Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T19:23:27.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Historicising intervention: strategy and synchronicity in British intervention 1815–50

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2013

JOHN MACMILLAN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article identifies three key themes in British intervention for purposes of liberal reordering in the period 1815–50, namely the ‘opening-up’ of new market spaces (discussed in relation to Uruguay/the Argentine Confederation in the 1840s), a cosmopolitan humanitarianism evident in the campaign for the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade that ran throughout this period, and the political-ideological contest between constitutionalist and absolutist forces and represented here by intervention in the Iberian Peninsula in the late 1820s to1830s. In developing a strategic perspective upon military/naval intervention the analysis shows its utility to have been subordinate to more fundamental sociopolitical, cultural, and institutional determinants. With regard to understanding the outcomes of specific intervention the analysis shows the importance of systematically evaluating developments in the domestic political environments of both intervening and target state as well as the military campaign itself and the need for sufficient general alignment or synchronisation in the timeline of developments in each of these three domains. This model helps to explain that whilst liberal interventions are not necessarily bound to fail, they frequently prove more difficult, complex, and protracted than the interveners expect.

Type
Articles
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 39 , Issue 5: Intervention and the Ordering of the Modern World , December 2013 , pp. 1091 - 1110
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2013 

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.)

References

1 See, for example, Hameiri, Shahar, Regulating Statehood: State Building and the Transformation of the Global Order (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2010), pp. 18–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Seybolt, Taylor, Humanitarian Military Intervention: The Conditions for Success and Failure (Oxford: SIPRI, 2007)Google Scholar; Adnan Pachachi, ‘The Road to Failure in Iraq’, New York Times (4 April 2013), available at: {http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/04/the-road-to-failure-in-iraq/?_r=0} accessed 31 July 2013.

2 Seybolt, Humanitarian Military Intervention, p. 23.

3 Owen, John M. IV, The Clash of Ideas in World Politics: Transnational Networks, States, and Regime Change, 1510–2010 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 See, for example, Jentleson, Bruce W. and Britton, Rebecca L., ‘Still Pretty Prudent: Post-Cold War American Public Opinion on the Use of Military Force’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42:4 (1998), pp. 395–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Eichenberg, Richard C., ‘Victory Has Many Friends: U.S. Public Opinion and the Use of Military Force, 1981–2005’, International Security, 30:1 (2005), pp. 140–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Howell, William G. and Pevehouse, Jon C., While Dangers Gather: Congressional Checks on Presidential War Powers (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hildebrandt, Timothy, Hillebrecht, Courtney, and Holm, Peter M., ‘The Domestic Politics of Humanitarian Intervention: Public Opinion, Partisanship, and Ideology’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 9 (2013), pp. 243–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and for case-based work see, for example, Lewis, Ioan and Mayall, James, ‘Somalia’, in Berdal, Mats and Economides, Spyros (eds), United Nations Interventionism 1991–2004 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 108–38Google Scholar; Biddle, Stephen, Friedman, Jeffrey A., and Shapiro, Jacob N., ‘Testing the Surge: Why Did Violence Decline in Iraq in 2007?’, International Security, 37:1 (2012), pp. 7–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Chaudhuri, Rudra and Farrell, Theo, ‘Campaign Disconnect: Operational Progress and Strategic Obstacles in Afghanistan, 2009–2011’, International Affairs, 87:2 (2011), pp. 27–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Vincent, John, Nonintervention and International Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), p. 8Google Scholar.

7 Quoted in McLean, David, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire: Britain and the Republics of La Plata, 1836–1853 (London: Tauris, 1995), p. 103Google Scholar.

8 Fairbank, John K., ‘The Creation of the Treaty System’, in Twitchett, Denis and Fairbank, John K. (eds), The Cambridge History of Modern China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978), p. 144CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 For recent discussions of intervention in this period see Simms, Brendan and Trim, D.J.B., Humanitarian Intervention: A History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Rodogno, Davide, Against Massacre: Humanitarian Interventions in the Ottoman Empire 1815–1914 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012)Google Scholar.

10 Kaufmann, Chaim D. and Pape, Robert A., ‘Explaining Costly International Moral Action: Britain's Sixty Year Campaign Against the Atlantic Slave Trade’, International Organization, 53 (1999), p. 633CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Quoted in Gelber, Harry, Opium, Soldiers and Evangelicals: Britain's 1840–42 War with China, and its Aftermath (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2004), p. 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 See Hao, Yen-P'ing and Wang, Erh-Min, ‘Changing Views of Western Relations, 1840–95’, in Twitchett, Denis and Fairbank, John K. (eds), The Cambridge History of Modern China, vol. 11 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), pp. 142–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Cassel, Par Kristoffer, Grounds of Judgment: Extraterritoriality and Imperial Power in Nineteenth Century China and Japan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 See, for example, Rowe, Wiliam T., China's Last Empire: The Great Qing (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 2009)Google Scholar; Gray, Jack, Rebellions and Revolutions. China From the 1800s to the 1980s (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

15 Gelber, Opium, Soldiers and Evangelicals, p. 168, 167–8; see also Pelcovitis, Nathan A., Old China Hands and the Foreign Office (New York: American Institute of Pacific Relations, 1948), pp. 15–17Google Scholar.

16 Fairbank, ‘The Creation of the Treaty System’, p. 226; see also Yen-P'ing Hao and Erh-Min Wang, ‘Changing Views of Western Relations, 1840–95’.

