Advertisement

The State of Affirmation in Peacebuilding: Locating Pragmatic Transitions

  • Jan PospisilEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

Peacebuilding’s history has undergone several stages, all characterised by a contestation between normative perspectives, realist power struggles and pragmatism. The rediscovery of internal violent conflict after the Cold War was accompanied by a period of conceptual authority: the creation of liberal democratic political institutions in the process of statebuilding should enable peace and stability. Failure to achieve the aspired success impelled peacebuilding to embrace the critique raised by the local turn and other approaches. Contextualised approaches and knowledge should provide a new background for useful interventions. However, the acceptance of context and the generation of respective knowledge overwhelmed peacebuilding. The eventual recognition of failure pushed peacebuilding into affirming its environmental circumstances. A transitional approach based on principled pragmatism, constructed out of existing, hitherto neglected practices in peace processes, may be able to provide a possible answer to this state of affirmation.

Keywords

Peacebuilding Conflict resolution Conceptual authority Contextual authority Affirmation Local turn Pragmatic peace 

References

  1. Annan, Kofi A. 2005. In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All. Report of the Secretary-General. A/59/2005. New York, NY: United Nations.Google Scholar
  2. Aradau, Claudia. 2007. Law Transformed: Guantanamo and the “Other” Exception. Third World Quarterly 28 (3): 489–501.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, Michael, and Christoph Zürcher. 2009. The Peacebuilder’s Contract: How External Statebuilding Reinforces Weak Statehood. In The Dilemmas of Statebuilding: Confronting the Contradictions of Postwar Peace Operations, ed. Roland Paris and Timothy D. Sisk, 23–52. London and New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Bell, Christine. 2015. What We Talk About When We Talk About Political Settlements: Towards Inclusive and Open Political Settlements in an Era of Disillusionment. PSRP Working Paper No. 1. PSRP, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, Christine, and Jan Pospisil. 2017. Navigating Inclusion in Transitions from Conflict: The Formalised Political Unsettlement. Journal of International Development 29 (5): 576–593.Google Scholar
  6. Carlton, David. 1971. Eden, Blum, and the Origins of Non-intervention. Journal of Contemporary History 6 (3): 40–55.Google Scholar
  7. Carothers, Thomas. 2002. The End of the Transition Paradigm. Journal of Democracy 13 (1): 5–21.Google Scholar
  8. Carothers, Thomas, and Oren Samet-Marram. 2015. The New Global Marketplace of Political Change. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
  9. Chabal, Patrick, and Jean-Pascal Daloz. 1999. Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument. Oxford: James Currey Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Chadwick, Wren, Tobias Debiel, Frank Gadinger (eds.). 2013. Relational Sensibility and the ‘Turn to the Local’: Prospects for the Future of Peacebuilding. Global Dialogues 2. Duisburg: Centre for Global Cooperation Research.Google Scholar
  11. Chandler, David. 2006. Empire in Denial: The Politics of State-Building. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  12. Chandler, David. 2007. The security-development nexus and the rise of “anti-foreign policy”’. Journal of International Relations and Development 10 (4): 362–386.Google Scholar
  13. Chandler, David. 2010. International Statebuilding: The Rise of Post-liberal Governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Chandler, David. 2014. Beyond Good and Evil: Ethics in a World of Complexity. International Politics 51 (4): 441–457.Google Scholar
  15. Chandler, David. 2015. Resilience and the “Everyday”: Beyond the Paradox of “Liberal Peace”. Review of International Studies 41 (1): 27–48.Google Scholar
  16. Chandler, David. 2017. Peacebuilding: The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1997–2017. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Chandler, David. 2018a. Ontopolitics in the Anthropocene: An Introduction to Mapping, Sensing and Hacking. Abingdon and New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Chandler, David. 2018b. Intervention and Statebuilding Beyond the Human: From the “Black Box” to the “Great Outdoors”. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 12 (1): 80–97.Google Scholar
  19. Chandler, David, and Oliver P. Richmond. 2015. Contesting Postliberalism: Governmentality or Emancipation? Journal of International Relations and Development 18 (1): 1–24.Google Scholar
  20. Collier, Paul, and Anke Hoeffler. 2004. Greed and Grievance in Civil War. Oxford Economic Papers 56 (4): 563–595.Google Scholar
  21. Criddle, Evan J. 2015. Three Grotian Theories of Humanitarian Intervention. Theoretical Inquiries in Law 16 (2): 473–505.Google Scholar
  22. de Coning, Cedric. 2016. From Peacebuilding to Sustaining Peace: Implications of Complexity for Resilience and Sustainability. Resilience: International Policies Practices and Discourses 4 (3): 166–181.Google Scholar
