Obstruction and intimidation of peacekeepers: How armed actors undermine civilian protection efforts

Abstract

While recent research focuses on why conflict parties attack peacekeepers, little attention has been given to other types of resistance against peacekeeping missions, such as intimidation and obstruction. It is argued in this article that one reason why peacekeepers are obstructed and intimidated is that armed actors that target civilians want to maintain the operational space to carry out attacks against civilians and want to prevent peacekeepers from monitoring human rights violations. A spatially and temporally disaggregated analysis on resistance against peacekeepers in Darfur between January 2008 and April 2009 indeed suggests that the intimidation and obstruction of peacekeepers is more likely to take place in areas with higher levels of violence against civilians. The findings hold when taking into account the non-random occurrence of violence against civilians through matching the data. Finally, anecdotal evidence from other sites of armed conflict than Darfur suggests that resistance against peacekeepers in these cases is also likely to be related to the targeting of civilians. This suggest that in order to be effective in protecting civilians, peace missions should not only be robust as highlighted in previous research, but peace missions should also develop an effective strategy to deal with armed groups that try to prevent peacekeepers from fulfilling their mandate.

The effectiveness of mediation and peacekeeping for ending conflict

“…Mediation facilitates the broader political process on which the deployment of peacekeepers normally relies, and which is essential to enable peacekeepers to operate effectively. Armed factions routinely challenge, obstruct, and undermine peacekeeping operations (Duursma, 2019). 11 Retaining the ability of peacekeepers to operate effectively requires active and authoritative representation at the highest levels of power.…”

A price for peace: troop contributing countries’ responses to peacekeeper fatalities

“…Conceivably, this could embolden the contributor's rivals to behave more aggressively in areas under contention. Within the peacekeeping operation, malicious attacks that injure or kill peacekeepers may also embolden actors who seek to spoil the peace to conduct future attacks or engage in other obstructive activities, especially if contributors respond by withdrawing from the mission (Duursma 2019;Fjelde, Hultman, and Bromley 2016;Salverda 2013). This, in turn, could generate future risks for peacekeepers in missions where these events occur.…”

Intergovernmental Networks in Peace Operations

“…It is established in the recent research that the presence of peacekeepers dissuades armed groups from targeting civilians 52 and increasing the number of peacekeeping units is associated with greater coercive capacity to deter perpetrators, 53 and ultimately, lower civilian deaths. 54 Dense IGO networks would presumably translate into large size of peacekeeping units and greater capacity to prevent armed actors from perpetrating civilian atrocities.…”