Private peace entrepreneurs (ppes) are private citizens with no official authority who initiate diplomatic correspondence with official representatives from the opposing side during a conflict in order to promote conflict resolution. This article outlines a theoretical framework for analyzing this phenomenon, drawing on a wide range of case studies. It defines the phenomenon and analyzes the power resources and factors that help theppeinfluence official processes. The article shows that althoughppes lack official authority and legal status, they have alternative, unofficial resources that help them influence the diplomatic sphere, and some have even played critical roles in conflict resolution efforts. The analysis distinguishes among different means of influence – through official decision makers, public opinion, the rival side, or a third side. The article offers insights about the individual private citizen as an actor in peace diplomacy and describes important historical figures who were excluded from history textbooks.
With the rise of populist leaders around the world, populism's impact on foreign policy and international affairs has come into focus. Adding to this literature, we propose the concept of ‘populist peacemaking’, in which key tenets of populism, in style and substance, are projected onto the sphere of international mediation. We offer an analytical framework for understanding populist peacemaking consisting of three features. Firstly, populist peacemaking is characterized by a rejection of the ‘peacemaking elites’ and their established rules and practices, including international norms, a refutation of context-specific knowledge, and a clean-slate approach that disregards past peacemaking attempts and alienates other international mediators. Secondly, populist peacemaking employs aggrandized rhetoric and symbolism that puts the mediator—rather than the conflict parties—in the spotlight, thus integrating domestic politics into peacemaking. Finally, populist peacemaking frames the process as representing the volonté générale, i.e. serving the interests of the ‘pure people’ in the conflict-affected context. We illustrate this phenomenon empirically with a case-study of United States' peacemaking efforts during the Trump era, tracing initiatives pursued by US envoys in the Israeli–Palestinian and Kosovo–Serbia conflicts. From this analysis, populist peacemaking emerges as a distinct phenomenon, not to be subsumed under the heading of ‘illiberal peacemaking’.
How do disasters influence conflict and diplomacy in conflict areas? The scholarship shows that while they can provide opportunities for cooperation and ‘disaster diplomacy’ between parties to a conflict, they can also intensify tension and hostility. This article uses the Israeli–Palestinian conflict during the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, exploring the impact of the crisis on relations between the rival parties and examining the conditions under which an ongoing pandemic might lead to either conflict or cooperation in a conflict area. The research is based on within-case analysis, comparing three conflict arenas: Israel–Palestinian Authority relations in the West Bank; relations between Israel and the Palestinian community in East Jerusalem; and Israel–Hamas government relations in the Gaza strip. The article outlines the possibilities and limitations of ‘disaster diplomacy’ in intractable conflicts and contributes to the literature by identifying how different contexts, relations and actors in each conflict arena affect the development of patterns of conflict and cooperation with regard to the pandemic. The study analyses the factors that shape how the pandemic affects the conflict, and the COVID-19-related diplomacy, in each sub-case, with attention to three main variables: the structure of the conflict arena, domestic politics and the developments in the pandemic. The analysis addresses the unique conditions of an ongoing global pandemic, as opposed to an isolated disaster event, and traces the changing impact of the pandemic on the conflict and on disaster-related cooperation at various stages.
Various conflict areas have faced situations of deadlock after repeated rounds of violence and failed negotiations. In such cases, international actors have used the strategy of drafting, presenting, and promoting a peace plan that addresses the main issues in the conflict and formulates a basis for negotiation and agreement. The article analyzes peace plans as a strategy in peacemaking, international intervention, and mediation processes in conflict areas, using four case studies: The Contact Group's plan for Bosnia (1994); US President Bill Clinton's plan for Israel–Palestine (2000); United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan's plan for Cyprus (2004); and United Nations Envoy Martti Ahtisaari's plan for Kosovo (2007). The article examines the peace plans as a diplomatic strategy and international practice and explores their influence as a “textual agency” in the long term. It finds that peace plans, though shaped by a specific context, can under certain conditions take on an independent life and have a long-term impact, even if they were rejected and had failed in the short term. The research traces the influence of the plans in various spheres and identifies the main factors that explain the variance in their afterlives. Distintas zonas de conflicto se han enfrentado a situaciones de estancamiento tras varias olas de violencia y negociaciones fallidas. En tales casos, la estrategia de los actores políticos internacionales ha consistido en elaborar, presentar y promover un plan de paz que aborde los principales temas del conflicto y formule una base para la negociación y el acuerdo. El presente artículo analiza los planes de paz como estrategia de pacificación, intervención internacional y procesos de mediación en zonas de conflicto, mediante el uso de cuatro estudios de caso: El plan del Grupo de Contacto para Bosnia [The Contact Group's plan for Bosnia (1994)]; El plan del presidente de los Estados Unidos Bill Clinton para el conflicto palestino-israelí [US President Bill Clinton's plan for Israel–Palestine (2000)]; El plan del secretario general de las Naciones Unidas, Kofi Annan, para Chipre [United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan's plan for Cyprus (2004)]; y el plan del enviado especial de las Naciones Unidas, Martti Ahtisaari, para Kosovo [United Nations Envoy Martti Ahtisaari's plan for Kosovo (2007)]. El presente artículo analiza los planes de paz como estrategia diplomática y práctica internacional, y examina su influencia como “agente de cambio textual” a largo plazo. Se concluye que los planes de paz, si bien están condicionados por un contexto específico, pueden, en determinadas situaciones, tener vida propia y producir un efecto a largo plazo, aunque sean rechazados y hayan fracasado a corto plazo. La presente investigación analiza la importancia de los planes en diversas áreas e identifica los principales factores que explican la variación de sus vidas posteriores. Diverses zones de conflit ont été confrontées à des impasses suite à des séries répétées de violences et d’échecs de négociations. Dans de tels cas, des acteurs internationaux ont eu recours à une stratégie consistant à ébaucher, présenter et promouvoir un plan de paix traitant les principaux problèmes du conflit tout en formulant une base pour une négociation et un accord. Cet article analyse les plans de paix en tant que stratégie des processus de pacification, d'intervention internationale et de médiation dans les zones de conflit en s'appuyant sur quatre études de cas: le plan du Groupe de contact pour la Bosnie (1994), le plan du Président américain Bill Clinton pour le conflit israélo–palestinien (2000), le plan du Secrétaire général des Nations unies Kofi Annan pour Chypre (2004) et le plan de l'Envoyé des Nations unies Martti Ahtisaari pour le Kosovo (2007). L'article examine les plans de paix en tant que stratégie diplomatique et que pratique internationale et explore leur influence en tant « qu'agents textuels » à long terme. Il constate que bien qu'ils soient façonnés par un contexte spécifique, les plans de paix peuvent, sous certaines conditions, survivre de manière indépendante et avoir un impact à long terme, même s'ils ont été rejetés et ont échoué à court terme. Cette recherche retrace l'influence des plans dans diverses sphères et identifie les principaux facteurs qui expliquent la variance de leur survie.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.