Routine but Consequential: How Ceasefire Monitors’ Reporting Constructs Opportunities for (Non)Compliance by Conflict Opponents

References

• Adler, Emanuel, and Vincent Pouliot. “International Practices.” International Theory 3, no. 1 (2011): 1–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Åkebo, Malin. The Politics of Ceasefires: On Ceasefire Agreements and Peace Processes in Aceh and Sri Lanka. Umeå: Department of Political Science, Umeå University, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Åkebo, Malin. ““Coexistence Ceasefire” in Mindanao.” Peace & Change 44, no. 4 (2019): 468–96.
   Google Scholar
• Alston, Philip. “Hobbling the Monitors: Should U.N. Human Rights Monitors be Accountable.” Harvard International Law Journal 52, no. 2 (2011): 561–650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amicarelli, Elio, and Jessica di Salvatore. “Introducing the PeaceKeeping Operations Corpus (PKOC).” Journal of Peace Research 58, no. 5 (2021): 1137–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoi, Chunyuki, Cedric de Coning, and Ramesh Thakur, eds. Unintended Consequences of Peacekeeping Operations. Hong Kong: United Nations University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Bagozzi, Benjamin, and Daniel Berliner. “The Politics of Scrutiny in Human rights Monitoring: Evidence from Structural Topic Models of US State Department Human Rights Reports.” Political Science Research and Methods 6, no. 4 (2018): 661–677.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bara, Corinne, Govinda Clayton, and Siri Aas Rustad. “Understanding Ceasefires.” International Peacekeeping 28, no. 3 (2021): 329–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellamy, Alex, and Stuart Griffin. “OSCE Peacekeeping: Lessons from the Kosovo Verification Mission.” European Security 11, no. 1 (2002): 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Blaikie, Norman. Designing Social Research. Cambridge: Polity, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Bliesemann De Guevara, Berit, and Roland Kostić. “Knowledge Production in/about Conflict and Intervention: Finding ‘Facts’, Telling ‘Truth’.” Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 11, no. 1 (2017): 1–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boutruche, Théo. “Credible Fact-finding and Allegations of International Humanitarian Law Violations: Challenges in Theory and Practice.” Journal of Conflict and Security Law 16, no. 1 (2011): 105–140.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, Cate, Govinda Clayton, and Alexander Ramsbotham. Ceasefire Monitoring: Developments and Complexities. London: Conciliation Resources, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Bueger, Christian, and Frank Gadinger. International Practice Theory. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Charlesworth, Hilary, and Emma Larking, eds. Human Rights and the Universal Periodic Review: Rituals and Ritualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Clayton, Govinda, Jacob Kathman, Kyle Beardsley, et al. “The Known Knowns and Known Unknowns of Peacekeeping Data.” International Peacekeeping 24, no. 1 (2017): 1–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clayton, Govinda, Laurie Nathan, and Claudia Wiehler. “Ceasefire Success: A Conceptual Framework.” International Peacekeeping 28, no. 3 (2021): 341–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clayton, Govinda, and Valerie Sticher. “The Logic of Ceasefires in Civil War.” International Studies Quarterly 65, no. 3 (2021): 633–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CTSAMM. “Report on Alleged Violations and the Situation in Unity state. V055.” 18 December 2015.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMM. “CTSAMM Report 027- Violations of the PCTSA Near Bentiu, Unity state.” 18 October 2016.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMM. “CTSAMM Report 2018/08 - Allegations in Jonglei State.” 23 March 2018.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMM. “Report 2018/12 - Sexual and Gender-Based Violence and Violence Against Civilians in the Yei Area.” 20 April 2018.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMM. “Report 2018/13 - Clashes in Nassir 25 March 2018.” 20 April 2018.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMVM. “Technical Committee Fourth Meeting Outcomes Report.” 7–8 November 2018.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMVM. “Tenth Meeting.” 25–26 April 2019.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMVM. “Thirteenth Meeting Outcome Report.” 5–6 August 2019.
   Google Scholar
• CTSAMVM. “Report 2022/24 - Denial of Access, Information and Harassment of CTSAMVM Personnel.” 2 December 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Dubois, Anna, and Lars-Erik Gadde. “Systematic Combining: An Abductive Approach to Case Research.” Journal of Business Research 55 (2002): 553–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duursma, Allard. “Information Processing Challenges in Peacekeeping Operations: A case Study on Peacekeeping Information Collection Efforts in Mali.” International Peacekeeping 25, no. 3 (2018): 446–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duursma, Allard, and Hannah Smidt. “Peacekeepers without Helmets: How Violence Shapes Local Peacebuilding by Civilian Peacekeepers.” Comparative Political Studies 57, no. 5 (2023): 1–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falleti, Tulia, and Julia Lynch. “From Process to Mechanism: Varieties of Disaggregation.” Qualitative Sociology 31 (2008): 333–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fearon, James. “Rationalist Explanations for War.” International Organization 49, no. 3 (1995): 379–414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Findlay, Trevor. “The Role of Monitoring and Verification.” Contemporary Security Policy 22, no. 3 (2001): 169–82.
