Search results

How can the UN Security Council contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security in times of heightened tensions, global polarisation, and contestation about the principles underlying the international legal and political order? In this Trialogue, experts with diverse geographic, socio-legal, and ideational backgrounds present their perspectives on the Security Council's historic development, its present functions and deficits, and its defining tensions and future trajectories. Three approaches engage with each other: a power-focused approach emphasising the role of China as an emerging actor; an institutionalist perspective exploring how less powerful states, particularly the elected members of the Security Council, exert influence and may strengthen rule-of-law standards; a regionalist perspective investigating how the Security Council as the central actor can cooperate with regional organisations towards maintaining international peace and security. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

Why are progressives often critical of US foreign policy and the national security state? What would a statecraft that pulls ideas from the American left look like? Grand Strategies of the Left brings the progressive worldview into conversation with security studies and foreign policy practice. It argues that American progressives think durable security will only come by prioritizing the interconnected conditions of peace, democracy, and equality. By conceiving of grand strategy as worldmaking, progressives see multiple ways of using foreign policy to make a more just and stable world. US statecraft - including defense policy - should be retooled not for primacy, endless power accumulation, or a political status quo that privileges elites, but rather to shape the context that gives rise to perpetual insecurity. Progressive worldmaking has its own risks and dilemmas but expands how we imagine what the world is and could be.

In an era where 'history' had supposedly ended, what was an Army for? This question confronted the US Army at the end of the Cold War. Although public support for the military remained high, fewer were sending their children to enlist and questions were raised about the uncertainty of future operations: How would Army leaders prepare soldiers for difficult peacekeeping operations that called for a more human-oriented approach in light of the promises of high-tech warfare? How best to navigate the broader debates about changing gender and sexual norms in American society? Pulled in different directions, the Army struggled to put forward a compelling vision of who and what the American solder should be. In Uncertain Warriors, David Fitzgerald reveals how, in response to this uncertainty, they eventually fell back on an older vision of martial masculinity, embracing a 'warrior ethos' that was meant to define the contemporary American soldier.

Challenging western and francocentric accounts of military interventions in the Sahel, Katharina P. W. Döring foregrounds the response of African regional organizations to armed violence since 2012. Based on extensive empirical research, she reconstructs the experiences of African intervenors in planning and deploying missions in the region. The book outlines the complex constellation of actors who shape African military politics, including presidents, diplomats, and bureaucrats. Drawing upon insights from critical geography, Döring considers the oft-neglected role that space - at once relational and changing - plays in the power dynamics of the region. In so doing, she offers a fresh perspective on military deployments and their politics. Amidst the current resurgence of nationalist geopolitics, this study and its findings have far-reaching implications for the analysis of military politics in Africa and beyond.

Section I: Philosophical, Theoretical & Historical Overview Of The Responsibility To Protect -- Chapter I: Introduction -- Chapter II: Responsibility-to-Protect and a Tri-dimensional Methodology: Exploring the Epistemic-Morality of an Interventionist -- Chapter III: From Peacekeeping to the Responsibility to Protect: Unpacking the Genealogy and History of the RtoP Doctrine in the International Humanitarian System -- Section II: Theory & Practice Of The Responsibility To Protect In Africa -- Chapter IV: A Critical Reflection of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Responsibility to Protect Intervention in Libya -- Chapter V: Horizontal Inequality - Armed Violence and the Responsibility to Protect in Africa: The Cote d'Ivoire Experience -- Chapter VI: Insurgency, Responsibility to Protect at the Expense of Local Protection in the Civilian Joint Task Force in the North-Eastern Region of Nigeria -- Chapter VII: The Sahel Region and the Dilemma of Civilian Protection: A Challenge to the Responsibility to Protect -- Chapter VIII: The Anglophone – Cameroon Conflict and the Responsibility to Protect -- Chapter IX: The Responsibility to Protect and International Community Response to the Boko Haram Insurgency in Nigeria -- Chapter X: From Regionalization of Peacekeeping to the Responsibility to Protect in Africa: The Gambia Experience -- Chapter XI: The US Foreign Policy and the Responsibility to Protect in Africa -- Section III: Emerging & contending issues from the pratice of the responsibility to protect in africa -- Chapter XII: The African Union, Responsibility to Protect and the Mantra of African Solutions to African Problems -- Chapter XIII: Implementing the RtoP: Coordinating Approaches Between the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) -- Chapter XIV: Peace Enforcement In The Face of International Military Intervention -- Chapter XV: The Media, Armed Conflict, and the Responsibility to Protect -- Chapter XVI: Exploring the Legal Discourse on the Practice of the Responsibility to Protect in Africa -- Chapter XVII: Responsibility to Protect and the Avoidance of the Responsibility: Ending Atrocity Crimes in Northern Nigeria -- Chapter XVIII: Environmental Challenges, Climate Change and the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) In Africa -- Section IV: Institutionalization, consolidation & prospects of the responsibility to protect in africa -- Chapter XIX: From the Sustainable Development Goal 16 to the African Union's Silencing the Guns Agenda: Why is it so Difficult to Achieve Sustainable Peace and Stability in Africa? -- Chapter XX: Can the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine Act as a Deterrent against Mass Atrocity and Human Rights Infringement in Africa? -- Chapter XXI: The Responsibility to Protect (RtoP): Norm Institutionalization, Issues, and Challenges -- Chapter XXII: Responsibility to Protect: From Contestation to Internationalization.

