联合国干预后利比里亚的混合安全治理

IF 1.1 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Mariam Bjarnesen
{"title":"联合国干预后利比里亚的混合安全治理","authors":"Mariam Bjarnesen","doi":"10.1080/14678802.2023.2178100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT What can we expect in terms of security governance in targeted states as international peacebuilding interventions and security sector reform ends? Can we assume that years of reform and capacity building will result in formal security institutions whose function alone can explain stability or instability, sustainable peace or relapses into violence, or even war? In 2018, the United Nations ended its peacekeeping mission in Liberia. Celebrated as a success and role model for future undertakings, scrutinising the UN narrative may appear as a natural starting point for analysing Liberia’s relative stability. Yet, in the Liberian case, formal performance reviews will never be sufficient. This paper, with a conceptual point of departure in theories of hybrid security governance, recognises the continued entangled nature of formal and informal security provision in Liberia. It argues that post-intervention narratives of success should not keep us from assessing security beyond formal state capacity. Instead, holistic approaches are key to understand security governance as non-state security providers are, for better or worse, likely to remain relevant despite years of reform and capacity building.","PeriodicalId":46301,"journal":{"name":"Conflict Security & Development","volume":"76 1","pages":"1 - 22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hybrid security governance in Liberia in the aftermath of UN intervention\",\"authors\":\"Mariam Bjarnesen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14678802.2023.2178100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT What can we expect in terms of security governance in targeted states as international peacebuilding interventions and security sector reform ends? Can we assume that years of reform and capacity building will result in formal security institutions whose function alone can explain stability or instability, sustainable peace or relapses into violence, or even war? In 2018, the United Nations ended its peacekeeping mission in Liberia. Celebrated as a success and role model for future undertakings, scrutinising the UN narrative may appear as a natural starting point for analysing Liberia’s relative stability. Yet, in the Liberian case, formal performance reviews will never be sufficient. This paper, with a conceptual point of departure in theories of hybrid security governance, recognises the continued entangled nature of formal and informal security provision in Liberia. It argues that post-intervention narratives of success should not keep us from assessing security beyond formal state capacity. Instead, holistic approaches are key to understand security governance as non-state security providers are, for better or worse, likely to remain relevant despite years of reform and capacity building.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46301,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conflict Security & Development\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 22\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conflict Security & Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2023.2178100\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conflict Security & Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2023.2178100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

随着国际建设和平干预和安全部门改革的结束,我们对目标国家的安全治理有何期待?我们是否可以假设,多年的改革和能力建设将产生正式的安全机构,其职能本身就可以解释稳定或不稳定、可持续和平或陷入暴力甚至战争?2018年,联合国结束了在利比里亚的维和任务。作为未来事业的成功和榜样,仔细审视联合国的叙述似乎是分析利比里亚相对稳定的一个自然起点。然而,在利比里亚的情况下,正式的业绩审查永远是不够的。本文从混合安全治理理论的概念出发,认识到利比里亚正式和非正式安全提供的持续纠缠性质。它认为,干预后的成功叙事不应阻止我们评估正式国家能力之外的安全。相反,整体方法是理解安全治理的关键,因为无论好坏,尽管经过多年的改革和能力建设,非国家安全提供商仍可能保持相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hybrid security governance in Liberia in the aftermath of UN intervention
ABSTRACT What can we expect in terms of security governance in targeted states as international peacebuilding interventions and security sector reform ends? Can we assume that years of reform and capacity building will result in formal security institutions whose function alone can explain stability or instability, sustainable peace or relapses into violence, or even war? In 2018, the United Nations ended its peacekeeping mission in Liberia. Celebrated as a success and role model for future undertakings, scrutinising the UN narrative may appear as a natural starting point for analysing Liberia’s relative stability. Yet, in the Liberian case, formal performance reviews will never be sufficient. This paper, with a conceptual point of departure in theories of hybrid security governance, recognises the continued entangled nature of formal and informal security provision in Liberia. It argues that post-intervention narratives of success should not keep us from assessing security beyond formal state capacity. Instead, holistic approaches are key to understand security governance as non-state security providers are, for better or worse, likely to remain relevant despite years of reform and capacity building.
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
Conflict Security & Development
Conflict Security & Development INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
22
×
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