If force is used it is expected to be calibrated and precise and in conformity with international humanitarian law. As the demands placed on peacekeeping operations have changed over the years, the principles that underpin them have been subject to shifting emphases and interpretations. In the early s, when the increased incidence of ethno-nationalist civil wars gave rise to grave violations of humanitarian law, pressures on the United Nations to act to prevent or mitigate these crimes resulted in a downgrading of consent as a requirement for UN peacekeeping.
However, the inability of UN peacekeeping forces subsequently to fulfill their mandate, most notably in Somalia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Rwanda, led to renewed appreciation of the importance of consent but also of the need for UN peacekeepers to be better equipped to use force in the face of would-be spoilers. Similarly, the humiliation that the United Nations suffered for failing to prevent genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda led subsequently to recommendations that the organization not allow concerns about impartiality to prevent discrimination between aggressors and victims in the field.
Such flexibility is necessary when dealing with dynamic and varied conflict environments but it has also led to confusion as to how these principles should be applied and a blurring of the lines between peacekeeping and peace enforcement. There is also some debate as to other, additional principles that should perhaps guide peacekeeping.
The Australian Defence Force, for instance, adds to the core three principles another eight: legitimacy, respect for sovereignty, credible force structure and composition, mutual respect, transparency, unity of command, interoperability, and freedom of movement.
The expansion of peacekeeping practice, and the debate it has spurred, has been one of the most significant developments in peacekeeping since the inception of the institution. While this expansion has created enormous burdens for the United Nations, arguably it has also made the Organization a more indispensable actor in the maintenance of international peace and security. In the absence of a formal peacekeeping doctrine, the document provides an articulation of the guiding principles of UN peacekeeping that are to be used to inform the work of planners, practitioners, and trainers.
Similar initiatives have been undertaken in recent years by regional security organizations, including NATO and the African Union. The growing importance of regional organizations for peacekeeping and peace enforcement in the post-Cold War era is another notable trend. The deployment of regional forces has either been at the request of the United Nations and in support of UN peacekeeping or it has represented unilateral initiatives. Regional forces can be a useful complement to UN peacekeeping, especially since the United Nations is unable or unwilling to deploy peacekeeping forces everywhere that the need arises, and indeed the Charter foresees a role for regional arrangements in peace maintenance Ch.
However, regional organizations, and the individual states within them, will often have their own views and practices of peacekeeping that may reflect more parochial considerations. In some cases, for instance, regional organizations engaged in peacekeeping have been accused of pursuing their own strategic interests first and foremost. Even where national forces serve in UN peacekeeping operations, problems arise when commanders of these forces in the field are more responsive to their national capitals than to the United Nations.
Another matter of concern is the global division of labor that has come to characterize UN peacekeeping in recent years. Historically, developed countries have been important troop-contributing nations to peacekeeping operations. These powers have become increasingly averse to the risks of peacekeeping, however, and as a result developing countries now provide the large majority of UN peacekeepers troops and police.
July , which was immediately accepted by Iraq, was finally used by Iran when it decided in to put an end to the war. In the same way, the negotiation of the Geneva agreements concerning Afghanistan lasted eight years, but Mikhail Gorbachev found them very useful when he decided to withdraw Soviet troops from the country. The UN work in all these cases offered some pretext for adopting a solution. It is not a useless role, but it is not the most glorious or the most important one.
However, the role attributed to the UN has become different since It is an absolutely new one, since this type of utilisation of the organisation was occasionally practiced before, but, it has become generalized.
The practice consists of referring to the UN problems which are considered insoluble or at least very difficult. Examples of this practice can be found in the case of the UK giving up its mandate on Palestine in , in the case of Congo in , and in Cyprus, at least since The UN interventions requested by the great powers are still called peacekeeping operations.
But to be kept, peace should already exist, and in all the cases mentioned, this was and still is not the case. The first practical confusion is due to the title given to these operations. In fact, they are not peacekeeping ones. They should be called « peacemaking undertakings through the use of the blue helmets.
