Keeping or Building Peace? UN Peace Operations beyond the Security Dilemma

IF 5 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Susanna P. Campbell, Jessica Di Salvatore
{"title":"Keeping or Building Peace? UN Peace Operations beyond the Security Dilemma","authors":"Susanna P. Campbell,&nbsp;Jessica Di Salvatore","doi":"10.1111/ajps.12797","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One of the most consistent findings on UN peace operations (UNPOs) is that they contribute to peace. Existing scholarship argues this is because UNPOs' peacekeeping troops solve the security dilemma that inhibits combatant disarmament and prevents their political leaders from sharing power. We argue that existing scholarship's focus on peacekeeping troops overlooks UNPOs’ role in enabling governments to implement redistributive power-sharing reforms contained in peace agreements, along with their broader peace processes. While peacekeeping troops can help belligerents refrain from violence, military force alone cannot explain how political elites implement redistributive reforms that threaten their status. We argue that UNPOs that have predominant peacebuilding (as opposed to peacekeeping) mandates help sustain political elites’ commitment to implementing peace agreement reforms and, thus, contribute to inclusive peace (increased political inclusion and reduced violence). We test our argument using a data set on UNPO mandates and original fieldwork on three sequential UNPOs in Burundi.</p>","PeriodicalId":48447,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Political Science","volume":"68 3","pages":"907-926"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12797","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the most consistent findings on UN peace operations (UNPOs) is that they contribute to peace. Existing scholarship argues this is because UNPOs' peacekeeping troops solve the security dilemma that inhibits combatant disarmament and prevents their political leaders from sharing power. We argue that existing scholarship's focus on peacekeeping troops overlooks UNPOs’ role in enabling governments to implement redistributive power-sharing reforms contained in peace agreements, along with their broader peace processes. While peacekeeping troops can help belligerents refrain from violence, military force alone cannot explain how political elites implement redistributive reforms that threaten their status. We argue that UNPOs that have predominant peacebuilding (as opposed to peacekeeping) mandates help sustain political elites’ commitment to implementing peace agreement reforms and, thus, contribute to inclusive peace (increased political inclusion and reduced violence). We test our argument using a data set on UNPO mandates and original fieldwork on three sequential UNPOs in Burundi.

维持和平还是建设和平?超越安全困境的联合国和平行动
关于联合国和平行动(UNPOs)最一致的结论之一是它们有助于和平。现有的学术研究认为,这是因为联合国维和行动的维和部队解决了阻碍战斗人员解除武装和政治领导人分享权力的安全困境。我们认为,现有学者对维和部队的关注忽视了联合国维和行动在帮助政府实施和平协议中的权力再分配改革以及更广泛的和平进程中所发挥的作用。虽然维和部队可以帮助交战各方避免暴力,但军事力量本身并不能解释政治精英如何实施威胁其地位的再分配改革。我们认为,主要承担建设和平(而非维持和平)任务的联合国维和行动有助于维持政治精英对实施和平协议改革的承诺,从而促进包容性和平(提高政治包容性和减少暴力)。我们利用关于联合国布隆迪政治事务处任务的数据集和对布隆迪三个先后设立的联合国布隆迪政治事务处的原始实地调查来验证我们的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
2.40%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Political Science (AJPS) publishes research in all major areas of political science including American politics, public policy, international relations, comparative politics, political methodology, and political theory. Founded in 1956, the AJPS publishes articles that make outstanding contributions to scholarly knowledge about notable theoretical concerns, puzzles or controversies in any subfield of political science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信