Item Details
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:734Hits:20013562Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

In Basket
  Article   Article
 

ID134525
Title ProperCompromised peacebuilding
LanguageENG
AuthorBarnett, Michael ;  Fang, Songying ;  Zurcher, Christoph
Summary / Abstract (Note)There is considerable evidence that peacebuilding operations are more likely to reproduce important elements of the status quo than they are to propel post-conflict states toward a liberal democracy. In contrast to existing theories that focus on the resources available to peacebuilders or the degree of damage caused by the war to explain the outcome, we highlight the interaction between international and domestic actors. Specifically, we conceive of peacebuilding as a strategic process involving peacebuilders, a postwar government, and other local elites. The equilibrium results show that this process typically concludes in a compromised peacebuilding outcome. This is not surprising when the policy preferences of the actors diverge, but the results also hold when domestic elites prefer a liberal democracy to the status quo. Why? Primarily, because postwar governments are rewarded by relatively impatient peacebuilders with more resources than they would otherwise receive. Additionally, if there exists a secondary elite with veto power, a compromised outcome becomes even more likely. We illustrate these findings with reference to post-1989 peacebuilding operations. Although peacebuilding might not work as it is intended, in the conclusion, we argue that it is better than the alternatives and propose a more realistic measure of peacebuilding success.
`In' analytical NoteInternational Studies Quarterly Vol.58, No.3; Sep.2014: p.608-620
Journal SourceInternational Studies Quarterly Vol: 58 No 3
Standard NumberInternational Actors


 
 
Media / Other Links  Full Text