After Exit: Assessing the Consequences of United Nations Peacekeeping Withdrawal

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Aims and ObjectivesSince the end of the Cold War, there has been a vast expansion in the number and scope of UN peacekeeping operations. With rare exceptions, the UN is no longer deploying troops to maintain the peace between former belligerents; rather UN peacekeepers now regularly intervene in ongoing conflicts with the aim of imposing order in the short-term, and then institutionalizing peace over the long-term by supporting the (re)construction of state and governmental institutions.But is the UN realizing this ambitious aim of peacebuilding through statebuilding? To answer this question, we need to know whether states that have played host to UN peacekeeping missions are able to perform basic state functions after PKOs have ended and peacekeepers have withdrawn. Problematically, however, there is currently little and unsystematized data on state capacity and the delivery of public services after exit. In this project, we aim to address this empirical gap by addressing two questions. We first ask, 'What are the trajectories of state capacity following the withdrawal of peacekeeping missions and associated peacekeeping forces?' This question invites an empirical descriptive response, which we will produce by gathering original data on the functionality of formerly peacekept states after exit. Our data collection effort will involve an aggregation of cross-national quantitative and qualitative data, as well as large-scale surveys in Liberia and Haiti after long-standing UN missions close in those countries.Our second question moves from description to explanation by asking 'Under what conditions are state functions sustained after exit, and under what conditions is there a shift in state functionality?' This question rests on the assumption that we will observe variation in the degree to which states are able to deliver public services after the withdrawal of UN peacekeeping support. Where such variation is indeed observed, we will explore three sets of factors that may shape post-exit state capacity: (1) the strength and scope of domestic institutions before, and during, the period of PKO deployment; (2) the scope of international intervention and strategy of international withdrawal; (3) the degree to which diverse domestic and international actors step in and substitute for the roles previously played by the UN PKO, after exit.To assess the relative impact of these possible causal factors, we will compare quantitative and qualitative measures of state functions before and during periods of UN PKO deployment with indicators of state functionality during the five years that follow the withdrawal of UN forces. We will focus on four state functions, in particular: security capacity, governmental/administrative capacity, productive/extractive capacity, and external relations. Academic and Policy ImpactGiven the innovative nature of our project, it is expected to generate significant interest among academic and policy audiences alike. On the academic side, our study will speak to at least three distinct audiences; scholars who are interested in evaluating the effectiveness of UN peacebuilding and statebuilding; those interested in concepts of the state, state capacity, and state fragility; and researchers whose work explores the methodological challenges of measuring intended and unintended legacies of peacekeeping interventions. The proposed study will also be of clear interest to policy actors who are currently involved in UN-sponsored peacebuilding. Since several members of our research team have worked closely with the UN for many years, we have well-established connections to various UN departments. As such, we will be able to convey our findings directly to policy actors who are responsible for operationalizing the exit of UN PKOs. We also have established relationships with state and non-governmental actors in Liberia and Haiti, which will facilitate dissemination of our work there.