This means that the majority of contemporary peacekeeping operations are deployed in countries with fragile governments and places where multiple non-state armed actors are vying for power and where relations between different communal groups are highly polarized.
Yet, most studies focus on the impact of mediation and peacekeeping on armed conflicts between government and rebel forces, ignoring non-state conflicts among different rebel groups or communal groups.
ALLARD DUURSMA’s article, titled ‘Peacekeeping, Mediation, and the Conclusion of Local Ceasefires in Non-State Conflicts’, aims to fill this gap in research.
The article theorizes on how military and civilian components of peacekeeping operations contribute to the conclusion of local ceasefires in non-state conflicts involving armed opposition groups or communal groups.
A mediation-based logic suggests that civilian peacekeeping staff can provide technical support aimed at resolving conflict issues and engage with state officials to promote peace.
A capabilities-based logic suggests that military peacekeepers can provide security during the negotiations, arrange logistics, and put military pressure on the conflict parties, all of which should make the conclusion of a ceasefire more likely.
The analysis, published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution, supports both the capabilities-based and the mediation-based logic. An instrumental variable estimation helps to account for endogeneity.
“This article contributes to the literature on peacekeeping, mediation, and ceasefires through shifting the focus to non-state conflicts,” the author states.
Yet, most studies focus on the impact of mediation and peacekeeping on armed conflicts between government and rebel forces, ignoring non-state conflicts among different rebel groups or communal groups.
ALLARD DUURSMA’s article, titled ‘Peacekeeping, Mediation, and the Conclusion of Local Ceasefires in Non-State Conflicts’, aims to fill this gap in research.
The article theorizes on how military and civilian components of peacekeeping operations contribute to the conclusion of local ceasefires in non-state conflicts involving armed opposition groups or communal groups.
A mediation-based logic suggests that civilian peacekeeping staff can provide technical support aimed at resolving conflict issues and engage with state officials to promote peace.
A capabilities-based logic suggests that military peacekeepers can provide security during the negotiations, arrange logistics, and put military pressure on the conflict parties, all of which should make the conclusion of a ceasefire more likely.
The analysis, published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution, supports both the capabilities-based and the mediation-based logic. An instrumental variable estimation helps to account for endogeneity.
“This article contributes to the literature on peacekeeping, mediation, and ceasefires through shifting the focus to non-state conflicts,” the author states.
Duursma, A. (2022). Peacekeeping, Mediation, and the Conclusion of Local Ceasefires in Non-State Conflicts. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 0(0).
https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027221148132
https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027221148132
No comments:
Post a Comment