""[Kaufman] tells the story brilliantly. Anyone interested in the Middle East or military history will appreciate Kaufman's work." --Senator Joseph I. Lieberman "A stimulating and insightful...will no doubt find a permanent place on the Arab-Israeli bookshelf." --Michael Oren, New York Times bestselling author of Six Days of War October 2023 marks the 50th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, a conflict that shaped the modern Middle East. The War was a trauma for Israel, a dangerous superpower showdown, and, following the oil embargo, a pivotal reordering of the global economic order. The Jewish State came shockingly close to defeat. A panicky cabinet meeting debated the use of nuclear weapons. After the war, Prime Minister Golda Meir resigned in disgrace, and a 9/11-style commission investigated the "debacle." But, argues Uri Kaufman, from the perspective of a half century, the War can be seen as a pivotal victory for Israel. After nearly being routed, the Israeli Defense Force clawed its way back to threaten Cairo and Damascus. In the war's aftermath both sides had to accept unwelcome truths: Israel could no longer take military superiority for granted--but the Arabs could no longer hope to wipe Israel off the map. A straight line leads from the battlefields of 1973 to the Camp David Accords of 1978 and all the treaties since. Like Michael Oren's Six Days of War, this is the definitive account of a critical moment in history"--

Die Alternative zur politisch-militärischen Blockbildung heißt: Neubegründung der Entspannungspolitik. Nur bei Gewährleistung gemeinsamer Sicherheit können die globalen Probleme des Klimawandels und der ökologischen Transformation bewältigt werden. Die mit der "Zeitenwende" auf den Weg gebrachte Aufrüstung steht dem entgegen.Nicht nur die politischen Systeme der postsowjetischen Gesellschaften des Ostens (Russland, Belarus, Kasachstan u.a.) sind eine Herausforderung für den Westen, auch die rasante wirtschaftliche Entwicklung der Volksrepublik China ist eine Herausforderung für westliche liberal-kapitalistische Ideologien und Machtansprüche.In der sich herausbildenden neuen Weltordnung beinhalten Abgrenzungen, Konfrontationen und Sanktionen die Gefahr einer Blockade von Nationen übergreifenden Handlungs- und Lösungsansätzen. Die infolge des Angriffskrieg Russlands gegen die Ukraine ausgesetzten Ansätze zu Transparenz, Vertrauensbildung und Rüstungskontrolle können jedoch nur reaktiviert werden, wenn Friedens- und Entspannungspolitik im 21. Jahrhundert neu gedacht und weiterentwickelt werden.

In this timely book, Alexandra Harrington examines the legal and policy terms contained in transitional justice mechanisms through the lenses of intergenerational equity and justice, and the impact on current and future generations. Based on these findings, she offers a new definition of transitional justice that focuses on generational incorporation to ensure a durable, equitable and just peace. Proposing a more nuanced definition of transitional justice in the setting of internal armed conflict, chapters address both the histories and the analyses of different conflicts. Harrington reviews the core findings and their potential impacts for crafting transitional justice mechanisms that are inclusive of the needs of children and youth, current and future generations, intergenerational equity and intergenerational justice. The book also focuses on the variety of agreements and instruments adopted for peace through trend analysis and information gathering.