17 See Fairbank, ‘The Creation of the Treaty System’. By the 1860s, the Qing dynasty was itself beginning to come to terms with the fact that the experience of relations with the European Powers did present a significant challenge to the Chinese world view. See, for example, Yen-P'ing Hao and Erh-Min Wang, ‘Changing Views of Western Relations, 1840–95’.

18 McLean, , War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire: Britain and the Republics of La Plata, 1836–1853 (London: Tauris, 1995), p. 49Google Scholar.

19 Lynch, John, Argentine Dictator: Juan Manuel de Rosas 1829–1852 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), p. 255Google Scholar.

20 McLean, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire, pp. 34–5.

21 Ibid., p. 64. McLean notes that in summer 1842, Rosas had warned Ouseley's predecessor that whilst he had no doubt an Anglo-French naval force could destroy his capital ‘his fanatical supporters would withdraw into the countryside and conduct a guerrilla struggle against the invaders before they would ever compromise’, p. 33.

22 McLean, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire, p. 164.

23 Lynch, Argentine Dictator, p. 274.

24 Miller, Rory, Britain and Latin America in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (London: Longman, 1993), pp. 54–5Google Scholar.

25 McLean, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire, pp. 185–7; see also Ferns, H. S., Britain and Argentina in the Nineteenth Century (Oxford: Clarendon, 1960), p. 280Google Scholar.

26 See, for example, Oksenberg, Michael, ‘China's Confident Nationalism’, Foreign Affairs, 65 (1986), pp. 501–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Note, however, that British and French forces intervened to assist the Qing regime to defeat the Taipings.

28 Quoted in Mclean, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire, p. 44.

29 Ibid., pp. 49–50.

30 Ibid., p. 88.

31 See ibid., pp. 90–1 for details of the criticism and highlighting of the discrepancy between official and actual policy.

32 Miller, Britain and Latin America, p. 51; see also McLean, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire, p. 188.

33 This section draws upon MacMillan, John, ‘Myths and Lessons of Liberal Intervention: the British Campaign for the Abolition of the Atlantic Slave Trade to Brazil’, Global Responsibility to Protect, 4 (2012), pp. 92–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 See, for example, Lord Clive Soley, ‘The Right Side of History’, {http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&biw=1260&bih=863&q=soley+right+side+of+history&oq=soley+right+side+of+history&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=8186l9983l0l14l8l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0} accessed 26 June 2011, pp. 2–3. See also Bass, Gary J., ‘Humanitarian Intervention in the 21st Century’, The Tocqueville Review, 30:1 (2009), pp. 17–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ferguson, Niall, Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power (London: Allen Lane, 2002), pp. 139, 303–17Google Scholar.

35 On this last point one can also include Hurd, Douglas, Choose Your Weapons: the British Foreign Secretary, 200 years of Argument, Success and Failure (London: Phoenix, 2011), pp. 83–4Google Scholar.

36 Bethell, Leslie, The Abolition of the Brazilian Slave Trade (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), p. 311CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Needell, Jeffrey D., ‘The Abolition of the Brazilian Slave Trade in 1850: Historiography, Slave Agency and Statesmanship’, Journal of Latin American Studies, 33 (2001), pp. 681–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Miller, Britain and Latin America, p. 55.

38 Needell, Jeffrey D., The Party of Order: The Conservatives, the State, and Slavery in the Brazilian Monarchy, 1831–1871 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006), pp. 60–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Bethell, Abolition, p. 79. For the violent character of this period see Needell, The Party of Order, pp. 61, 95–105; also Burns, E. Bradford, A History of Brazil (2nd edn, New York: Columbia University Press, 1980), pp. 170–86Google Scholar.

39 Bethell, Abolition, pp. 341–2.

40 This interpretation is drawn from Needell, Abolition, p. 707.

41 See Bethell, Abolition; MacMillan, ‘Myths and Lessons’, p. 109.

42 Hobsbawm, Eric, The Age of Revolution 1789–1848 (London: Abacus, 2009 [orig. pub. 1962]), pp. 138–9Google Scholar.

43 Webster, Charles K., The Foreign Policy of Castlereagh, 1815–1822 (Bell: London, 1947), p. 51Google Scholar (quoted in Vincent, Nonintervention, p. 75).

44 Broers, Michael, Europe After Napoleon, 1799–1815 (London: Arnold, 1996), p. 118Google Scholar (quoted in Owen, The Clash of Ideas, p. 155).

45 Schroeder, Paul W., The Transformation of European Politics, 1763–1848 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996)Google Scholar.

46 Bullen, Roger, ‘Party Politics and Foreign Policy: Whigs, Tories and Iberian Affairs, 1830-6’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 51:123 (London: University of London, 1978), p. 40Google Scholar.

47 Birmingham, David, A Concise History of Portugal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 113Google Scholar.

48 Bullen, ‘Party Politics’, p. 39.

49 Bullen, ‘Party Politics’, p. 49.

50 Ibid., p. 57; Hobsbawm, The Age of Revolution, p. 147.

51 Phillips, William D. and Phillips, Carla Rahn, A Concise History of Spain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 215CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 See, on these questions, Roberts, Adam, ‘The “war on terror” in historical perspective’, Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 47:2 (2005), pp. 101–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hameiri, Shahar, Regulating Statehood: State Building and the Transformation of The Global Order (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Downes, Alexander B. and Monten, Jonathan, ‘Forced to be Free?’, International Security, 37:4 (2013), pp. 90–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar.