FOREIGN INTERVENTION IN FAILED STATES
Francois France has produced a thought-provoking and necessary point of view surrounding
issues of failed state intervention. The literature review outlines the complexity of the definition
of a “failed state” painting the picture that one cloth doesn’t fit all. The definition of “failed
state” is also very subjective. The source of the data used in the analysis is credible, however
more data sources would provide a more robust dataset.. The labeling and interpretation of the
model is clear and concise. The author walks us through the selection process of the best model.
In the introduction of this paper, the author sets anticipation for a two pronged approach to i) the
likelihood of foreign intervention in a given delegitimized stage of a state and ii) the effect of
this intervention. However, by the end of the study no analysis was conducted on the effect of
foreign state intervention.
The author of this study clearly lays out the various definitions of failed states, and the difficulty
in creating one definition of failed state. It would have been helpful to have a working definition
from the author’s point of view on the two key concepts of ”failed states” and “foreign
intervention” as applied in this study, this would ensure various readers have the same
interpretation as intended by the author of this paper.
The null hypothesis is that the there is no association between intervention and state
delegitimization.
The dependent variable as identified by the author is :delegitimization of state”, yet the model
enlists “Failed state index” as the dependent variable. However, “delegitimized state” is listed as
an independent variable. That be said, modeling “failed state index”, in and of itself an indicator
for the delegitimization status of a state, presents a relationship where delegitimization of state is
regressed on itself. This model could lead to amplified results.
In interpretation of the model, the author lists the coefficients as “5.92 for External Intervention,
5.82 for public services, and 5.0 for external intervention” It is not clear why there are two
external variables and why they both have different results.
Although the analysis did not show us how states are delegitimized by the intervention act of
foreign states, the author has proposed plausible alternatives to intervention.