2 ms·
I know what you mean. I am for once undecided on this issue and did not want to pull a Godwin. Therefore trying to find a more recent example and did this in Bo
by sdoering 11y ago
I know what you mean. I am for once undecided on this issue and did not want to pull a Godwin. Therefore trying to find a more recent example and did this in Bosnia.
The German part of that intervention by the way was against our constitution, but did happen non the less (it being a war like effort, without UN mandate is not allowed and explicitly forbidden by our constitution - but who cares as no consequences for the politicians did happen).
I see hefty reasons to be against interventions and having studied history, I also see some cases where interventions might be, in the long run, for the greater good. But that can be decided in hindsight and I find it hard (to impossible) to do so smack in the middle of such a situation.
We do not have lots of information and we have to make decisions under massiv uncertainty. If politicians then have multiple voices telling them this or that viewpoint (with their own hidden agendas) - who of us would be any better in deciding rationally? And I do mean the rational part of the decision, that cold hard rationality, that might not look good in the press, but is necessary? To make a decision is mostly easy. To do it right is hard (or do it based on ideology - also quite easy imho).
So Bosnian Serbs having their own country? Did I get something wrong while studying history or didn't the Bosnien Serbs for the most part want to stay with Serbia? And weren't it the Bosniaks who pushed for a separate state?
Weren't the Bosniaks the ones who did (in a 1990 questionnaire) identify mostly as a non religious ethnic group, but were traditionally sorted into the "Muslim" category since the Ottoman Empire (thereby gaining support during the war by muslim countries).
Weren't it for the Serbs who did most (around three quarters) of the war crimes and atrocities (not that the other quarter wasn't as bad).
So yeah - not intervening here might just have perpetuated a situation. It also might have made it worse. But that's easy to discuss in hindsight. Having only partial information it might not be that easy to decide in the given situation. And I am willing to give the politicians back then some slack for deciding in uncertainty.
And no, that is no "get out of jail" card or anything. It is just me trying to have a rational view based in reality, while trying to build a more final view on these questions.
Not saying, that the current interventions are anything good at all or not driven by purely economic interests or interests in securing access to natural resources or such.