  23. de Coning, Cedric. 2017. Implications of Complexity for Peacebuilding Policies and Practices. In Complexity Thinking for Peacebuilding Practice and Evaluation, ed. Emery Brusset, Cedric de Coning, and Bryn Hughes, 19–48. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. de Waal, Alex. 2015. The Real Politics of the Horn of Africa: Money, War and the Business of Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  25. Doornbos, Martin. 2001. “Good Governance”: The Rise and Decline of a Policy Metaphor? The Journal of Development Studies 37 (6): 93–108.Google Scholar
  26. Dossa, Shiraz. 2007. Slicing up “Development”: Colonialism, Political Theory, Ethics. Third World Quarterly 28 (5): 887–899.Google Scholar
  27. Duffield, Mark. 2001. Global Governance and the New Wars: The Merging of Development and Security. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  28. Duffield, Mark. 2010. The Liberal Way of Development and the Development-Security Impasse: Exploring the Global Life-Chance Divide. Security Dialogue 41 (1): 53–76.Google Scholar
  29. EUGS—EU Global Strategy. 2016. Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe. Brussels: European Union.Google Scholar
  30. Fukuyama, Francis. 1989. The End of History? The National Interest (Summer): 3–18. Google Scholar
  31. Fukuyama, Francis. 2005. State Building: Governance and World Order in the Twenty-First Century. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  32. Galtung, Johan. 1969. Violence, Peace, and Peace Research. Journal of Peace Research 6 (3): 167–191.Google Scholar
  33. Ghani, Ashraf, and Claire Lockhart. 2009. Fixing Failed States. A Framework for Rebuilding a Fractured World. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Gray, John. 1993. Post-liberalism: Studies in Political Thought. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Helmke, Gretchen, and Steven Levitsky. 2004. Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda. Perspectives on Politics 2 (4): 725–740.Google Scholar
  36. Heraclides, Alexis, and Ada Dialla. 2015. Humanitarian Intervention in the Long Nineteenth Century: Setting the Precedent. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Oklahoma City, OK: Oklahoma University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Huysmans, Jef. 2014. Security Unbound: Enacting Democratic Limits. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Jahn, Beate. 2007a. The Tragedy of Liberal Diplomacy: Democratization, Intervention, Statebuilding (Part I). Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 1 (1): 87–106.Google Scholar
  40. Jahn, Beate. 2007b. The Tragedy of Liberal Diplomacy: Democratization, Intervention, Statebuilding (Part II). Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 1 (2): 211–229.Google Scholar
  41. Jonas, Hans. 2001. The Phenomenon of Life: Toward a Philosophical Biology. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Kaldor, Mary. 1999. New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  43. Kaldor, Mary. 2007. Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kaldor, Mary. 2013. In Defence of New Wars. Stability: International Journal of Security and Development 2 (1): Article 4.Google Scholar
  45. Kalyvas, Stathis N., and Laia Balcells. 2010. International System and Technologies of Rebellion: How the End of the Cold War Shaped Internal Conflict. The American Political Science Review 104 (3): 415–429.Google Scholar
  46. Kende, Istvan. 1968. Peaceful Co-existence: Its Interpretation and Misinterpretation. Journal of Peace Research 5 (4): 352–364.Google Scholar
  47. Khittel, Stefan, and Jan Pospisil. 2010. Früherkennung von bewaffneten Konflikten? Ein Vergleich standardisierter Konfliktanalyseverfahren. oiip Working Paper No. 62, oiip, Vienna.Google Scholar
  48. Kivimäki, Timo. 2016. Paradigms of Peace: A Pragmatist Introduction to the Contribution to Peace of Paradigms of Social Science. London: Imperial College Press.Google Scholar
  49. Kozhevnikov, Feodor Ivanovich (ed.). 1960. International Law: A Textbook for Use in Law Schools. Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R., Foreign Languages Publishing House.Google Scholar
  50. Lederach, John Paul. 2005. The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Lemay-Hébert, Nicolas. 2013. Critical Debates on Liberal Peacebuilding. Civil Wars 15 (2): 242–252.Google Scholar
  52. Mac Ginty, Roger. 2011. International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  53. Mac Ginty, Roger. 2013. Indicators+: A proposal for everyday peace indicators. Evaluation and Program Planning 36 (1), 56–63.Google Scholar
  54. Mac Ginty, Roger, and Oliver P. Richmond. 2013. The Local Turn in Peace Building: A Critical Agenda for Peace. Third World Quarterly 34 (5), 763–783.Google Scholar
  55. McWhinney, Edward. 1962. “Peaceful Co-Existence” and Soviet-Western International Law. American Journal of International Law 56 (4): 951–970.Google Scholar
  56. Migdal, Joel S. 1988. Strong Societies and Weak States: State-Society Relations and State Capabilities in the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Newman, Edward, Roland Paris, and Oliver P. Richmond (eds.). 2009. New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding. New York, NY: United Nations University.Google Scholar
  58. NSS—US National Security Strategy. 2015. Washington, DC: The White House.Google Scholar
