Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2156111
C. Bell, L. Wise
ABSTRACT This article examines when, how and why local agreements are used to end violent conflict, drawing on a new global dataset of local agreements. It provides a typology of security functions that local agreements deliver at different stages of the conflict-to-peace cycle, and the types of space they address and create. It examines the relationship of local agreements to national peacemaking processes, arguing that they reveal the nested nature of local, national, transnational, and international conflict in protracted conflict settings. This reality points to the need for a new political imaginary for peace processes design. The conclusion sketches its contours.
{"title":"The Spaces of Local Agreements: Towards a New Imaginary of the Peace Process","authors":"C. Bell, L. Wise","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2156111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2156111","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines when, how and why local agreements are used to end violent conflict, drawing on a new global dataset of local agreements. It provides a typology of security functions that local agreements deliver at different stages of the conflict-to-peace cycle, and the types of space they address and create. It examines the relationship of local agreements to national peacemaking processes, arguing that they reveal the nested nature of local, national, transnational, and international conflict in protracted conflict settings. This reality points to the need for a new political imaginary for peace processes design. The conclusion sketches its contours.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42728761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2153517
F. Kühn
Statebuilding has waned in importance, at least when we are looking at the two decades following the Balkans wars. Building a state which would provide a platform for peaceful resolution of conflicts was widely understood as a remedy to escape cycles of violence and counterviolence. The ‘multi-functional’ state, of course, was viewed as a somewhat a-political unit, not restricted to merely holding a monopoly to the legitimate use of violence; it would be manned (predominantly) with representatives who were technocratically able but bore little personal ambition (Ghani and Lockhart 2007). International interventions were meant to help, or enforce, building such a state, and how-to knowledge was in demand. When the Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding was founded and first published in 2007, with three issues per year, the balance between academic analysis and practical requirements was hence very important (Chandler, Chesterman, and Laakso 2007) – and the requirement to bring practice and conceptual thinking and political into a productive dialogue is more valid than ever today. At the same time, it became clear over the years in contributions of many clever scholars that there were fundamental flaws in a liberal world view that guided action in international interventions, which not inevitably but almost naturally contained components of statebuilding (Jahn 2007a, 2007b; Richmond 2009; Goodhand andWalton 2009; Mac Ginty 2012; Greener 2012; Augestad Knudsen 2013; Charbonneau and Sears 2014; Philipsen 2014; Paffenholz 2021; see also Special Issues guest edited by Gabay and Death 2012; Mullin and Pallister-Wilkins 2015). Of the many findings, the most important were that, to many statebuilders’ surprise, statebuilding was political, not technocratic; politicians in intervened countries followed their own political considerations, in the process not necessarily supporting the norms the interveners claimed to hold dear; interveners themselves had narrow interests, career projections and organizational logics to follow rather than pursue lofty ideals they prided themselves officially to be supporting. After all, politics remained local, recognized in the local turn debate and its inherent limits (Roberts 2013; Chandler 2015; Abboud 2021; Randazzo 2021). The initial diagnosis, namely that in conflict settings the state which was unable to balance societal groups’ interest within its own institutions was somewhat deficient was correct. The reverse conclusion, that functioning institutions would prevent violent conflicts was not (Hehir 2007). Hence, statebuilding was not the ideal cure for violence, programmatically, even though several explanatory factors were routinely identified for dysfunctional, or fragile, statehood (Lemay-Hébert 2009; Barakat and Larson 2014): a lack of democratic participation in decision-making (Kurki 2011); a lack of monopoly of violence (Ahram 2011; see Special Issues guest edited by Berit Bliesemann de Guevara 2010; Schme