This could be easily shown by considering the interventions. I will limit my examples to Somalia and Yugoslavia, without entering into a detailed analysis. In Somalia, the intervention was belated: the civil war was already going on in and it developed into a full war in , followed by the secession of Somaliland in The Security Council was requested to react only in Moreover, the first resolution, of 23 January , decided on an arms embargo which was too late to be effective, but was obviously intended to facilitate peacemaking.
The other resolutions of on humanitarian activities, the sending of observers, the creation of UNOSOM, and the various actions undertaken in the following years cannot in any way be called peacekeeping operations, but rather clumsy attempts at peacemaking through the display of blue helmets, peace enforcement through American intervention, and humanitarian relief accompanied by numerous unsuccessful appeals to the parties to stop fighting.
For Yugoslavia, a similar analysis can be made. Peace has not existed there since All of the efforts made, here again far too late, and without any use of economic assistance, have, since the first resolution of 25 September , attempted « to restore peace and dialogue » through the sending of observers, the use of numerous blue helmets and the convening of various conferences and meetings. They have been accompanied by humanitarian operations. But the display of the blue helmets has not in any case been able to keep peace; no cease-fire has been respected.
Again, it would be better to qualify the UN intervention since its origin as « a clumsy peacemaking operation using humanitarian activities, military display, and diplomatic negotiations. De Coning uses a scale going from coherence, cooperation, and collaboration to coexistence.
Coherence, the highest degree of coordination, refers to a coalition that acts upon a standard mandate, strategic vision, and objectives Friis and Jarmyr Jordan and Schout measure coordination on a nine-level Metcalfe scale: independent policy making, exchange of information, consultation, speaking with one voice, looking for consensus, conciliation, arbitration, setting margins, and working towards a specified objective.
Strategy formation : Choices also need to be made about the management of the peacebuilding process. Hart identifies five modes of strategy-formation processes. This framework is built around who is involved in the strategy formulation and in what manner. In the command mode , a strong leader controls the process. The strategy is a conscious, controlled process that is centralized at the top. The end state, the baseline, and alternatives are considered, and an appropriate course of action is decided upon and implemented.
This strategy formation mode can vary from being directive to coercive using power to impose change Balogun and Hailey The symbolic mode involves the creation, by the actors who take the lead, of a clear and compelling vision and mission. The major task is to motivate and inspire and to provide the necessary focus to guide the creative actions of the actors involved. Education and communication are core activities.
This mode requires a great deal of participation and commitment. The rational mode is a theory-driven strategy formation. Strategy is developed through formal analysis and information processing and strategic planning. The transactive mode is based on interaction and learning rather than on the execution of a predetermined plan.
Strategy is crafted based upon an ongoing dialogue with the key stakeholders. Cross-sector and cross-level communication between the actors involved is very important in this mode. The last mode of strategy formation is the generative mode. This mode depends on the autonomous initiatives of the actors involved in the peacebuilding process.
The donor community selects and nurtures initiatives with high peace potential. These ideal types are not exclusive. In many cases, one notices a combination of several of these modes.
The choice is influenced by several factors: the power relations between the actors, the level of complexity of the peacebuilding plan, the heterogeneity of the conflict environment, the phase the conflict is in, etc. Donini distinguishes three types of strategy formulation and implementation: 1 coordination by command, 2 coordination by consensus, and 3 coordination by default.
Some analysts, like Minear , argue in favor of the coordination by command approach; others, like Stephenson and Kehler , prefer coordination by consensus.
Some researchers have focused on the unilateral vs multilateral organization of external interventions. Dobbins et al. The activities could be highly atomized and the administration unwieldy.
Most researchers have analyzed and evaluated existing coordination mechanisms and structures, and some have generated alternative models of coordination. There is, for example, a considerable amount of research about the United Nations peacebuilding and integrated missions.
