Conflict Management or Conflict Resolution: How Do Major Powers See the Role of the UN in Peacebuilding?

How do major powers conceive the role of the United Nations in peacebuilding?
Writing in the journal Contemporary Security Policy, FANNY BADACHE, SARA HELLMÜLLER and BILAL SALAYMEH conceptualize the UN’s role along the distinction between conflict management and conflict resolution and distinguish between the types of tasks and the approach the UN can adopt. 
In their article titled ‘Conflict management or conflict resolution: how do major powers conceive the role of the United Nations in peacebuilding?’ the authors map states’ conceptions of the UN’s role in peacebuilding by coding peace-related speeches at the UN Security Council (1991–2020) delivered by China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States as well as Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey as rising regional powers. 
“Our findings show that states’ conceptions differ regarding the type of tasks the UN should do. However, the main fault line between the countries lie in the approach the UN should adopt to conduct peacebuilding tasks.” 
The authors conclude that major powers see a role for the UN beyond mere conflict management as long as it is done with respect for national sovereignty.

Fanny Badache, Sara Hellmüller & Bilal Salaymeh (2022) Conflict management or conflict resolution: how do major powers conceive the role of the United Nations in peacebuilding?, Contemporary Security Policy, DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2022.2147334

Ethical Exit: When Should Peacekeepers Depart?

When should peacekeepers partially or fully withdraw from a country or region in which they operate? This important question has received little scholarly attention. However, it has profound implications. 

If peacekeepers depart prematurely, as happened in Rwanda in 1994, the consequences can be disastrous and potentially lead to widespread preventable deaths and human suffering. 

If they overstay, peacekeepers risk alienating the population they seek to protect and undercutting popular sovereignty at significant economic costs. 

Writing in the European Journal of International Security, EAMON ALOYO and GEOFFREY SWENSON seek to strike a balance. They propose a framework for just withdrawal that is both normatively compelling and empirically sound. 

Their article – titled ‘Ethical exit: When should peacekeepers depart?’ – focuses on three aspects vital for understanding when peacekeepers can depart in an ethically justified manner: just cause, effectiveness, and legitimacy. 

By considering a number of objections, the authors also address critics who challenge the overarching premise of peacekeeping or might prefer different standards by which to suggest peacekeepers should stay or depart. 

Finally, the authors illustrate their argument with theoretical and empirical examples and a discussion of UN peacekeeping in East Timor.

Aloyo, E., & Swenson, G. (2022). Ethical exit: When should peacekeepers depart? European Journal of International Security, 1-20. doi:10.1017/eis.2022.31

Selective Attention: The United Nations Security Council and Armed Conflict

What explains why the United Nations Security Council meets and deliberates on some armed conflicts but not others? 
Writing in the British Journal of Political Science, MAGNUS LUNDGREN and MARK KLAMBERG advance a theoretical argument centred on the role of conflict externalities, state interests and interest heterogeneity. 
In the article titled ‘Selective Attention: The United Nations Security Council and Armed Conflict’, the authors investigate data on the Security Council’s deliberation on armed conflicts in the 1989–2019 period and make three key findings: 
(1) conflicts that generate substantive military or civilian deaths are more likely to attract the Security Council's attention; 
(2) permanent members are varyingly likely to involve the Security Council when their interests are at stake; and 
(3) in contrast to the conventional wisdom, conflicts over which members have divergent interests are more likely to enter the agenda than other conflicts. “The findings have important implications for debates about the Security Council’s attention, responsiveness to problems and role in world politics,” the authors state.

Lundgren, M., & Klamberg, M. (2022). Selective Attention: The United Nations Security Council and Armed Conflict. British Journal of Political Science, 1-22. doi:10.1017/S0007123422000461