Challenges to Peacebuilding in a Changing World

标题：地方起源，自由轨迹？：分析建设和平干预对缅甸、尼泊尔和菲律宾非自由地方秩序的纠缠拟议的研究旨在询问受冲突影响的社会中自由建设努力与非自由地方秩序的纠缠，希望解决阻碍世界各地建设和平干预的日益高涨的威权主义和非自由主义。具体地说，我首先要问的问题是：地方一级根深蒂固的政治/社会结构如何影响国际建设和平干预，反之亦然？我的研究希望解决冲突后建设和平努力中固有的两难困境，这些社会深陷地方政府俘虏、军阀政治和精英讨价还价的泥潭；我的研究旨在建立一个有用的框架，以了解大的男性/女性政治和基于亲属关系的联盟对受冲突影响社区的国际建设和平和国家建设干预的影响。由此产生的框架可能会为冲突后国家建设提供替代途径，并扰乱对亚洲国家地位有限的社会(缅甸、尼泊尔和菲律宾)自由建设和平做法的批评和争辩。毫无疑问，自由和平的模板特权符合威斯特伐利亚国家的国家特征--强大的机构、有价值的官僚机构和平等的代表权，使当地派生的国家-社会安排变得微不足道。周边安排，如基于亲属的联盟和个人主义政治，植根于亚洲的历史和国家形成过程，但在文学和实践中，人们对它们与当前政治秩序和更广泛的建设和平图景的纠缠知之甚少。建设和平的支持者和学者往往不承认现有的战前和战后结构，更不用说承认它们的长期遗产和它们成功运作的背景。即使在关键的建设和平和地方转向文献的帮助下，学术界和实践界至今仍在努力理解，在促进世界各地脆弱社会的和平方面，建设和平和国家建设的干预措施有哪些不足之处。通过定性的方法，我将分析国际建设和平干预对缅甸、尼泊尔和菲律宾根深蒂固的政治和社会秩序的纠缠。主要数据将通过档案、历史和人种学研究，采用半结构化访谈和对当地社区的参与者观察来收集，这些社区包括各自的地方政府单位、土著机构、传统司法系统和基层组织等。此外，还计划在国际警报组织在亚洲的一个或两个办事处担任更多的实地志愿者。分析工作将分三个阶段进行。分析的第一部分是描述国家地位有限的社会中的社会和政治机构的特征，放大到基于亲属关系、联盟、大人物和叛乱政治的地方派生秩序，从历史到现代。然后，我将把这些机构及其做法与国际警戒自1988年在菲律宾、2001年在尼泊尔和2012年在缅甸以来在三种情况下采取的国际建设和平和国家建设干预措施进行比较。通过比较历史社会学的视角，这些纠缠随后将被分析与“基本结构--经济、制度、社会和地缘政治(Hedman and Sidel，2005，p.6)”秩序相对照。我假设，当地和国际秩序对建设和平结果的影响比以往在实践和文献中假定的更大。这种影响在不同的方向来来去去，造成了冲突和争执，但也造成了谈判和和解

Title: Local origins, liberal trajectories?: Analyzing the entanglements of peacebuilding interventions to the illiberal local order in Myanmar, Nepal, and the PhilippinesThe proposed research aims to interrogate the entanglements of liberal peacebuilding efforts to the illiberal local order in conflict-affected societies, in hopes of addressing the rising authoritarianism and illiberalism that has hampered peacebuilding interventions all over the world. Specifically, I ask the initial question: How do embedded political/social structures at the local level shape international peacebuilding interventions, and vice versa? My research hopes to tackle head-on dilemmas inherent to post-conflict peacebuilding efforts in societies mired with local state capture, warlord politics, and elite bargaining; and aims to develop a useful framework to understand the effects of big men/women politics and kinship-based alliances to international peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions in conflict-affected communities. The resulting framework can potentially offer alternative pathways for post-conflict statebuilding and unsettle criticisms and contestations of the practice of liberal peacebuilding in societies with limited statehood in Asia (Myanmar, Nepal, and the Philippines). There is no debate that the liberal peace template privileges state characteristics that conform to Westphalian states-- strong institutions, meritorious bureaucracy, and equal representation, rendering locally derived state-society arrangements as insignificant. Peripheral arrangements such as kin-based alliances and personalistic politics are rooted in history and state formation processes in Asia, yet little is known about their entanglements to the current political order and broader peacebuilding landscape in both literature and practice. Proponents and scholars of peacebuilding often fail to acknowledge the existing pre- and post-war structures, let alone recognize their long-term legacies and the backdrop from which they successfully operate. Even with the aid of critical peacebuilding and local turn literature, to this day, both scholarship and practice have grappled to understand where peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions fell short in fostering peace in fragile societies all over the world. Through qualitative methods, I will analyze the entanglements of international peacebuilding interventions to the embedded political and social order in Myanmar, Nepal, and the Philippines. Primary data will be collected through archival, historical, and ethnographic research, employing semi-structured interviews and participant observation among local communities: their respective local government units, indigenous institutions, traditional justice systems, and grassroots organizations, among others. An extended field involvement as a volunteer at one or two of International Alert's offices in Asia is also envisioned.The analysis will proceed in three stages. The first part of the analysis is to characterize the social and political institutions in societies with 'limited statehood', zooming into locally-derived orders based on kinship, alliances, "big men" and insurgent politics, spanning from historical to modern times. I will then juxtapose these institutions and their practices to international peacebuilding and statebuilding interventions by International Alert in the three contexts since 1988 in the Philippines, 2001 in Nepal, and 2012 in Myanmar. Through the lens of comparative historical sociology, these entanglements will then be analyzed vis-a-vis the "underlying structures-- economic, institutional, social, and geopolitical (Hedman and Sidel, 2005, p. 6)" orders. I hypothesize that the local and international orders influence peacebuilding outcomes more than previously assumed in practice and literature. This influence comes and goes in different directions, creating collisions, and contestation but also negotiations and accommodat