Mediation and Peacekeeping in Civil Wars

Abstract

The occurrence of outside mediation and peacekeeping has increased exponentially since the end of the Cold War. But how do third-party states and international organizations decide which civil wars to intervene in? And how do they decide whether to mediate talks between the warring parties or to send peacekeepers? In this study, we propose that third parties are influenced by their interests in a civil war country, they take into account the urgency a civil war poses, and they shy away from particularly challenging civil wars. Empirical tests confirm some of these hypotheses but also yield some contrary results. In contrast to much of the empirical literature, which has mostly treated different conflict management tools separately, this study combines two of the most important aspects of international conflict management – mediation and peacekeeping – into one theoretical framework.

Notes

 1. The views in this study are those of the authors and do not reflect the position of the UN or UNSCO.

 2. The data sources are explained in detail in the research design section below.

 3. Human Security Report Project, Human Security Report 2009/2010: The Causes of Peace and the Shrinking Costs of War (New York: Oxford University Press 2011).

 4. Lotta Harbom and Peter Wallensteen, ‘Armed Conflicts, 1946–2009’, Journal of Peace Research 47/4 (2010) pp.501–9.

 5. For example, Michael Doyle and Nicholas Sambanis, ‘International Peacekeeping: A Theoretical and Quantitative Analysis’, American Political Science Review 94 (2000) pp.779–801; Virginia Page Fortna, ‘Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace? International Intervention and the Duration of Peace after Civil War’, International Studies Quarterly 48/2 (2004) pp.269–92; and Barbara Walter, Committing to Peace: The Successful Settlement of Civil Wars (Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press 2002).

 6. Michael J. Gilligan and Stephen Stedman, ‘Where Do Peacekeepers Go?’ International Studies Review 5 (2003) pp.37–54.

 7. J. Michael Greig, ‘Stepping Into the Fray: When Do Mediators Mediate?’ American Journal of Political Science 49/2 (2005) pp.249–66.

 8. J. Michael Greig and Patrick Regan, ‘When Do They Say Yes? An Analysis of the Willingness to Offer and Accept Mediation in Civil Wars’, International Studies Quarterly 52/4 (2008) pp.759–81.

 9. Benjamin A. Most and Harvey Starr, ‘International Relations Theory, Foreign Policy Substitutability, and “Nice” Laws’, World Politics 36 (1984) pp.383–406 and Benjamin A. Most and Harvey Starr, Inquiry, Logic and International Politics (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press 1989).

10. Glenn Palmer and Archana Bhandari, ‘The Investigation of Substitutability in Foreign Policy’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 44 (2000) pp.3–10. Also see the other articles in the Journal of Conflict Resolution's 44/1 (2000) special issue on foreign policy substitutability.

11. I. William Zartman, ‘Dynamics and Constraints in Negotiations in Internal Conflicts’, in I. William Zartman (ed.) Elusive Peace – Negotiating an End to Civil Wars (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution 1995) pp.3–29.

12. James Fearon, ‘Why Do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer Than Others?’ Journal of Peace Research 41/3 (2004) pp.275–301.

13. Jacob Bercovitch and Gerald Schneider, ‘Who Mediates?: The Political Economy of International Conflict Management’, Journal of Peace Research 37/2 (2000) pp.145–65; Gilligan and Stedman (note 6); Fortna (note 5); Greig (note 7); and Nicolas Rost and J. Michael Greig, ‘Taking Matters Into Their Own Hands: An Analysis of the Determinants of State-Conducted Peacekeeping in Civil Wars’, Journal of Peace Research 48/2 (2011) pp.171–84.

14. Fortna (note 5).

15. J. Michael Greig and Paul Diehl, ‘Softening Up: Making Conflicts More Amenable to Diplomacy’, International Interactions 32/4 (2006) pp.355–84.

16. Patrick Regan, ‘Choosing to Intervene: Outside Interventions in Internal Conflicts’, Journal of Politics 60 (1998) pp.754–79.

17. Idean Salehyan, David E. Cunningham and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, ‘Explaining External Support for Insurgent Groups’, International Organization 65/4 (2011) pp.709–44.

18. T. Clifton Morgan and Valerie L. Schwebach, ‘Fools Suffer Gladly: The Use of Economic Sanctions in International Crises’, International Studies Quarterly 41 (1997) pp.27–50.

19. Walter (note 5).

20. Jacob Bercovitch, Paul Diehl, and Gary Goertz, ‘The Management and Termination of Protracted Interstate Conflicts: Conceptual and Empirical Considerations’, Millennium, 26/3 (1997) pp.751–70.

21. Mark Mullenbach, ‘Deciding to Keep Peace: An Analysis of International Influences on the Establishment of Third-Party Peacekeeping Missions’, International Studies Quarterly 49/3 (2005) pp.529–56. Dataset available at < http://uca.edu/politicalscience/dadm-project/dadm-data-sets/>.

22. David Carment and Dane Rowlands, ‘Three's Company: Evaluating Third-Party Intervention in Intrastate Conflict,’ Journal of Conflict Resolution 42/5 (1998) pp.572–99; Regan (note 16).