  59. Ostrom, Elinor, and Marco A. Janssen. 2004. Multi-level Governance and the Resilience of Social-Ecological Systems. In Globalisation, ed. Max Spoor, 239–259. Poverty and Conflict, Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  60. Padelford, Norman J. 1937. The International Non-Intervention Agreement and the Spanish Civil War. The American Journal of International Law 31 (4): 578–603.Google Scholar
  61. Paris, Roland. 2001. Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air? International Security 26 (2): 87–102.Google Scholar
  62. Paris, Roland. 2004. At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Paris, Roland. 2009. Does Liberal Peacebuilding Have a Future? In New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding, ed. Edward Newman, Roland Paris, and Oliver P. Richmond, 97–111. New York, NY: United Nations University.Google Scholar
  64. Paris, Roland. 2010. Saving Liberal Peacebuilding. Review of International Studies 36 (2): 337–365.Google Scholar
  65. Pospisil, Jan. 2016. Komplikation statt Komplexität: Die EU als globaler Peacebuilding-Akteur. In Europa und Demokratien im Wandel: Ausgewählte Beiträge zum Globalisierungsforum 2014–2015, ed. Gudrun Biffl and Dorothea Stepan, 83–102. Krems: DUK.Google Scholar
  66. Pospisil, Jan. 2017. “Unsharing” Sovereignty: g7+ and the Politics of International Statebuilding. International Affairs 93 (6): 1417–1434.Google Scholar
  67. Pospisil, Jan, and Florian P. Kühn. 2016. The Resilient State: New Regulatory Modes in International Approaches to State Building? Third World Quarterly 37 (1): 1–16.Google Scholar
  68. Ramalingam, Ben. 2015. Aid on the Edge of Chaos: Rethinking International Cooperation in a Complex World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Ramsbotham, Oliver. 2010. Transforming Violent Conflict: Radical Disagreement, Dialogue and Survival. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Richmond, Oliver P. 2001. A Genealogy of Peacemaking: The Creation and Re-Creation of Order. Alternatives 26 (3): 317–348.Google Scholar
  71. Richmond, Oliver P. 2009. Beyond Liberal Peace? Responses to “backsliding”. In New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding, ed. Edward Newman, Roland Paris, and Oliver P. Richmond, 54–77. New York, NY: United Nations University.Google Scholar
  72. Richmond, Oliver P. 2010. Resistance and the Post-liberal Peace. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 38 (3): 665–692.Google Scholar
  73. Richmond, Oliver P. 2011. A Post-liberal Peace. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  74. Richmond, Oliver P. 2016a. Peace Formation and Political Order in Conflict Affected Societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Richmond, Oliver P. 2016b. Mediation in Post-liberal International Relations. Unpublished Draft Paper.Google Scholar
  76. Richmond, Oliver P. 2018. A Genealogy of Mediation in International Relations: From ‘Analogue’ to ‘Digital’ Forms of Global Justice or Managed War? Cooperation and Conflict 53 (3): 301–319.Google Scholar
  77. Ricigliano, Robert. 2011. Systems Thinking in Conflict Assessment: Concepts and Application. Washington, DC: USAID.Google Scholar
  78. Robinson, William I. 1996. Promoting Polyarchy: Globalization, US Intervention, and Hegemony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Rosamond, Ben. 2000. Theories of European Integration. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  80. Rosato, Sebastian. 2003. The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory. American Political Science Review 97 (4): 585–602.Google Scholar
  81. Rose, Gideon. 1998. Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy (Review Article). World Politics 51 (1): 144–172.Google Scholar
  82. Rostow, Walt William. 1960. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-communist Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Sabaratnam, Meera. 2013. Avatars of Eurocentrism in the Critique of the Liberal Peace. Security Dialogue 44 (3): 259–278.Google Scholar
  84. Saferworld. 2004. Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peacebuilding: A Resource Pack. London: Saferworld.Google Scholar
  85. Sanderson, Ian. 2009. Intelligent Policy Making for a Complex World: Pragmatism, Evidence and Learning. Political Studies 57 (4): 699–719.Google Scholar
  86. Snyder, Jack. 2000. From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict. London: Norton.Google Scholar
  87. Tunkin, Grigory I. 1958. Co-existence and International Law (Volume 095). In Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. The Hague Academy of International Law.Google Scholar
  88. United Nations. 1945. Charter of the United Nations. Washington, DC: United Nations.Google Scholar
  89. Urry, John. 2005. The Complexity Turn. Theory, Culture & Society 22 (5): 1–14.Google Scholar
  90. Väyrynen, Raimo. 1991. New Directions in Conflict Theory: Conflict Resolution and Conflict Transformation. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  91. Wendt, Alexander. 1992. Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization 46 (2): 391–425.Google Scholar
  92. Wiuff Moe, Louise, and Finn Stepputat. 2018. Introduction: Peacebuilding in an Era of Pragmatism. International Affairs 94 (2): 293–299.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ASPR—Austrian Study Centre for Peace and Conflict ResolutionViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations