimate and important to consider. This is the basis of the method used in this study, to use different perspectives to give a clearer overall image of why states act as they do, and why they make the decisions that they make.