令人难以置信的承诺:联合国维和失败如何影响和平进程

IF 1.5 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Barış Arı
{"title":"令人难以置信的承诺:联合国维和失败如何影响和平进程","authors":"Barış Arı","doi":"10.1080/13533312.2022.2044312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The credible commitment problem refers to the inability of parties in a conflict to commit to a peace agreement because they distrust the other party to keep up their end of the bargain. This problem is the prevailing explanation for why parties in a civil war cannot resolve their conflict peacefully without the involvement of a third party, such as the UN. According to this dominant view, UN peace operations make negotiated settlement possible by providing essential security guarantees that address credible commitment problems. In Incredible Commitments: How UN Peacekeeping Failures Shape Peace Processes, Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal contests this prevailing explanation by presenting an alternative theoretical framework in which combatants seek international assistance due to various distributional and reputational reasons, but not because of a predominant security concern. According to Dayal, parties in a peace process learn from highly visible failures of UN peacekeeping elsewhere but keep requesting UN assistance. As combatants often have strong reasons to doubt the UN’s ability to address commitment problems and deliver credible guarantees, the credible commitment theory of war termination is incomplete, if not flawed:","PeriodicalId":47231,"journal":{"name":"International Peacekeeping","volume":"29 1","pages":"348 - 350"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incredible Commitments: How UN Peacekeeping Failures Shape Peace Processes\",\"authors\":\"Barış Arı\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13533312.2022.2044312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The credible commitment problem refers to the inability of parties in a conflict to commit to a peace agreement because they distrust the other party to keep up their end of the bargain. This problem is the prevailing explanation for why parties in a civil war cannot resolve their conflict peacefully without the involvement of a third party, such as the UN. According to this dominant view, UN peace operations make negotiated settlement possible by providing essential security guarantees that address credible commitment problems. In Incredible Commitments: How UN Peacekeeping Failures Shape Peace Processes, Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal contests this prevailing explanation by presenting an alternative theoretical framework in which combatants seek international assistance due to various distributional and reputational reasons, but not because of a predominant security concern. According to Dayal, parties in a peace process learn from highly visible failures of UN peacekeeping elsewhere but keep requesting UN assistance. As combatants often have strong reasons to doubt the UN’s ability to address commitment problems and deliver credible guarantees, the credible commitment theory of war termination is incomplete, if not flawed:\",\"PeriodicalId\":47231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Peacekeeping\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"348 - 350\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Peacekeeping\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13533312.2022.2044312\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Peacekeeping","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13533312.2022.2044312","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

可信承诺问题是指冲突各方由于不信任对方遵守协议而无法承诺达成和平协议。这个问题是为什么内战各方在没有第三方(如联合国)参与的情况下无法和平解决冲突的普遍解释。根据这一主流观点,联合国和平行动通过提供解决可信承诺问题的基本安全保障,使谈判解决成为可能。在《令人难以置信的承诺:联合国维和失败如何塑造和平进程》一书中,Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal对这一普遍解释提出了质疑,他提出了一个替代理论框架,在该框架中,战斗人员由于各种分配和声誉原因寻求国际援助,但不是因为主要的安全问题。达亚尔表示,和平进程中的各方从联合国在其他地方维和行动的明显失败中吸取了教训,但仍不断请求联合国援助。由于战斗人员往往有充分的理由怀疑联合国解决承诺问题和提供可信保证的能力,因此终止战争的可信承诺理论即使没有缺陷,也是不完整的:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incredible Commitments: How UN Peacekeeping Failures Shape Peace Processes
The credible commitment problem refers to the inability of parties in a conflict to commit to a peace agreement because they distrust the other party to keep up their end of the bargain. This problem is the prevailing explanation for why parties in a civil war cannot resolve their conflict peacefully without the involvement of a third party, such as the UN. According to this dominant view, UN peace operations make negotiated settlement possible by providing essential security guarantees that address credible commitment problems. In Incredible Commitments: How UN Peacekeeping Failures Shape Peace Processes, Anjali Kaushlesh Dayal contests this prevailing explanation by presenting an alternative theoretical framework in which combatants seek international assistance due to various distributional and reputational reasons, but not because of a predominant security concern. According to Dayal, parties in a peace process learn from highly visible failures of UN peacekeeping elsewhere but keep requesting UN assistance. As combatants often have strong reasons to doubt the UN’s ability to address commitment problems and deliver credible guarantees, the credible commitment theory of war termination is incomplete, if not flawed:
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Peacekeeping
International Peacekeeping INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
17.40%
发文量
29
×
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