Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:43:50.794Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

irrelevant or malevolent? un arms embargoes in civil wars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2005

Abstract

un arms embargoes have been increasingly applied to civil wars, yet these embargoes have tended to be either irrelevant or malevolent in their effects. arms embargoes are rarely enforced in a civil war; they undermine the credibility of the un; they are unlikely to change the political positions of civil war participants; they criminalise target societies; and they benefit arms suppliers willing to break the rules. this article argues for the reform of partial arms embargoes, which target select groups in a civil war. it also argues for the restriction in use of impartial embargoes, which apply to all sides in a civil war. enforcing impartial embargoes can actually make the situation worse, by shaping the course of the civil war in unpredictable and immoral ways.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2005 british international studies association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)