Intrastate Conflict Intervention： The Role of NATO in Bosnia—Herzegovina and Rwanda Cases

李琴

【Abstract】In the past three decades， there were quite a few intrastate conflicts in the world. As a powerful regional organization， NATO plays a vital role in the process of conflict intervention. However， in different cases， it may perform rather diversely. This essay explores the role of NATO in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda cases， in an attempt to find a reasonable strategy for some complicated intrastate conflicts.

【Key words】NATO； intrastate conflict； military intervention

1. Introduction

It has been proved that， since the end of 1980s， a vast majority of armed conflicts all over the world have been intrastate rather than interstate conflicts. Among a wide range of intrastate conflicts， the cases of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda attract much attention. This essay takes an overview of the Bosnia-Herzegovina conflict， and soon turns to the reactions NATO （the North Atlantic Treaty Organization）. Then， it intends to explore the role of NATO when it manages， settles， or prevents the intrastate conflicts. A brief introduction of the Rwanda tragedy will be put in the following context. At last， it will do certain comparison concerning the two cases and NATO， so as to find a possible solution for intrastate conflict intervention.

2. Bosnia-Herzegovina Conflict

Bosnia-Herzegovina， a member state of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia， held a referendum on independence in 1992 （Paris， 2004：97）. The three major ethnic groups， the Muslims， Croats， and Serbs， did not reach an agreement on Bosnias independence：the first two groups strongly favored it， while the last group intensely opposed it. When the Serbs boycotting the referendum， most of the valid votes were for independence and corresponding resolution was approved （Lobell and Mauceri， 2004：27）. Consequently， the conflict among these groups developed into a civil war. At the beginning， the Croats and Muslims pulled together to fight against the Serbs， but soon their military coalition collapsed and they began to switch in the attack to each other. Due to the overwhelming military superiority， the Serbs took control of more than 70% of Bosnian territory， at the cost of around 200， 000 deaths and 2， 000， 000 refugees.

The actions of the Serbs， including secret camps， mass killings， destruction of Muslin architecture， etc.， were prevailingly identified as ‘ethnic cleansing in the international media （Paris， 2004：98）. Despite the relevant reports by media， the global community remained more or less indifferent.