23. Nicholas Sambanis, ‘The United Nations Operations in Cyprus: A New Look at the Peacekeeping-Peacemaking Relationship’, International Peacekeeping 6/1 (1999) pp.79–108.

24. Paul Diehl, International Peacekeeping (Revised edition, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press 1994).

25. Greig and Regan (note 8).

26. Mullenbach (note 21); Carment and Rowlands (note 22).

27. Greig and Regan (note 8).

28. I. William Zartman, ‘Mediation by Regional Organizations: The OAU in Chad and Congo,’ in Jacob Bercovitch (ed.) Studies in International Mediation (New York: Palgrave MacMillan 2002); Saadia Touval, ‘Mediation and Foreign Policy’, International Studies Review 5/4 (2003) pp.91–5.

29. Greig and Regan (note 8).

30. Jacob D. Kathman, ‘The Geopolitics of Civil War Intervention’, PhD dissertation (Chapel Hill, NL: University of North Carolina 2007); Patrick Regan and Aysegul Aydin, ‘Diplomacy and Other Forms of Intervention in Civil Wars’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 50/5 (2006) pp.736–56.

31. Mark J.C. Crescenzi, Andrew Enterline, and Stephen Long, ‘Bringing Cooperation Back In: A Dynamic Model of Interstate Interaction’, Conflict Management and Peace Science 25/3 (2008) pp.264–80.

32. Greig and Regan (note 8).

33. Regan (note 16); Karen A. Feste, Expanding the Frontiers: Superpower Intervention in the Cold War (New York: Praeger 1992); Hans Morgenthau, ‘To Intervene or Not To Intervene’, Foreign Affairs 45/3 (1967) pp.425–36.

34. Rost and Greig (note 13).

35. Zartman (note 28).

36. Laura Neack, ‘Linking State Type with Foreign Policy Behaviour’, in Laura Neack, Jeanne A.K. Hey, and Patrick J. Haney (eds) Foreign Policy Analysis: Continuity and Change in its Second Generation (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall 1995) p.217.

37. William J. Durch, ‘Getting Involved: The Political–Military Context’, in William J. Durch (ed.) The Evolution of UN Peacekeeping: Case Studies and Comparative Analysis (New York: St. Martin's 1993).

38. Chantal de Jonge Oudraat, ‘The United Nations and Internal Conflict’, in Michael E. Brown (ed.) International Dimensions of Internal Conflicts (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press 1996).

39. John Mueller, ‘Policing the Remnants of War’, Journal of Peace Research 40/3 (2003) pp.507–18.

40. Peter V. Jacobsen, ‘National Interest, Humanitarianism or CNN: What Triggers UN Peace Enforcement after the Cold War?’ Journal of Peace Research 33 (1996) pp.205–15; Gilligan and Stedman (note 6).

41. Most and Starr, Inquiry, Logic and International Politics (note 9); John A. Vasquez, The War Puzzle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1993); John A. Vasquez, ‘Why Do Neighbors Fight? Proximity, Interaction or Territoriality’, Journal of Peace Research 32/3 (1996) pp.277–93.

42. Greig and Regan (note 8).

43. Jacobsen (note 40) has called this the ‘CNN effect’.

44. See, for instance, Gareth Evans, The Responsibility to Protect: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution 2008).

45. Jacobsen (note 40); Gilligan and Stedman (note 6); Martha Finnemore, ‘Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention’, in Karen A. Mingst and Jack L. Snyder (eds), Essential Readings in World Politics, Second edition (New York: W. W. Norton & Company 2004) pp.102–18; Patrick Regan, ‘The Substitutability of US Policy Options in Internal Conflicts,’ Journal of Conflict Resolution 44/1 (2000) pp.90–106.

46. I. William Zartman, ‘Ripeness: The Hurting Stalemate and Beyond’, in Paul Stern and Daniel Druckman (eds) International Conflict Resolution After the Cold War (Washington, DC: National Academy Press 2000).

47. Christopher Mitchell, Gestures of Conciliation: Factors Contributing to Successful Olive Branches (New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2000).

48. Karin Aggestam and Christer Jönsson, ‘(Un)ending Conflict: Challenges in Post-War Bargaining’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies 26 (1997) pp.771–93.

49. Dean Pruitt and Jeffrey Rubin, Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate, and Settlement (New York: Random House 1986); Bertram I. Spector, ‘Deciding to Negotiate with Villains’, Negotiation Journal 14/1 (1998) pp.43–60.

50. Greig (note 7).

51. Walter (note 5).

52. Kenneth Kressel and Dean Pruitt, ‘International Dispute Mediation’, in Mediation Research, The Process and Effectiveness of Third-Party Intervention (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass 1989); Jacob Bercovitch, J. Theodore Anagnoson, and Donnette L. Wille, ‘Some Conceptual Issues and Empirical Trends in the Study of Successful Mediation in International Relations’, Journal of Peace Research 28 (1991) pp.7–17; Jacob Bercovitch, ‘Mediation in International Conflict: An Overview of Theory, A Review of Practice’, in I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen (eds) Peacemaking in International Conflict: Methods and Techniques (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace 1997); Caroline Hartzell, Matthew Hoddie, and Donald Rothchild, ‘Stabilizing the Peace After Civil War’, International Organization 55 (2001) pp.183–208.

