Hybrid Peace Operations: Rationale and Challenges

Tardy, Thierry

doi:10.1163/19426720-02001007

Cited by 18 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The civil wars in the Balkans introduced two key and interrelated lessons regarding the co‐dependence of security and development, as well as the need for strengthening policy coherence in peace interventions more generally (OECD DAC, 2007, 2008, 2012; UNDP, 1994, 2012; World Bank, 2011). The first official UN mission to be considered ‘hybrid’, or multi‐actor and comprehensive, was the UN‐African Union (AU) Mission in Darfur 2007–2008, though multi‐actor coordination had been exhibited in some previous missions, such as the AU Mission in Sudan II (Tardy, 2014). The provincial reconstruction teams (PRTs) employed in Afghanistan and Iraq constituted an important effort to institutionalize comprehensiveness and multi‐actor coordination in a conflict‐response operation, unfortunately with mixed results.…”

Section: Lesson 2: Comprehensiveness and Coherence Are Vitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Approaches intended to overcome the complex nature of fragility and conflict in the post‐9/11 period emphasize local legitimacy and ownership, in line with broader trends in development policy (OECD DAC, 2007, 2008, 2012; UN, 2011; UNDP, 2012). Though widely debated, scholarship has increasingly pointed to ‘hybridity’, or the interplay of external and internal peace processes, as a feasible approach to peacebuilding in contextually‐appropriate and locally legitimate ways (Newman, 2011; Richmond, 2012; Tardy, 2014). The critical peacebuilding literature, however, points to hybridity as the latest methodology of generating local buy‐in for the same normative, liberal democratic end goals of peace interventions, often reinforcing the binaries and power differentials it aims to overcome, while essentializing the ‘local’ (Mac Ginty and Richmond, 2016; Nadarajah and Rampton, 2015; Newman, 2011; Randazzo, 2016; Wallis, 2017).…”

Section: Lesson 3: Hybriditymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The End of the Liberal World Order and the Future of UN Peace Operations: Lessons Learned

Cassin

Zyla

2021

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global conflicts are becoming increasingly transnational and often involve non‐state actors. These trends mirror the diffusion of power that has resulted from globalization and the erosion of liberal hegemony since the late 1990s and early 2000s. Though projections vary among scholars, the future international system is likely to involve a diversification of actors exerting influence in all policy spheres, including conflict‐response and peace operations. The United Nations (UN) and other liberal actors, historically dominant in peace operations, must adapt to remain relevant in a future where their governance of operations, and the underlying liberal democratic goals on which they are based, can no longer be assumed. In light of this waning liberal international order, this paper examines the core lessons learned from the past 70 years of UN peace operations to infer what future UN peacekeeping might look like and what adaptations will be necessary for this new environment. In so doing, we prepare recommendations for a truly localized and contextualized approach to peace operations that is expansive, representative and non‐directive, ultimately necessitating the UN and other liberal actors to adopt higher risk tolerance and relinquish exclusive control over conflict‐response and peace.

show abstract

Section: Lesson 2: Comprehensiveness and Coherence Are Vitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lesson 3: Hybriditymentioning

confidence: 99%

The End of the Liberal World Order and the Future of UN Peace Operations: Lessons Learned

Cassin

Zyla

2021

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most significant of them all is the replicability of these models from one conflict management process to another. While conventional mediation mechanisms can access institutional frameworks for processing information at the group‐level, hybrid mediation needs to generate the corresponding frameworks for information processing in addition to sharing relevant information (Tardy ). In conventional coordination mechanisms, these frameworks are established and institutionalized and therefore can be accessed as needed by the mediators.…”

Section: Coordination Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Multiparty Mediation: Prospects for a Coordinated Effort

Vuković

2019

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of international peace mediation has become increasingly complex. Proliferation of actors that are able and willing to mediate has made multiparty mediation a standard format through which conflicts get managed. Due to their ad hoc nature, multiparty mediation efforts require specific mechanisms that will provide sufficient clarity and direction for the mediators involved. This paper departs by differentiating three distinct, yet highly interrelated, fundamental aspects that contribute to the overall success in multiparty mediation: cooperation, coordination and leadership. Treating coordination as a subset element of wider cooperation, this paper addresses the main challenges of achieving effective coordination in a given context. The paper highlights the relevance of information carrying capacity and premediated appointment of a leader when developing particular coordination mechanisms.

show abstract

“…Inter-IGO interaction in peace operations affects the performance of such missions, as it shapes "decision-making processes, financing procedures, command and control arrangements, operational practices, and accountability and reporting mechanisms." 20 Thus, the assumption is that to gain a deeper understanding of the performance of peace operations, one needs to take into account the interplay between multiple missions and peacekeeping actors, their collective effort, and the extent to which separate operations are connected. 21 This study examines the interactions among IGOs by applying a network analysis perspective.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergovernmental Networks in Peace Operations

Akbulut-Gok¹

2020

Peace & Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Notwithstanding the growing consensus on the benefits associated with cooperation among intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) in peacekeeping operations (PKOs), academic research has thus far neglected pressing questions of how IGOs collaborate within a network context in peace missions and how these interorganizational collaborations among IGOs, known as IGO networks, might account for the success or failure of these operations. More specifically, this study concentrates on how structural properties of IGO networks, such as the extensiveness of ties between network partners and the cohesiveness of such networks, may account for PKOs' performance in accomplishing their core goals. A statistical analysis of all IGO peace operation networks since 1991 reveals that the density and centralization of IGO networks predict which PKOs are likely to be successful in accomplishing their core tasks of violence abatement, conflict containment, and conflict settlement.

show abstract

Hybrid Peace Operations: Rationale and Challenges

Cited by 18 publications

References 10 publications

The End of the Liberal World Order and the Future of UN Peace Operations: Lessons Learned

The End of the Liberal World Order and the Future of UN Peace Operations: Lessons Learned

International Multiparty Mediation: Prospects for a Coordinated Effort

Intergovernmental Networks in Peace Operations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About