| Summary/Abstract |
Stabilization is a contestable concept of intervention in violent conflicts. Often, it is either uncritically supported or rejected. In this article, we criticize current conceptualisations and practices of stabilization and newly introduce a dynamic approach for stabilization that yields a transformative potential. By distinguishing static vs. dynamic approaches to stabilization, we address the widespread dilemma that so-called stabilization measures seem unable to avoid instability and protracted violence in the long-term. Our analysis of the three policy fields peacekeeping, train & equip programmes and migration management in Mali reveals the dominance of static elements in stabilization practice. Instead, our article proposes to see a transformative variant of stabilization measures that enhances long-term security and development. We argue that there are two dynamic approaches of stabilization that policy-makers and practitioners can apply in (post-)conflict societies: state-centred liberal peacebuilding that takes its normative core seriously, and non-state centric peacebuilding that acknowledges alternative lived orders.
|