{"title":"Considering Statebuilding, Publishing Statebuilding – On Being an Editor in a Changing Field","authors":"F. Kühn","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2153517","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2153517","url":null,"abstract":"Statebuilding has waned in importance, at least when we are looking at the two decades following the Balkans wars. Building a state which would provide a platform for peaceful resolution of conflicts was widely understood as a remedy to escape cycles of violence and counterviolence. The ‘multi-functional’ state, of course, was viewed as a somewhat a-political unit, not restricted to merely holding a monopoly to the legitimate use of violence; it would be manned (predominantly) with representatives who were technocratically able but bore little personal ambition (Ghani and Lockhart 2007). International interventions were meant to help, or enforce, building such a state, and how-to knowledge was in demand. When the Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding was founded and first published in 2007, with three issues per year, the balance between academic analysis and practical requirements was hence very important (Chandler, Chesterman, and Laakso 2007) – and the requirement to bring practice and conceptual thinking and political into a productive dialogue is more valid than ever today. At the same time, it became clear over the years in contributions of many clever scholars that there were fundamental flaws in a liberal world view that guided action in international interventions, which not inevitably but almost naturally contained components of statebuilding (Jahn 2007a, 2007b; Richmond 2009; Goodhand andWalton 2009; Mac Ginty 2012; Greener 2012; Augestad Knudsen 2013; Charbonneau and Sears 2014; Philipsen 2014; Paffenholz 2021; see also Special Issues guest edited by Gabay and Death 2012; Mullin and Pallister-Wilkins 2015). Of the many findings, the most important were that, to many statebuilders’ surprise, statebuilding was political, not technocratic; politicians in intervened countries followed their own political considerations, in the process not necessarily supporting the norms the interveners claimed to hold dear; interveners themselves had narrow interests, career projections and organizational logics to follow rather than pursue lofty ideals they prided themselves officially to be supporting. After all, politics remained local, recognized in the local turn debate and its inherent limits (Roberts 2013; Chandler 2015; Abboud 2021; Randazzo 2021). The initial diagnosis, namely that in conflict settings the state which was unable to balance societal groups’ interest within its own institutions was somewhat deficient was correct. The reverse conclusion, that functioning institutions would prevent violent conflicts was not (Hehir 2007). Hence, statebuilding was not the ideal cure for violence, programmatically, even though several explanatory factors were routinely identified for dysfunctional, or fragile, statehood (Lemay-Hébert 2009; Barakat and Larson 2014): a lack of democratic participation in decision-making (Kurki 2011); a lack of monopoly of violence (Ahram 2011; see Special Issues guest edited by Berit Bliesemann de Guevara 2010; Schme","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42304703","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2154025
A. Björkdahl, Susanne Buckley-Zistel
ABSTRACT Space for Peace is a Special Issue that advances the spatial turn in peace and conflict studies. It brings to the fore the purchase of using space as an analytic category by advancing spatial theorization and providing empirical case studies. This introduction draws out the main tenets of spatial approaches and responds to the question: Why space? Moreover, it outlines the chapters in the Special Issue and provides some thoughts about future research.
{"title":"Introducing Space for Peace","authors":"A. Björkdahl, Susanne Buckley-Zistel","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2154025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2154025","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Space for Peace is a Special Issue that advances the spatial turn in peace and conflict studies. It brings to the fore the purchase of using space as an analytic category by advancing spatial theorization and providing empirical case studies. This introduction draws out the main tenets of spatial approaches and responds to the question: Why space? Moreover, it outlines the chapters in the Special Issue and provides some thoughts about future research.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48601967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2129330
I. Gusic
ABSTRACT The plurality and subjectivity of peace means that transitions from war are contested – i.e. permeated by conflicts between previously warring antagonists who want to (re)order postwar society according to competing peace(s). But while there always will exist mutually excluding peace(s), such outliers do not foreclose middle grounds where multiple peace(s) can coexist. In this article, I argue that the postwar city can generate coexistence between peace(s) of varying divergence through the creativity, accommodation, and fragmentation of city spaces. These arguments are illustrated through examples from postwar Belfast, Mitrovica, and Mostar. I term this conceptualization urban peace.