53. Doyle and Sambanis (note 5); Fortna (note 5).

54. Gilligan and Stedman (note 6); Mullenbach (note 21).

55. Carment and Rowlands (note 22).

56. Regan (note 16).

57. Jacob Bercovitch, ‘The Structures and Diversity of Mediation in International Relations’, in Jacob Bercovitch and Jeffrey Z. Rubin (eds), Mediation in International Relations: Multiple Approaches to Conflict Managements (New York: St. Martin's Press 1992) pp.6–29; Greig (note 7).

58. Durch (note 37).

59. Gilligan and Stedman (note 6).

60. Andrea Andersson, ‘Democracies and UN Peacekeeping Operations, 1990–1996’, International Peacekeeping 7 (2000) pp.1–22; Hartzell et al. (note 52).

61. Durch (note 37).

62. Alastair Smith and Allan Stam, ‘Mediation and Peacekeeping in a Random Walk Model of Civil and Interstate War’, International Studies Review 5/4 (2003) pp.115–35.

63. Paul Diehl, ‘Institutional Alternatives to Traditional U.N. Peacekeeping: An Assessment of Regional and Multinational Options’, Armed Forces and Society 19/2 (1993) pp.209–30.

64. Virginia Page Fortna and Lisa Martin, ‘Peacekeepers as Signals: the Demand for International Peacekeeping in Civil Wars’, in Helen Milner and Andrew Moravcsik (eds), Power, Interdependence, and Nonstate Actors in World Politics: Research Frontiers (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 2009).

65. Doyle and Sambanis (note 5).

66. Jacob Bercovitch and Karl DeRouen, ‘Introducing the Civil Wars Mediation (CWM) Dataset’, Journal of Peace Research 48/5 (2011), pp.663–672.

67. Mullenbach (note 21).

68. Doyle and Sambanis (note 5).

69. James D. Fearon and David Laitin, ‘Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War’, American Political Science Review 97/1 (2003): 75–90.

70. Paul Hensel, ‘ICOW Colonial History data set’ (2006), online at < http://www.paulhensel.org/Data/ICOWdata.zip>, accessed 1 Jan. 2012.

71. Douglas M. Gibler and Meredith Sarkees, ‘Measuring Alliances: The Correlates of War Formal Interstate Alliance Dataset, 1816-2000’, Journal of Peace Research 41/2 (2004) pp.211–22.

72. D. Scott Bennett and Allan C. Stam, ‘EUGene: A Conceptual Manual’, International Interactions 26 (2000) pp.179–204.

73. Bethany Lacina and Nils Petter Gleditsch, ‘Monitoring Trends in Global Combat: A New Dataset of Battle Deaths’, European Journal of Population 21 (2005) pp.145–66.

74. Jack A. Goldstone, Ted Robert Gurr, Barbara Harff, Mark A. Levy, Monty G. Marshall, Robert H. Bates, David L. Epstein, Colin H. Kahl, Pamela T. Surko, John C. Ulfelder and Alan N. Unger, ‘State Failure Task Force Project: Phase III Findings’, (2000), online at < http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/stfail/SFTF%20Phase%20III%20Report%20Final.pdf>, accessed 11 Aug. 2003; Barbara Harff, ‘No Lessons Learned from the Holocaust? Assessing Risks of Genocide and Political Mass Murder since 1955’, American Political Science Review 97 (2003) pp.57–73.

75. Monty G. Marshall, ‘Forcibly Displaced Populations, 1964–2008’ (2002, dataset), online at < http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/inscr.htm>, accessed 17 Jan. 2013.

76. Doyle and Sambanis (note 5).

77. Fearon and Laitin (note 69).

78. Doyle and Sambanis (note 5).

79. Patrick M. Regan and Allan C. Stam, ‘In the Nick of Time: Conflict Management, Mediation Timing and the Duration of Interstate Disputes’, International Studies Quarterly 44/2 (2000) pp.239–60; Greig (note 7).

80. Mullenbach (note 21).

81. Bercovitch and DeRouen (note 66).

82. Stina Högbladh, Therése Pettersson & Lotta Themnér, ‘External Support in Armed Conflict 1975–2009. Presenting new data’, Paper presented at the 52nd Annual International Studies Association Convention, Montreal, Canada, 16–19 Mar. 2011.

83. Patrick Regan, ‘Third Party Interventions and the Duration of Intrastate Conflict’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 46/1 (2002), pp.55–73.

84. T. Clifton Morgan, Navin Bapat, Valentin Krustev, ‘The Threat and Imposition of Economic Sanctions, 1971–2000’, Conflict Management and Peace Science 26/1 (2009), pp.92–110.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nicolas Rost

1