Bilateral and multilateral donors are increasingly focusing on strengthening social cohesion in efforts to build and sustain peace in conflict-affected societies. What does promoting social cohesion mean with respect to inter­national engagement? This policy brief provides an overview of the "social cohesion" approach, explains how it applies to conflict-affected and fragile contexts, and intro­duces a typology of common interventions. It discusses the added value of taking a social cohesion approach to development and peacebuilding practice, as well as challenges policymakers and practitioners may encounter when using it. Social cohesion can be understood as positive relations among individuals and groups (the horizontal dimension) and between society and the state (the vertical dimension). While fostering, rebuilding or sustaining cohesion are challenges for any society, they are particularly difficult in conflict settings where divisions fuel violence and violence reinforces divisions. We argue that taking a social cohesion approach in divided, conflict-affected societies offers several advantages. First, it has the potential to focus intervention on less tangible aspects of conflict – drawing attention to overlooked grievances and bringing tensions between groups and the state into focus. Second, it helps integrate a peacebuilding lens in a broad variety of policy spaces. Third, it helps policymakers to integrate citizen perspectives into develop­ment strategies and to focus on the provision of quality peace for all citizens. Taking a social cohesion approach, however, also brings challenges. It may be sensitive for external actors to address social grievances, identity-based divisions and power relations. Dominant groups may feel threatened in their position of power and push back against these attempts, or tensions among historically marginalised groups may cause friction. Donors may experience backlash against programmes that directly address sensitive topics. At the same time, if the intent is to take a transformative approach to building social cohesion, it may be difficult for donors to maintain a neutral stance. Social cohesion programmes may risk increasing tension in the short term, but to restore inter-group trust and state legitimacy over the long term, it might be necessary to confront and accept tension. Reflecting on the potentials and pitfalls of strengthening social cohesion in fragile and conflict-affected contexts, we suggest that policymakers and practitioners should:Think politically. Fostering social cohesion may initially appear less political or less contentious than peace­building, but it inevitably involves engaging politics, as well as identity and power dynamics. Securing donor support for "apolitical" social cohesion programming may at first appear to be advantageous, but this perception risks overlooking power relationships, politicised grievances, hierarchies and other salient dimensions of social structure (e.g., class dynamics). Expect pushback. The social cohesion approach has the potential to interrupt powerful political and economic structures that link social and political identities (e.g., ethnicity, class and gender) to power, status and public goods. Donors should expect overt and covert pushback and contention and be prepared to encounter the stickiness of informal institutions Work across multiple dividing lines. Strengthening in-group trust and cooperation may negatively affect out-group relationships and overall social cohesion. Fostering social cohesion in the wake of violent conflict requires networks to address multiple social divisions. Large coalitions that cut across race, ethnicity, gender, class and generation are notoriously difficult to form and sustain, yet essential for building sustainable peace.

Peacebuilding aims to resolve conflicts by addressing the root causes. The mainstream theory of peacebuilding is the liberal approach, which has been successful in some regions but has also faced criticism and failures in others. In response to the need for new approaches to peacebuilding, China was under the spotlight as an emerging and active actor in conflict-affected areas, through economic assistance, UN peacekeeping contributions, and mediation efforts. So can China's practice bring stability and peace to the local communities? This book explores China's approach through the Developmental Peace framework, promoting sustainable peace through multi-dimensional development: economic growth, effective governance, and the human right to survival and development. Based on extensive interviews in China and conflict zones like South Sudan, the author demonstrates China's potential for achieving stability, though long-term observation is needed to ensure sustainable peace. Developmental Peace offers a comprehensive analysis of China's role in international peacebuilding, providing valuable insights into conflict resolution and sustainable peace.

In their PRIF Report the authors focus on the various forms of resistance to and backlash against gender equality and gender-sensitive human rights in peacebuilding processes. Based on 33 interviews with key stakeholders, they explore how peacebuilders understand and perceive resistance to and backlash against the realisation of gender-sensitive human rights in peacebuilding. The report also sheds light on the counter-measures and strategies used by peacebuilders. Finally, the authors discuss the impact of feminist foreign policy on gender-sensitive human rights in peacebuilding.

The paper examines the role of conflict-generated diasporas and their agency in state-sanctioned truth-seeking processes by asking how such a process impacts the diaspora community in the country of residence and what purpose the process serves the diaspora. It builds on the case study of the Colombian diaspora in Switzerland as the Colombian Commission for the Clarification of Truth, Coexistence, and Non-repetition (Comisión para el Esclarecimiento de la Verdad, la Convivencia y la No Repetición; CEV) from 2018-2022 was the first truth commission to officially have a mandate to include diaspora communities in their truth-seeking.