Un Peacekeeping In Civil Wars

An in-depth 2007 analysis of the sources of success and failure in UN peacekeeping missions in civil wars.

Making War and Building Peace examines how well United Nations peacekeeping missions work after civil war. Statistically analyzing all civil wars since 1945, the book compares peace processes that had UN involvement to those that didn't. Michael Doyle and Nicholas Sambanis argue that each mission must be designed to fit the conflict, with the right authority and adequate resources. UN missions can be effective by supporting new actors committed to the peace, building governing institutions, and monitoring and policing implementation of peace settlements. But the UN is not good at intervening in ongoing wars. If the conflict is controlled by spoilers or if the parties are not ready to make peace, the UN cannot play an effective enforcement role. It can, however, offer its technical expertise in multidimensional peacekeeping operations that follow enforcement missions undertaken by states or regional organizations such as NATO. Finding that UN missions are most effective in the first few years after the end of war, and that economic development is the best way to decrease the risk of new fighting in the long run, the authors also argue that the UN's role in launching development projects after civil war should be expanded.

Civil wars have caused tremendous human suffering in the last century, and the United Nations is often asked to send peacekeepers to stop ongoing violence. Yet despite being the most visible tool of international intervention, policymakers and scholars have little systematic knowledge about how well peacekeeping works. Peacekeeping in the Midst of War offers the most comprehensive analyses of peacekeeping on civil war violence to date. With unique data on different types of violence in civil wars around the world, Peacekeeping in the Midst of War offers a rigorous understanding of UN intervention by analysing both wars with and without UN peacekeeping efforts. It also directly measures the strength of UN missions in personnel capacity and constitution. Using large-n quantitative analyses, the book finds that UN peacekeeping missions with appropriately constituted force capacities mitigate violence in civil wars. The authors conclude by analyzing the broader context of UN intervention effectiveness, and conclude that peacekeeping is a more generally effective way to reduce the human suffering associated with civil war.

"Fortna demonstrates that peacekeeping is an extremely effective policy tool, dramatically reducing the risk that war will resume. Moreover, she explains that relatively small and militarily weak consent-based peacekeeping operations are often just as effective as larger, more robust enforcement missions. Fortna examines the causal mechanisms of peacekeeping, paying particular attention to the perspective of the peacekept--the belligerents themselves--on whose decisions the stability of peace depends."--publisher website.

First published in 1998, this volume is a record, both by detailed statistical analysis and by personal account, of lessons learned. These lessons are only useful if they are shared to ensure that they are not relearned the hard way. Any soldier or statesman who is involved in Peacekeeping Operations and anyone involved in the future of peacekeeping in the United Nations would be well advised to use this exceptionally insightful and informative work as one of their essential reference books. It contains a rich store of analysis and sober conclusions that makes it an indispensable guide and should serve as a source of inspiration and reflection, but even more it should serve to provide guidance for future action. Biermann and Vadset have made a major contribution to the analysis of UN field operations and an important source book for the study of UN and NATO operations.

Boxes, figures and tables.

This book examines the emergent conviction that UN robust peacekeeping works better than UN traditional peacekeeping in reducing civilian killings within contemporary post-cold war violent civil wars. In an unprecedented study, Nsia-Pepra has systematically and empirically documented the relationship between robust peacekeeping and civilian killings in violent civil wars using both statistical and case study models. His research, engagingly expounded upon in UN Robust Peacekeeping, indicates that robust peacekeeping works better than traditional peacekeeping in lowering civilian killings by spoilers in violent civil wars. His book also presents the concept of a formidable barrier model of robust peacekeeping success using the game theoretical model. It makes policy recommendations to enhance the UN's capacity to protect civilians from human rights violations, including a unified, coherent doctrinal definition for robust peacekeeping, an operational doctrine on the use of force, and improved UN intelligence capacity. Nsia-Pepra also suggests employing the GA 1950 Uniting for Peace Resolution as well as robust mandates, common training doctrine, pre-deployment training, improved UN intelligence capacity, major power participation, implementation of R2P and US objective global leadership.

Dennis C. Jett examines why peacekeeping operations fail by comparing the unsuccessful attempt at peacekeeping in Angola with the successful effort in Mozambique, alongside a wide range of other peacekeeping experiences. The book argues that while the causes of past peacekeeping failures can be identified, the chances for success will be difficult to improve because of the way such operations are initiated and conducted, and the way the United Nations operates as an organization. Jett reviews the history of peacekeeping and the evolution in the number, size, scope, and cost of peacekeeping missions. He also explains why peacekeeping has become more necessary, possible, and desired and yet, at the same time, more complex, more difficult, and less frequently used. The book takes a hard look at the UN's actions and provides useful information for understanding current conflicts.