Jones lists among the successful cases the role of the Special Representatives of the Secretary General SRSGs , the continuity of key actors, the role of friend groups, and coordination mechanisms. Jordan and Schout have produced an interesting and critical analysis of the coordination in the European Union.
Ricigliano introduced the concept of a Network of Effective Action NEA as a set of practices for collaboration that is capable of facilitating integrated approaches to peacebuilding both on the ground and in terms of the theoretical development of the field. Without an effective system for monitoring and evaluating the impact of interventions on the conflict dynamic and peacebuilding, it is difficult to adapt to new challenges and unpredictables effectively and to learn from experience.
Evaluation of the conflict and the peace impact of peacebuilding interventions has become common practice. Evaluations have been done before, during, and after intervention, and focus on different levels and sectors.
Most evaluations look at part of the big picture. There are no macro evaluations of the peacebuilding activities in different sectors of all the major actors internal and external in a particular conflict setting. An essential part of the evaluation is the selection of objective criteria for evaluating the process and of benchmarks for progress and success. The research community has contributed to evaluation by operationalizing the criteria used for assessing good peacebuilding, developing methods for monitoring and evaluating interventions Earl et al.
The nexus between peacemaking, political change, development, peacekeeping, building, and reconciliation has become a central focus of the research, and peacebuilding the common framework within which the interactions between the activities are studied. Peacebuilding involves high-stake decisions that must be made when information is ambiguous, values conflict, and experts disagree. The research relates to six areas where decisions, choices, and judgments have to be made, regarding 1 the definition of the peace and the theoretical assumptions of peacebuilding the end state , 2 the conflict and the peacebuilding deficiencies at the baseline, 3 the context, 4 the planning of the peacebuilding process, 5 the coordination of the process, and 6 the monitoring and evaluation of the intervention.
Despite the progress made, there remain big gaps and challenges. There is a convergence in the identification of peacebuilding conditions, but the research community still needs to distill from the vast and scattered reservoir of knowledge a comprehensive and valid theory of peacebuilding. Considerable progress has been made in the analysis of the baseline, including conflict analysis, early warning, and assessment of the peacebuilding potential and the difficulty of conflict transformation.
With respect to the context, two salient issues require more attention: the qualities of a peacebuilder and the role of integrative power. It is one of the most fascinating and complex areas of study, relating to the framing of time, entry and exit, priority setting, pacing the process, synchronicity and sequencing, and positive and negative synergies.
Higher-quality information and a methodology for analyzing complex dynamic behavior are urgently needed. The fifth and sixth components, peacebuilding coordination and monitoring and evaluation, have recently experienced a boost of attention and produced new insights and methodologies.
More scientific research would help to shape and create more effective, sustainable peacebuilding policies. A better exchange between researchers, practitioners, and decision makers could raise the learning curve. This would involve overcoming several obstacles. They are perceived as being out of touch with the realities of a rapidly changing international landscape. This contains some truth, but distance can also be an advantage. The view from the academic balcony allows one to reflect dispassionately on perturbing foreign policy problems, to discern underlying patterns of behavior, to anticipate future threats, and to forecast the consequences of different policy options.
Second, there is the problem of slow institutional learning. Some countries learn, while others have a flat learning curve. A third obstacle that limits the impact of researchers is the diminution of academic freedom in democratic countries.
In the academic environment, especially in the humanities, the incentives for transdisciplinary research remain very poor. The political environment, especially with respect to conflict, peace, and security issues, has had an extremely negative impact on academic freedom, in the form of political correctness, the influence of spin doctors, unspeakable truths, the use of euphemisms, and the confusing language and taboos.
Some scholars get around politically sensitive issues by engaging in pure theorizing and methodological correctness. The last obstacle is the foreign policy and security decision-making process, which is low on democratic checks and balances.
All of this makes critical and sustainable peace theorizing essential. International Crisis Group ICG is recognized as the leading independent source of analysis and advice to governments and international organization. It publishes reports on conflicts and a crisis watch and provides databases and resources.
World Bank: Conflict Prevention and Reconstruction. The CAF analyzes key factors influencing conflict, focusing on six areas: social and ethnic relations; governance and political institutions; human rights and security; economic structure and performance; environment and natural resources; and external factors.
Conciliation Resources CR is an international nongovernmental organization which publishes Accord , an international review of peace initiatives, and provides many links to other relevant organizations. Its crisis prevention and crisis recovery unit provides a rich set of reports on issues such as DDR, economic recovery, rule of law, small arms, state building, and gender equality.
UNDP also produces human security reports. The Stockholm Peace Research Institute SIPRI has the reputation of publishing objective data and analyses about everything related to arms, arms expenditures, arms control, and peace operations. This contribution is based on many experiences, discussions, and research over the years.
Let me express my appreciation for the valuable and timely help from two doctoral students, Julianne Funk and Nikos Manaras. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice.
Oxford Research Encyclopedias. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. Oxford Research Encyclopedias International Studies. Advanced search. Your current browser may not support copying via this button. Sign In Article Navigation. Subscriber sign in You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Username Please enter your Username. Password Please enter your Password. Forgot password? Don't have an account?
Sign in via your Institution. You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Sign in with your library card Please enter your library card number. Search within Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, and Peacebuilding. Keywords peacemaking peacekeeping peacebuilding conflict prevention preventive diplomacy political change development reconciliation United Nations. Introduction Mainstreaming Peace Peacemaking, peacekeeping, and peacebuilding may not have the punch and the means of national security, but they are receiving an increasing amount of attention in education, research, and politics.
The agenda specified four areas of action, which taken together, were presented as a coherent contribution towards securing peace: 1 preventive diplomacy is action to prevent disputes from arising between the parties, to prevent existing disputes from escalating into conflicts and to limit the spread of the latter when they occur, 2 peacemaking is action to bring hostile parties to agreement, essentially through such peaceful means as those foreseen in Chapter VI of the Charter, 3 peacekeeping is the deployment of a United Nations military and civilian presence in the field to expand the possibilities for both the prevention of the conflict and the making of peace, and 4 peacebuilding is action to identify and support structures which will tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict.
Political and Intellectual Drivers As a result of several changes in the political landscape, attention began to be paid to peacemaking, peacekeeping, and peacebuilding. Preventive Diplomacy and Peacemaking Both preventive diplomacy and peacemaking are key components of peacebuilding.
Peace Negotiations and Peacemaking Peace negotiation, peacemaking, and mediation are efforts to bring the conflicting parties to a peace agreement. Peacekeeping and Peace Support Tasks Researchers such as Chopra , Berdal and Economides , and MacQueen have analyzed the experiences and lessons learned, which led to the development of new types of peace operations and efforts to improve the international and regional organization.
Hazardous Operational Theaters Analysts also identified the characteristics of the war zones which complicate the peace operations seriously. Successes and Failures Reports inside and outside the UN have identified f actors which contributed to failed peace operations, as in Somalia —5 and Rwanda —4.
Peacebuilding Architecture Peacebuilding is about complex change; it involves concurrent activities by many people in different sectors, at several levels, in different time-scapes, and in different layers.
The End State The end state can be defined as the set of required conditions that defines achievement of the peace one wants to build. Definition of Peace Do the researchers provide clear operational definitions of the peace they are studying? Peacebuilding Blocks Most researchers see peacebuilding as the result of transformations in multiple sectors. The Baseline The baseline is the situation at the starting point of a peacebuilding intervention. Conflict Analysis and Prognosis The literature is flooded with all kinds of models to analyze and anticipate conflicts.
Peacebuilding Deficiency Assessment To evaluate the relevance of peacebuilding efforts, a comparison has to be made between the situation at the start of the intervention and the necessary conditions to realize the envisaged peace. Peacebuilding Potential Lederach , Anderson , and others stress the importance of identifying the available and potential peacebuilding socio-economic and socio-cultural resources. The Context The lack of universal formulae and the complexity of conflicts requires the development of a high level of context sensitivity.
The Planning of the Peacebuilding Process The fourth component is the planning of the peacebuilding process. Framing Time This involves choices about differentiating phases in the process, and the framing of the building process as a linear, circular, or procedural activity Murnighan and Mowen All the authors perceive peacebuilding to be a multiphased process, each phase characterized by its own priorities.
Entry and Exit The entry—exit decision has facets, such as when to intervene, the expected exit, when and how to exit instant vs phased withdrawal , assessing the impacts of withdrawal, and the choice of follow-up arrangements. Pacing the Peacebuilding Process Changes can be implemented, either in an all-at-once, big bang fashion, or in a more incremental, step-by-step, stage-by-stage fashion. Setting Priorities In the different phases of the conflict transformation, which tasks get priority or are allocated more resources and time than others?
Synchronicity and Sequencing Are all the tasks implemented synchronically or is there a clear sequencing of the efforts? Negative and Positive Cross-Impacts or Synergies How much attention is paid to the positive and negative cross-impacts of efforts in different sectors and at different levels? Peacebuilding Coordination All peacebuilders are interdependent in that they cannot achieve peace by themselves Lederach Coherence Deficit and Dilemma Despite growing demands for working with an integrated framework and coordinating peace efforts, there is still a coherence deficit.
Dimensions of Coordination An assessment of cooperation and coordination in peacebuilding implies an analysis of the 1 spaces of coordination, 2 the participation, 3 the elements of coordination, 4 the degree of coordination, and 5 strategy formation. Coordination Mechanisms and Structures Most researchers have analyzed and evaluated existing coordination mechanisms and structures, and some have generated alternative models of coordination.
Monitoring and Evaluation Without an effective system for monitoring and evaluating the impact of interventions on the conflict dynamic and peacebuilding, it is difficult to adapt to new challenges and unpredictables effectively and to learn from experience.
Conclusion The nexus between peacemaking, political change, development, peacekeeping, building, and reconciliation has become a central focus of the research, and peacebuilding the common framework within which the interactions between the activities are studied.
References Alger, C. Webel and J. Galtung eds. Handbook of Peace and Conflict Studies. London: Routledge, pp. Anderson, M. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. Augsburger, D. Louisville: John Knox.
Azar, E. Aldershot: Dartmouth. Balogun, J. New York: Prentice Hall. Barnes, K. London: International Alert. Bercovitch, J. Berdal, M. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Booth, K. Boulding, E. Futures 23 5 , — Boulding, K. Austin: University of Texas Press. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Boutros-Ghali, B. New York: United Nations. Brown, M. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Burgess, G. Burton, J. London: Macmillan. Lanham: University Press of America. Caplan, R. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chesterman, S. Chopra, J. London: Routledge. Collier, P. Washington, DC: World Bank. Cooperrider, D. San Francisco: Berret-Koeller. Cousens, E. Crocker, C. Curle, A. London: Tavistock. Daniel, D.
Daniel , P. Taft , and S. Wiharta eds. Peace Operations: Trends, Progress and Prospects. Darby, J. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Oslo: NUPI. Deutsch, D. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Discussion paper. Diamond, L. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian. Dobbins, J. Donini, A. Occasional Paper Providence, RI: Thomas J. Watson Institute for International Studies. Doyle, M. Stedman , D. Rothchild , and E. Cousens eds. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. Duffield, M. London: Zed Books. Earl, S. Ottawa: IDRC. Elbe, S.
Collins ed. Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. Falk, R. Predatory Globalization: A Critique. Cambridge: Polity.
Farrell, T.
0コメント