Development assistance to fragile states and conflict-affected areas can be a core component of peacebuilding, providing support for the restoration of government functions, delivery of basic services, the rule of law, and economic revitalization. What has worked, why it has worked, and what is scalable and transferable are key questions for both development practice and research into how peace is built and the interactive role of domestic and international processes therein. Despite a wealth of research into these questions, significant gaps remain. This volume speaks to these gaps through new analysis of a selected set of well-regarded aid interventions. Drawing on diverse scholarly and policy expertise, eight case study chapters span multiple domains and regions to analyse Afghanistan's National Solidarity Programme, the Yemen Social Fund for Development, public financial management reform in Sierra Leone, Finn Church Aid's assistance in Somalia, Liberia's gender-sensitive police reform, the judicial facilitators programme in Nicaragua, UNICEF's education projects in Somalia, and World Bank health projects in Timor-Leste. Analysis illustrates the significance of three broad factors in understanding why some aid interventions work better than others: the area of intervention and related degree of engagement with state institutions, local contextual factors such as windows of opportunity and the degree of local support, and programme design and management.
"All over the world the practice of peacebuilding is beset with common dilemmas: peace versus justice, religious versus secular approaches, individual versus structural justice, reconciliation versus retribution, and the harmonization of the sheer multiplicity of practices involved in repairing past harms. Progress towards the resolution of these dilemmas requires far more than reforming institutions and practices but rather clear thinking about the more basic questions: What is justice? And how is it related to the building of peace? The twin concepts of reconciliation and restorative justice, both involving the holistic restoration of right relationship, contain not only a compelling logic of justice but also great promise for resolving peacebuilding's tensions and for constructing and assessing its institutions and practices. This volume furthers this potential by developing not only the core content of these concepts but also their implications for accountability, forgiveness, reparations, traditional practices, human rights, and international law. While the volume's central orientation is theory, it contains much of interest to a wide range of scholars as well as practitioners. It is both interdisciplinary and accessibly written. It situates its analysis in countries as diverse as South Africa, El Salvador, Canada, and East Timor and in the work of institutions and communities such as the United Nations, the Catholic Church, various indigenous communities, and the international law community. It contains essays by leading scholars of restorative justice, international law, transitional justice, political philosophy and theology"--
Conflict resolution theory has become relevant to the various challenges faced by the United Nations peacekeeping forces as efforts are made to learn from the traumatic and devastating impact of the many civil wars that have erupted in the 1990s. This work analyzes the theory.
"This book is a long overdue assessment of the role of UN agencies in peacekeeping operations. Special emphasis is given to that most vexed category, 'complex emergencies', involving entrapped or victimized civilian populations and a plethora of UN, national military and NGO actors." "While based on the full range of recent history, the contributions to this volume are forward looking and policy oriented, bringing a hardedged practicality to complex and hitherto under-examined issues."--Jacket.
"The Republic of Ireland has won its status as a leading contributor to international peacekeeping operations, which have been its key 'foreign policy' since the 1960s. But why is Ireland so keen to be involved? It cannot simply be for charitable reasons, so is it because it is a neutral state or because it is a middle power? Overall, is Ireland's peacekeeping policy based on realism and liberalism?"
"Sustaining and strengthening local livelihoods is one of the most fundamental challenges faced by post-conflict countries. By degrading the natural resources that are essential to livelihoods and by significantly hindering access to those resources, conflict can wreak havoc on the ability of war-torn populations to survive and recover. This book explores how natural resource management initiatives in more than twenty countries and territories have supported livelihoods and facilitated post-conflict peacebuilding. Case studies and analyses identify lessons and opportunities for the more effective design of interventions to support the livelihoods that depend on natural resources -- from land to agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and protected areas. The book also explores larger questions about how to structure livelihoods assistance as part of a coherent, integrated approach to post-conflict redevelopment. Livelihoods and Natural Resources in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding is part of a global initiative to identify and analyze lessons in post-conflict peacebuilding and natural resource management. The project has generated six books of case studies and analyses, with contributions from practitioners, policy makers, and researchers. Other books in this series address high value resources, land, water, assessing and restoring natural resources, and governance"--
This paper investigates the zero tolerance policy on sexual exploitation and sexual abuse by United Nations peacekeepers as it relates to survival sex in peacekeeping economies. Understanding the policy as a form of discursive power, the analysis seeks to reveal the effects of zero tolerance by asking: what is obscured about survival sex in peacekeeping economies when it is viewed through the lens of zero tolerance, and to whose benefit? The argument is that zero tolerance is a poor policy framework to address peacekeeper engagement in survival sex because it fails to grapple with the complex set of economic circumstances that give rise to survival sex decision-making by girls and women in peacekeeping economies. In light of the failures of zero tolerance, a rights-based approach to survival sex in peacekeeping economies represents a more promising means of addressing the issue to the benefit of local girls and women. Adapted from source document.
Both because the United Nations (UN) spectacularly failed in Rwanda and because of the dose links between the 1994 Rwandan genocide and the continuing conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUSCO) -- formerly the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (MONUC) -- constitutes an important test-case for UN peacekeeping. However, since MONUSCO is ongoing, it is too early to assess whether or not it has passed this test. This article, however, focuses on a particular issue that may ultimately cause the mission to fail, namely contradictions within its ever-expanding mandate. It argues that MONUSCO itself is helping to fuel these tensions through its flawed approach to one of the key components of its mandate, namely DDR (disarmament, demobilization and reintegration) and DDRRR (disarmament, demobilization, repatriation, resettlement and reintegration). It thus suggests how MONUSCO might revise its approach to these processes, particularly through a more 'bottom-up' focus that engages directly with local communities and with former combatants as individuals. Adapted from source document.
The author compares the 1994 Rwandan genocide and the crimes against humanity and possible genocide in Darfur (since 2003). He finds one main common point: the basic incapacity to turn the Responsibility to Protect from a virtuous doctrine into a practical reality. On the basis of his wide experience as a scholar of African politics, the author gives his answer to the question why. His conclusion is that in both cases there was either no "peace" to keep for the "peacekeepers", or several of the actors had no intention of respecting the peace agreement. He then sums up seven commonly held illusions about peacekeeping: a) Parties stop fighting because they recognize the inanity of conflict; b) "Give war a chance" is wrong c) A bad peace is better than a good war; d) A peacekeeping military force on the ground changes the reality; e) A pro-forma stabilization of peace is enough to start a peacekeeping operation; f) "Conflict" is an operational concept; and g) We deal with the present, the past belongs to historians. He concludes that in many ways the failed peacekeeping operations in Rwanda and Darfur are exemplary, not because of what peacekeeping advocates hope are technical mistakes, but because the basic concepts of why the operations were undertaken at all. He argues there are no quick-fix solutions, because the basic concepts are wrong, or at the very least wrongly applied, and that if we cannot do something properly, we should not do it at all. Adapted from source document.
The article discusses the exploitation of women and girls by peacekeepers and its effect on efforts to establish the rule of law in a post-conflict situation. It provides a situational analysis of the problem, examining the issue from rights-based, stabilization, and organized crime perspectives. It considers the rule of law mandate of modern peace-building operations, including the ability of peacekeepers to help combat trafficking and the sexual exploitation of women and girls. It proposes a solution to tackling gender-based violence, trafficking and exploitation in the establishment of the rule of law through accountability and domestic capacity-building. The work of committed peace-builders is critical to achieving this goal. Adapted from source document.