Hobbes and the Congo: Frames, Local Violence, and International Intervention
Hobbes and the Congo: Frames, Local Violence, and International Intervention
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s0020818309090080
复制
发表时间：
2009-03-01
影响因子：
7.8
通讯作者：
Autesserre, Severine
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Autesserre, Severine
为什么国际和平建设者未能解决和平进程失败的当地原因？现有对建设和平失败的解释侧重于制约因素和既得利益，不能解释国际社会对当地冲突的忽视。在这篇文章中，我展示了杂乱无章的框架如何塑造国际干预，并阻止国际社会对地方暴力采取行动。通过330多次访谈、多地点人种学和文件分析，我对刚果民主共和国从战争到和平与民主的过渡(2003-2006)进行了个案研究。我证明，地方议程在维持地方、国家和区域暴力方面发挥了决定性作用。然而，冲突后建设和平框架塑造了国际社会对暴力和干预的理解，使当地解决冲突显得无关紧要和不合法。这一框架包括四个关键要素：国际行为体将刚果称为“冲突后”局势；他们认为那里的暴力是与生俱来的，因此即使在和平时期也是可以接受的；他们认为国际干预完全涉及国家和国际领域；他们认为举行选举而不是解决当地冲突是国家和建设和平的一种可行、适当和有效的工具。这一框架授权并证明了具体做法和政策的合理性，同时排除了其他做法和政策，特别是当地冲突的解决，最终注定了建设和平努力的失败。最后，我认为，分析论述框架是解决刚果以外国际建设和平失败之谜的富有成效的办法。
Why do international peacebuilders fail to address the local causes of peace process failures? The existing explanations of peacebuilding failures, which focus on constraints and vested interests, do not explain the international neglect of local conflict. In this article, I show how discursive frames shape international intervention and preclude international action on local violence. Drawing on more than 330 interviews, multi-sited ethnography, and document analysis, I develop a case study of the Democratic Republic of Congo's transition from war to peace and democracy (2003-2006). I demonstrate that local agendas played a decisive role in sustaining local, national, and regional violence. However, a postconflict peacebuilding frame shaped the international understanding of violence and intervention in such a way that local conflict resolution appeared irrelevant and illegitimate. This frame included four key elements: international actors labeled the Congo a "postconflict" situation; they believed that violence there was innate and therefore acceptable even in peacetime; they conceptualized international intervention as exclusively concerned with the national and international realms; and they saw holding elections, as opposed to local conflict resolution, as a workable, appropriate, and effective tool for state- and peacebuilding. This frame authorized and justified specific practices and policies while precluding others, notably local conflict resolution, ultimately dooming the peacebuilding efforts. In Conclusion, I contend that analyzing discursive frames is a fruitful approach to the Puzzle of international peacebuilding failures beyond the Congo.