停火是战争、和平进程的一部分,还是“没有和平就没有战争”的形式

Q1 Arts and Humanities Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy Pub Date : 2023-10-05 DOI:10.17994/it.2023.21.1.72.6
E. Stepanova
{"title":"停火是战争、和平进程的一部分,还是“没有和平就没有战争”的形式","authors":"E. Stepanova","doi":"10.17994/it.2023.21.1.72.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ceasefires are increasingly relevant for contemporary conflicts and conflict management. During the first two decades of the 21st century, ceasefires also became the most widespread form of outcome for conflicts with any conclusive outcome. Half of all ceasefires, however, either had not yet been part of a political negotiated process to address key incompatibilities contested in an armed conflict, or had no relation to any peace process at all. A ceasefire in its traditional interpretation – as a technical stage on the way to peace – increasingly becomes a ceasefire in the absence of peace and a pragmatic alternative to a stalled peace process. What are the goals and functions of ceasefires at different conflict stages, including, but not limited to, a peace process? What are the main types of ceasefire based on its key function in conflict and on underlying goals and motivations of its parties? The article explores these questions at the theoretical/conceptual and empirical levels, on the basis of analysis of available statistical data and drawing upon concrete examples in various contexts, with special attention to conflicts in Syria and Donbass. It offers an original functional-motivational typology of ceasefires classified into three types: ceasefires as part of hostilities; ceasefires ‘for the sake of peace’ that aim at supporting and preparing conditions for peace negotiations; and ceasefires as a format of an intermediate state of ‘neither peace, nor war’, including as a means of structuring this semi-frozen state to achieve a degree of stabilization. In practical terms, this typology helps clarify (а) the issue of effectiveness – success of failure – of a ceasefire that should not be expected to advance or deliver one type of outcome if one or all of its parties deliberately seek to use it to achieve another type of outcome; (b) the role of the factor of armed violence at the stage of a ceasefire that may achieve its main, underlying goals even if it does not lead to lasting cessation of hostilities.","PeriodicalId":37798,"journal":{"name":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ceasefires as a Part of War, Peace Process, or a “No Peace, No War” Format\",\"authors\":\"E. Stepanova\",\"doi\":\"10.17994/it.2023.21.1.72.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ceasefires are increasingly relevant for contemporary conflicts and conflict management. During the first two decades of the 21st century, ceasefires also became the most widespread form of outcome for conflicts with any conclusive outcome. Half of all ceasefires, however, either had not yet been part of a political negotiated process to address key incompatibilities contested in an armed conflict, or had no relation to any peace process at all. A ceasefire in its traditional interpretation – as a technical stage on the way to peace – increasingly becomes a ceasefire in the absence of peace and a pragmatic alternative to a stalled peace process. What are the goals and functions of ceasefires at different conflict stages, including, but not limited to, a peace process? What are the main types of ceasefire based on its key function in conflict and on underlying goals and motivations of its parties? The article explores these questions at the theoretical/conceptual and empirical levels, on the basis of analysis of available statistical data and drawing upon concrete examples in various contexts, with special attention to conflicts in Syria and Donbass. It offers an original functional-motivational typology of ceasefires classified into three types: ceasefires as part of hostilities; ceasefires ‘for the sake of peace’ that aim at supporting and preparing conditions for peace negotiations; and ceasefires as a format of an intermediate state of ‘neither peace, nor war’, including as a means of structuring this semi-frozen state to achieve a degree of stabilization. In practical terms, this typology helps clarify (а) the issue of effectiveness – success of failure – of a ceasefire that should not be expected to advance or deliver one type of outcome if one or all of its parties deliberately seek to use it to achieve another type of outcome; (b) the role of the factor of armed violence at the stage of a ceasefire that may achieve its main, underlying goals even if it does not lead to lasting cessation of hostilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17994/it.2023.21.1.72.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17994/it.2023.21.1.72.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

停火与当代冲突和冲突管理的关系日益密切。在21世纪的头二十年里,停火也成为冲突中最普遍的结果形式,并产生了任何结论性结果。然而,一半的停火要么尚未成为政治谈判进程的一部分,以解决武装冲突中存在的关键矛盾,要么根本与任何和平进程无关。传统意义上的停火- -作为通往和平道路上的一个技术阶段- -日益成为在没有和平的情况下的停火和对停滞的和平进程的一种务实的替代办法。在冲突的不同阶段,包括但不限于和平进程,停火的目标和职能是什么?根据其在冲突中的关键作用以及各方的基本目标和动机,停火的主要类型是什么?本文在分析现有统计数据的基础上,借鉴各种背景下的具体例子,在理论/概念和经验层面探讨了这些问题,并特别关注了叙利亚和顿巴斯的冲突。它为停火提供了一种原始的功能-动机类型,分为三种类型:作为敌对行动一部分的停火;“为和平”停火,旨在支持和平谈判并为和平谈判创造条件;停火作为一种“非和平非战争”的中间状态,包括作为一种构建这种半冻结状态以实现一定程度稳定的手段。实际上,这种类型有助于澄清停火的有效性问题-成功或失败-如果其中一方或所有各方故意试图利用停火来实现另一种结果,则不应期望停火推进或实现一种结果;(b)武装暴力因素在停火阶段的作用,即使停火不会导致持久停止敌对行动,也可能实现其主要的基本目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ceasefires as a Part of War, Peace Process, or a “No Peace, No War” Format
Ceasefires are increasingly relevant for contemporary conflicts and conflict management. During the first two decades of the 21st century, ceasefires also became the most widespread form of outcome for conflicts with any conclusive outcome. Half of all ceasefires, however, either had not yet been part of a political negotiated process to address key incompatibilities contested in an armed conflict, or had no relation to any peace process at all. A ceasefire in its traditional interpretation – as a technical stage on the way to peace – increasingly becomes a ceasefire in the absence of peace and a pragmatic alternative to a stalled peace process. What are the goals and functions of ceasefires at different conflict stages, including, but not limited to, a peace process? What are the main types of ceasefire based on its key function in conflict and on underlying goals and motivations of its parties? The article explores these questions at the theoretical/conceptual and empirical levels, on the basis of analysis of available statistical data and drawing upon concrete examples in various contexts, with special attention to conflicts in Syria and Donbass. It offers an original functional-motivational typology of ceasefires classified into three types: ceasefires as part of hostilities; ceasefires ‘for the sake of peace’ that aim at supporting and preparing conditions for peace negotiations; and ceasefires as a format of an intermediate state of ‘neither peace, nor war’, including as a means of structuring this semi-frozen state to achieve a degree of stabilization. In practical terms, this typology helps clarify (а) the issue of effectiveness – success of failure – of a ceasefire that should not be expected to advance or deliver one type of outcome if one or all of its parties deliberately seek to use it to achieve another type of outcome; (b) the role of the factor of armed violence at the stage of a ceasefire that may achieve its main, underlying goals even if it does not lead to lasting cessation of hostilities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: “International Trends” (“Mezhdunarodnye protsessy”) was established in 2002 as the first Russian TIR journal. As of the early 2010s, it holds a strong position among the top three Russian thematic academic journals (according to the Russian Science Citation Index). The Journal’s key mission is a theoretical comprehension of the world as a whole, of international tendencies and the planetary political environment, and of the world-integrity our country finds herself in and develops with.
期刊最新文献
What Drives the West in Its Energy Policy? Leaders Against the Backdrop of an Era NATO Development by the Early 2020s Theoretical Foundations of the Foreign Policy of Latin American Nations Post-Conflict Economic Recovery in Kosovo
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1