Search results

Insbesondere seit der umstrittenen NATO-Intervention in Libyen im Jahr 2011 stehen sich westliche Staaten und Schwellenländer in der Frage nach Interventionen zum Schutz der Rechte von Individuen gegenüber. Während westliche Staaten militärische Gewalt häufig für ein probates Mittel erachten, betrachten Schwellenländer ein Nichtgreifen als eine entscheidende Garantie ihrer Autonomie und ziehen nicht-militärische Unterstützung vor. Im aktuellen Global Governance Spotlight führt Prof. Dr. Kai Michael Kenkel Gründe an, warum für die Legitimität und Wirksamkeit der Schutzverantwortung (R2P) die Unterstützung sowohl von Staaten aus dem globalen Norden als auch aus dem globalen Süden erforderlich ist und gibt Empfehlungen für eine Neubelebung der Debatte.

This article combines both international practice and analytical contributions into a systematic and synthetic presentation of the evolution of peace operations from their modern inception in 1948 to the present. It seeks to serve a didactic purpose in proposing a basic structure for Brazilian scholars' burgeoning debate on peace operations and intervention, rather than a definitive characterization of blue helmet practice. Peace operations' progression is traced through five analytical "generations," each adding a crucial factor distinguishing it from its predecessors. Each generation is placed in relation to changes in the nature of conflict and in the interpretation of the foundational principles of peace operations, and links to broader theoretical issues in International Relations are made explicit at each stage.

This article analyses the peacekeeping efforts of Brazil, an emerging power for which peacebuilding is a key element of its international presence, and which has been strongly critical of the dominant liberal paradigm. Peacebuilding is key to Brazil's approach, as the country by tradition participates (with the contested exception of MINUSTAH) only in Chapter VI peace operations, abjuring the robust use of force. An activity such as peacebuilding which marries development and security concerns is an ideal setting for Brazil's foreign policy aims; in order to gain a seat in global decisionmaking bodies, in the absence of hard power and the will to use it Brazil turns to peacebuilding to transform its domestic development successes into action in the security arena. The South American giant has also placed significant emphasis on Africa in part as a means to the end of underscoring – as a voice for the global South – its claim to greater international influence. This article will examine the motivations that underpin Brazil's commitment to peacebuilding operations, as well as its commitment to that practice in Africa, which has taken place largely on a bilateral basis.