Cedric De Coning

From peacebuilding to sustaining peace: Implications of complexity for resilience and sustainability

Abstract This article applies complexity theory to the peacebuilding field and finds that for a peace process to become self-sustainable, resilient social institutions need to emerge from within, i.e. informed by the local culture, history and socio-economic context. International peacebuilders can assist this process, but if they interfere too much they end up undermining the self-organising processes necessary to generate and sustain resilient social institutions. A complexity-informed approach to sustaining peace suggests that international peacebuilders focus their efforts on safeguarding, stimulating, facilitating and creating the space for societies to develop resilient capacities for self-organisation.This article applies complexity theory to the peacebuilding field and finds that for a peace process to become self-sustainable, resilient social institutions need to emerge from within, i.e. infor...

Peace enforcement in Africa: Doctrinal distinctions between the African Union and United Nations

When the United Nations (UN) Security Council needs to authorize a peace enforcement operation in Africa, its partner of choice is the African Union (AU). Africa has developed significant peace ope...ABSTRACT When the United Nations (UN) Security Council needs to authorize a peace enforcement operation in Africa, its partner of choice is the African Union (AU). Africa has developed significant peace operations capacity over the past decade. In addition to deploying eight AU operations, Africa now contributes 50% of all UN peacekeepers. African stability operations, like its mission in Somalia, are often described as peace enforcement operations. In this article, I question whether it is accurate to categorize African stability operations as peace enforcement? I answer the question by considering what the criteria are that are used to differentiate between peace enforcement and peacekeeping operations in the UN context. I then use the peace enforcement criteria to assess whether AU stabilization operations would qualify as peace enforcement operations. In conclusion, I consider the implications of the findings for the strategic partnership between the AU and the UN.

Implications of Complexity for Peacebuilding Policies and Practices

This chapter explores the implications of Complexity for peacebuilding. It introduces Complexity by looking at systems, non-linearity, and self-organisation. The chapter also touches on the ethics of applying Complexity to peacebuilding. For instance, unintended consequences are inevitable and must be anticipated, so steps should be taken to monitor, mitigate, and adjust accordingly. The core finding of this chapter is that when peacebuilding attempts to control outcomes it generates ongoing instability, dependence, and fragility, because it undermines self-organisation. A Complexity informed approach to peacebuilding should be about safeguarding, stimulating, facilitating, and creating the space for societies to develop robust and resilient capacities for self-organisation. The key to successful peacebuilding lies in finding the appropriate balance between international support and local self-organisation.

Civil-Military Interaction: Rationale, Possibilities and Limitations

The military is inclined to isolation because its baseline culture is designed to protect its command, control and communication systems from external threats. In the peace operations context, however, it is vital that the security dimension is integrated into the larger political and social-development strategic framework that guides the overall process. The civil-military interface is thus a critical node that helps to connect the military agencies with the rest of the peace operation system. In this chapter we will unpack the rationale behind civil-military interaction, and analyse the different levels at which civil-military interaction takes place. We will also consider the limits of civil-military interaction: how much coherence can one realistically expect to achieve, and what factors would influence these limits? The chapter ends by looking at the possibilities of civil-military interaction and why it has become such a central part of all contemporary peace operations.

Conclusion: Are Rising Powers Breaking the Peacebuilding Mold?

The concluding chapter analyzes the peacebuilding concepts, policies, and practices of five key rising powers—Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa, and Turkey. It finds that these countries’ approaches share some key features but diverge in others. Rising powers have a broader concept of peacebuilding than most Western donor countries, but the extent to which they equate peacebuilding with development varies. They have a more holistic operational approach, a longer time horizon, and a strong emphasis on national ownership, but the latter is often narrowed down to governmental consent. They share a heightened sensitivity to sovereignty, but negotiate this in a variety of ways. It finds that the rising powers have influenced the discourse and practices of peacebuilding, especially at the United Nations (UN), but not transformed them. Several recent setbacks raise doubts about whether rising powers will sustain their new influential role in peacebuilding. This volume shows that rising powers have set forth a broadly coherent set of principles and rationales as the basis for their new approach to peacebuilding. These principles and practices are likely to influence how Western donors, the UN, regional organizations, and non-governmental organizations approach peacebuilding in important ways in the coming years.

Introduction: Why Examine Rising Powers’ Role in Peacebuilding?

Over the last decade, setbacks in places like Burundi, Libya, South Sudan, and Yemen have undercut the credibility that peacebuilding enjoyed in the international system. These failures have combined with a push from rising powers against Western dominance to produce a turn to the Global South for more legitimate and effective responses to mass organized violence in the world. Onto this stage new actors like the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) and other regional powers in the Global South, like Indonesia and Turkey, have emerged as new “donors” that advance their own political and technical approaches to peacebuilding. These rising powers seek to influence how the United Nations, other multilateral organizations, traditional donors, and recipient countries view and do peacebuilding. Their entry may fundamentally alter peacebuilding a decade from now. This book seeks to answer the following central questions: What exactly is new and innovative about the peacebuilding approaches of rising powers from the Global South, and what are the implications of these new approaches? The introductory chapter explains why this study is important, identifies several key research questions, and outlines the method and structure of the volume.