Military Responses to Refugee Disasters

The problem of refugees, both those who have crossed recognized international borders, and those "internally displaced" who have not, has recently achieved greater policy prominence in the developed world.' This new concern has also prompted a greater inclination to consider and apply military remedies to specific refugee problems. Policy makers, analysts, pundits, and activists now perceive vastly diminished constraints on the exercise of military power in the service of '"good," compared to their views during the Cold War. The great preponderance of global power now enjoyed by the west due to the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the greatly increased capability of air power demonstrated in Operation Desert Storm, have both contributed to this tendency. This optimism is misplaced; I argue below that the application of military power to this set of problems will often prove politically and militarily difficult. This essay first briefly reviews the political and military causes of refugee flows. (The essay is not concerned with economic sources of migration.) These are genocide/politicide, ethnic cleansing, harsh occupation or a repressive indigenous regime, the dangerous environment created by warfare, and the deterioration of local economies that often is caused by warfare. Then, the alternative military remedies to these causes are developed, and their general strengths and weaknesses are outlined. These remedies are aerial bombing, large safe zones, circumscribed safe havens, peace enforcement, and general war against the state or group deemed to be the principal cause of trouble.