{"title":"Peace between Peace(s)? Urban Peace and the Coexistence of Antagonists in City Spaces","authors":"I. Gusic","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2129330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2129330","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The plurality and subjectivity of peace means that transitions from war are contested – i.e. permeated by conflicts between previously warring antagonists who want to (re)order postwar society according to competing peace(s). But while there always will exist mutually excluding peace(s), such outliers do not foreclose middle grounds where multiple peace(s) can coexist. In this article, I argue that the postwar city can generate coexistence between peace(s) of varying divergence through the creativity, accommodation, and fragmentation of city spaces. These arguments are illustrated through examples from postwar Belfast, Mitrovica, and Mostar. I term this conceptualization urban peace.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42156485","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-19DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2131194
A. Björkdahl, Susanne Buckley-Zistel
ABSTRACT Spatial analysis of peace and conflict is slowly but steadily gaining traction. As a new and innovative approach, it focuses on the mutual construction of spaces and agency in a field that has thus far merely considered space as a backdrop against which war, violence, and peace unfold. Conceptually borrowing from disciplines such as geography, anthropology, and others, in this article we propose three avenues for analysing spaces for peace: spatial practices, spatial dynamics, and space formations. Given the novelty of the spatial perspective in peace and conflict studies, we also offer some thoughts on methodology, data collection, and knowledge production.
{"title":"Space for Peace: A Research Agenda","authors":"A. Björkdahl, Susanne Buckley-Zistel","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2131194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2131194","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Spatial analysis of peace and conflict is slowly but steadily gaining traction. As a new and innovative approach, it focuses on the mutual construction of spaces and agency in a field that has thus far merely considered space as a backdrop against which war, violence, and peace unfold. Conceptually borrowing from disciplines such as geography, anthropology, and others, in this article we propose three avenues for analysing spaces for peace: spatial practices, spatial dynamics, and space formations. Given the novelty of the spatial perspective in peace and conflict studies, we also offer some thoughts on methodology, data collection, and knowledge production.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41256464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-19DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2128592
L. Cole, S. Kappler
ABSTRACT The ‘spatial turn’ in peace research has primarily highlighted the visuality of the spaces in which peace takes place. In this article, however, we argue that ‘sound’ can challenge rigid visual markers, which are particularly prominent in divided cities. Drawing on a sound story from a larger archive, we investigate how a sound artist re-imagines the divided city of Mostar by mobilizing a set of sonic memories. Our sonic reading of the Partisan’s Cemetery traces the spatial transformation of the city, which disrupts visual representations of space as divided and presents alternative spatial imaginations.
{"title":"Soundscapes of Mostar: Space and Art Beyond the Divided City","authors":"L. Cole, S. Kappler","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2128592","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2128592","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The ‘spatial turn’ in peace research has primarily highlighted the visuality of the spaces in which peace takes place. In this article, however, we argue that ‘sound’ can challenge rigid visual markers, which are particularly prominent in divided cities. Drawing on a sound story from a larger archive, we investigate how a sound artist re-imagines the divided city of Mostar by mobilizing a set of sonic memories. Our sonic reading of the Partisan’s Cemetery traces the spatial transformation of the city, which disrupts visual representations of space as divided and presents alternative spatial imaginations.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41721196","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-19DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2118425
G. Pugliese
ABSTRACT Is the EU raising its political and security profile in the Indo-Pacific solely because of China’s assertiveness or US–China strategic competition, as often posited? On the basis of official documentation and elite interviews, this article advances a more nuanced view of the rationale behind the EU’s engagement there. Aside from increased European naval involvement the EU and its member states are fostering the capacity building of Indo-Pacific countries concerned with their maritime safety, maritime security and to uphold the rules-based multilateral order. Yet, this article demonstrates how mercantile goals lie behind the EU and its member states’ politico-security engagement.
