Human security and humanitarian intervention

This dissertation asks why some humanitarian interventions succeed in providing human security while others fail. It explores the factors that determine the differences in intervention outcomes, focusing on the context of post-Cold War Africa. Unlike studies that examine limited cases, this comparative study offers a systematic account of regional variations in human security by encompassing the entire African continent. Through fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), the research tests the argument that when the three responsibilities of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), namely prevention, reaction, and reconstruction, are strongly implemented, they facilitate the establishment of a state capable of protecting its people. The findings reveal alternative paths to achieving human security. When the period of early prevention or strong reaction successfully resolves civil wars and is followed by comprehensive reconstruction, it enhances the state's resilience, allowing the state to ensure freedom from fear and freedom from want. This dissertation makes several contributions: firstly, it contributes to security studies with a comparative analysis of intervention conditions for achieving human security. Secondly, it covers the entirety of Africa, offering the first systematic account of variations within the region in attaining human security. Thirdly, the study contributes to the field's methodological evolution by employing fsQCA, providing a systematic and comprehensive explanation of the intervention conditions to achieve long-term human security.