Taking matters into their own hands: An analysis of the determinants of state-conducted peacekeeping in civil wars
| Published date | 01 March 2011 |
| Author | Nicolas Rost,J Michael Greig |
| Date | 01 March 2011 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0022343310396110 |
Taking matters into their own hands:
An analysis of the determinants of
state-conducted peacekeeping in civil wars
Nicolas Rost
Department of Politics and Management, University of Konstanz & United Nations
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs for Somalia (OCHA)
J Michael Greig
Department of Political Science, University of North Texas
Abstract
Why and when do states take the burden upon themselves to send peacekeepers into a civil war, rather than relying on
intergovernmental organizations to do so? While there are a few empirical studies on the conditions under which the
UN sends peacekeeping missions, no such analyses of state-conducted peacekeeping exist. In this study, a theoretical
framework on state-conducted peacekeeping in civil wars is developed and empirically tested. Not surprisingly, when
acting outside international organizations, states are able to take their own interests directly into account and select
those civil wars to which they send peacekeepers accordingly. States’ interests play a much greater role here than, for
example, the interests of the major powers do for UN peacekeeping. When states send peacekeepers they are more likely
to choose former colonies, military allies, trade partners, or countries with which they have ethnic ties. Yet, this does not
mean that state-conducted peacekeeping occurs only where states see their own interests. Contrary to conventional
wisdom, states also provide peacekeeping to ‘tough’ cases, the most challenging civil wars. These are long, ethnic wars.
This tendency for states to provide peacekeeping holds when civil wars produce dire effects on civilians. States are more
likely to send peacekeepers into civil wars that kill or displace many people. Finally, states react to opportunities: the
more previous mediation attempts, the higher the chances for state-conducted peacekeeping.
Keywords
civil war, conflict management, conflict resolution, peacekeeping, United Nations
Introduction
We’ve got to recognise that the multilateral system does
have its limits. And there have been occasions, I’m afraid,
when the UN has been unable to deal with crises in
Rwanda, in Kosovo, quite a long list of missed opportuni-
tiesbytheUN.AndthecaseoftheSolomons,itwouldjust
be too difficult to get the UN to solve this problem. We’ll
have to do it ourselves, with a coalition of other countries.
(Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer on the
need for Australia to lead a peacekeeping mission to the
Solomon Islands, cited in Ponzio, 2005: 178)
During the 1990s, Australia, New Zealand, Fiji,
Vanuatu, and Tonga on three occasions sent
peacekeeping forces to Papua New Guinea. On Bougain-
ville, an island in the east of the country rich in mineral
resources, the Bougainville Revolutionary Army was
fighting for independence. The first intervention, in
1994, lasted only three weeks and did not succeed in
bringing about peace. During 1997–2003, the same
countries sent two further missions to supervise a cease-
fire, which succeeded in brokering an agreement. Nigeria
sent its own peacekeepers in 1964–1965 to the Katanga
region in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and in
Corresponding author:
greig@unt.edu
Journal of Peace Research
48(2) 171–184
ªThe Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0022343310396110
jpr.sagepub.com
p
eace
R
ESEARCH
journal of
To continue reading
Request your trial