Discussion Topics on Marten Chap. 1-3


Do you agree with Marten that “complex peacekeeping operations” are similar to liberal colonialism?


Is the contemporary purpose behind CPOs similar to the imperial motive for controlling colonies? Does the different intent matter for purposes of Marten’s comparison?


Should we take the “humanitarian plank” of the 1885 Berlin Conference (p.86) seriously?


Marten argues that humanitarian norms and security interests were entwined in liberal colonialism and contemporary peacekeeping. Do you agree that norms and interests are entwined, or does one social factor dominate?

If norms matter, why was there no intervention in Rwanda?


Does the need for CPOs to be “doubly multilateral” (p.10) mean that they are doomed to fail? Must mission coherence be sacrificed to achieve international consent to begin a CPO and domestic participation during the CPO? Is it an error to sacrifice self-determination for control?


Has multilateral support in Afghanistan made that mission easier?


Marten seems to argue that CPOs either do too little or attempt too much. Is this a fair criticism? What is Marten’s proposed alternative?

Are current difficulties in Iraq due to lack of US will or doing too much?