OxTalks will soon be transitioning to Oxford Events (full details are available on the Staff Gateway). A two-week publishing freeze is expected in early Hilary to allow all events to be migrated to the new platform. During this period, you will not be able to submit or edit events on OxTalks. The exact freeze dates will be confirmed as soon as possible.
If you have any questions, please contact halo@digital.ox.ac.uk
This paper examines how populations in conflict zones perceive foreign military interventions, using Mali as a case study. Based on an original survey experiment (N = 1,594), it compares support for interventions led by the UN, ECOWAS, France, and Russia, focusing on how actor identity, perceived effectiveness, and integrity shape preferences. Findings challenge common assumptions: states—especially non-Western ones like Russia—often attract more support than international organizations; effectiveness raises support across all actors; and misconduct erodes approval, particularly for otherwise trusted interveners. The study highlights the importance of local perspectives for understanding legitimacy and warns Western states not to assume preferred-partner status in an era of multipolar competition and declining UN reach.