{"title":"The European Union’s Security Intervention in the Indo-Pacific: Between Multilateralism and Mercantile Interests","authors":"G. Pugliese","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2118425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2118425","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Is the EU raising its political and security profile in the Indo-Pacific solely because of China’s assertiveness or US–China strategic competition, as often posited? On the basis of official documentation and elite interviews, this article advances a more nuanced view of the rationale behind the EU’s engagement there. Aside from increased European naval involvement the EU and its member states are fostering the capacity building of Indo-Pacific countries concerned with their maritime safety, maritime security and to uphold the rules-based multilateral order. Yet, this article demonstrates how mercantile goals lie behind the EU and its member states’ politico-security engagement.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49403633","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-12DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2107361
J. Federer
{"title":"The Politics of Proscription and Peacemaking: Implications of Labelling Armed Groups as Terrorists and Extremists","authors":"J. Federer","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2107361","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2107361","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44972822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-08DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2101311
Cemaliye Beysoylu, Enver Gülseven
ABSTRACT This article scrutinizes Turkish Cypriot elites’ legitimation strategies of sustaining internal legitimacy in the absence of international recognition and coping with challenges rising from the international context, parent state’s pressure and patron state’s meddling. The article links the sustainability of North Cyprus’ unrecognized statehood to two major factors. Firstly, parent’s counter-recognition policies and despair of repeatedly failing negotiations result in a backlash among Turkish Cypriots, forging internal unity. Secondly, the degree of political pluralism allows peaceful transfer of power amongst various elite groups, resulting in use of diverse and often conflicting legitimation strategies to better cope with legitimacy challenges.
{"title":"Sustaining Legitimacy of Unrecognized Statehood: How Turkish Cypriot Elites Cope with Internal and External Challenges","authors":"Cemaliye Beysoylu, Enver Gülseven","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2101311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2101311","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article scrutinizes Turkish Cypriot elites’ legitimation strategies of sustaining internal legitimacy in the absence of international recognition and coping with challenges rising from the international context, parent state’s pressure and patron state’s meddling. The article links the sustainability of North Cyprus’ unrecognized statehood to two major factors. Firstly, parent’s counter-recognition policies and despair of repeatedly failing negotiations result in a backlash among Turkish Cypriots, forging internal unity. Secondly, the degree of political pluralism allows peaceful transfer of power amongst various elite groups, resulting in use of diverse and often conflicting legitimation strategies to better cope with legitimacy challenges.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45315553","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-08DOI: 10.1080/17502977.2022.2104437
R. Brett
ABSTRACT This article interrogates how survivors/victims participate in peacemaking and victim-centred Transitional Justice initiatives, focusing on the role of the victims' delegations during the Santos-FARC/EP peace talks in Colombia (2012-2016). The article presents unique empirical data, drawing on sixty-eight interviews with participants from the talks. The research assesses Colombia's victim-centred approach, arguing that the delegations shaped the content of the peace agreement, influenced historic narratives of victimhood and shaped victim-perpetrator relationships, facilitating victim agency and empowerment. However, wider political and economic prerogatives and dominant TJ tendencies constrained the broader exercise of agency, whilst participants experienced episodes of disempowerment and instrumentalisation.
{"title":"Victim-Centred Peacemaking: The Colombian Experience","authors":"R. Brett","doi":"10.1080/17502977.2022.2104437","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2022.2104437","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article interrogates how survivors/victims participate in peacemaking and victim-centred Transitional Justice initiatives, focusing on the role of the victims' delegations during the Santos-FARC/EP peace talks in Colombia (2012-2016). The article presents unique empirical data, drawing on sixty-eight interviews with participants from the talks. The research assesses Colombia's victim-centred approach, arguing that the delegations shaped the content of the peace agreement, influenced historic narratives of victimhood and shaped victim-perpetrator relationships, facilitating victim agency and empowerment. However, wider political and economic prerogatives and dominant TJ tendencies constrained the broader exercise of agency, whilst participants experienced episodes of disempowerment and instrumentalisation.","PeriodicalId":46629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49121237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：