UN Peace Operations and the Use of Military Force

Rudolf, Peter

doi:10.1080/00396338.2017.1325605

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Alex J. Bellamy and Charles T. Hunt (2015) identify five potential challenges associated with the UN's new approach to peacekeeping: decreased legal protections for peacekeepers; decreased safety of peacekeepers; increased strain on UN resources; increased international and domestic expectations; and increased vulnerability of humanitarian actors due to perceptions of co-option. These challenges echo those identified by several other scholars (Tardy 2011;Karlsurd 2015;Hunt 2017;Rudolf 2017), all of whom emphasize that eroding the UN's core principles will have serious strategic, political, legal and ethical consequences. Although not all scholars agree that these challenges will be insurmountable (Nadin et al 2014;Berdal and Ucko 2015), it is difficult to deny that these new stabilization operations come with a degree of risk.…”

Section: The Debatementioning

confidence: 54%

Does quality matter? An evaluation of the relationship between United Nations peacekeepers and civil war violence

Winchester¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why are some groups of peacekeepers more effective at managing civil war violence than others? Existing studies of operational effectiveness have focused on the quantity, profession, and geographic location of deployed personnel and have suggested that each of these is independently important. However, the relationship, if any, between the quality of UN peacekeepers and their ability to manage on-going violence remains critically understudied. To address this gap, this study begins by developing a novel definition of "peacekeeper quality" that consists of two key factors: professional capabilities and a willingness to act. It then evaluates the extent to which variation in peacekeeper quality contributes to operational effectiveness, at both the state-level and the local-level. I argue that higher quality peacekeepers are more effective than lower quality peacekeepers because they have an easier time coercing local conflict actors. To test this argument, I use an explanatory sequential methodology -a form of mixed-method research that uses qualitative data to help interpret the results of a primarily quantitative study. It starts with a cross-national analysis of all intrastate conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa from 1991-2017 to determine if variation in average operational quality affects the severity of violence at the state-level. It then proceeds to a geographically disaggregated analysis of three peacekeeping operations located in sub-Saharan Africa from 2010-2017 to determine if variation in the average quality of individual groups of peacekeepers affects the severity of violence at the local-level. Finally, it presents a process-tracing case study of MINUSCA's intervention in CAR from 2014-2018 that examines both overall trends and discrete conflict episodes. In short, this dissertation shows how and why peacekeeper quality matters. Specifically, it shows that the UN's highest quality peacekeepers are its iii most effective, that the quantity of peacekeepers continues to affect violence when controlling for quality and that peacekeepers are better at protecting civilians from harm than they are at managing battlefield violence. As a result, future attempts to evaluate the relationship between peacekeepers and violence, or to improve the UN's operational effectiveness, should also account for the role played by peacekeeper quality.iv

show abstract