Into the Lion's Den: Local Responses to UN Peacekeeping
Han Dorussen (University of Essex) and Ismene Gizelis (University of Kent)
Abstract: In taking on the task of 'integrative peacekeeping', the United Nations (UN) has become deeply involved in state-building and taken on responsibility for good governance in post-conflict societies. Arguably, integrative peacekeeping is bound to be more contentious than traditional peacekeeping. Not only is integrative peacekeeping often applied to relatively hard cases-intrastate wars in weak or failing states-it also aims at transforming these cases into inclusive, well-governed societies. The research question is when do the actions and policies of peacekeeping produce cooperation rather than conflict? Three sets of hypotheses are evaluated with a focus on the (a) authorities involved in the event, (b) the policies implemented, and (c) the role of the peacekeepers. We introduce the first results for an ongoing research project collecting disaggregated event data on governance events in peacekeeping operations. The data pertain to the peacekeeping missions in the African Great Lakes region. We find central authorities to be more open to UN efforts to strengthen their control and regulatory capacity, while rebel authorities are more suspicious. Further and contrary to our expectations, policies that aim at power-sharing and democratization are more instead of less contentious than policies that strengthen state / central authorities. Finally, actions over which the UN holds direct responsibility are met with more cooperation (at least verbally) than action where the UN has mainly a supportive role.