   Google Scholar
• Fortna, Virginia Page. Peace Time: Cease-Fire Agreements and the Durability of Peace. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Grand-Clement, Sarah. Exploring the Use of Technology for Remote Ceasefire Monitoring and Verification. Geneva: UNIDIR, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Greco, Ettore. The OSCE’s Kosovo Verification Mission: a Preliminary Assessment. Rome: Istituto Affari Internazionali, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Grist, Ryan. “More than Eunuchs at the Orgy: Observation and Monitoring Reconsidered.” International Peacekeeping 8, no. 3 (2001): 59–78.
   Google Scholar
• Hellmüller, Sara, Laurent Goetschel, and Kristoffer Lidén. “Knowledge Production on Peace: Actors, Hierarchies and Policy Relevance.” International Affairs 99, no. 5 (2023): 1839–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höglund, Kristine. “Obstacles to Monitoring: Perceptions of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission and the Dual role of Norway.” International Peacekeeping 18, no. 2 (2011): 210–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höglund, Kristine, and Marcus Wennerström. “When the Going Gets Tough… Monitoring Missions and a Changing Conflict Environment in Sri Lanka, 2002–2008.” Small Wars & Insurgencies 26, no. 5 (2015): 836–860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IGAD MVM. “Investigations into Continuing Violations of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement in Bor, Juba and Bentiu (V006).” 20 June 2014.
   Google Scholar
• IGAD MVM. “Investigations into Violations of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement in Bentiu and Mayom, Unity state (V014).” 24 September 2014.
   Google Scholar
• IGAD MVM. “Investigations into Violations of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement in Malakal County, Upper Nile State (V031).” 6 March 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Jeong, Ho-Won. “Peacebuilding: Conceptual and Policy Issues.” In Approaches to Peacebuilding, ed. Ho-Won Jeong, 3–17. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Joshi, Madhav, SungYong Lee, and Roger Mac Ginty. “Built-in Safeguards and the Implementation of Civil War Peace Accords.” International Interactions 43, no. 6 (2017): 994–1018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoll-Tudor Bernhard, Márta Pardavi, and Marta Achler. “Cartel of Silence: How the European Union Undermines the Work of its Human Rights Defenders in the OSCE.” Journal of Human Rights Practice 15, no. 1 (2023): 284–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koivu, Kendra, and Annika Marlen Hinze. “Cases of Convenience? The Divergence of Theory from Practice in case Selection in Qualitative and Mixed-Methods Research.” PS: Political Science & Politics 50, no. 4 (2017): 1023–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosmatopoulos, Nikolas. “Sentinel Matters: the Techno-Politics of International Crisis in Lebanon (and beyond).” Third World Quarterly 35, no. 4 (2014): 598–615.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, Jana, and Erin Kamler. “Ceasefires and Civilian Protection Monitoring in Myanmar.” Global Studies Quarterly 2, no. 1 (2022): ksac005.
   Google Scholar
• Lesch, Max. “Contested Facts: The Politics and Practice of International Fact-Finding Missions.” International Studies Review 25, no. 3 (2023): viad034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leurdijk, J. Henk. “Fact-Finding: its Place in International Law and International Politics.” Netherlands International Law Review 14, no. 2 (1967): 141–61.
   Google Scholar
• Loquai, Heinz. “Kosovo – A Missed Opportunity for a Peaceful Solution to the Conflict?” In OSCE Yearbook 1999, ed. IFSH, 79–90. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Mac Ginty, Roger. “Peacekeeping and Data.” International Peacekeeping 24, no. 5 (2017): 695–705.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackiewicz, Lukasz. “More than Counting Ceasefire Violations–the Human Dimension within the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine.” In OSCE Yearbook 2018, ed. IFSH, 177–92. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Maisonneuve, J. R. Michel. “The OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission. Canadian Military Journal 1, no. 2 (2000): 49–54.
   Google Scholar
• Martin-Brûlé, Sarah-Myriam. “Competing for Trust: Challenges in United Nations Peacekeeping-Intelligence.” International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence 34, no. 3 (2021): 494–524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, Mary. “Crossing Boundaries: the European Union Monitoring Mission to Georgia.” In The European Union and human security, eds. Mary Martin and Mary Kaldor, 142–58. Abingdon: Routledge, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Molony, Thomas, and Robert Macdonald. “Re-Evaluating International Observation of Kenya’s 2017 Elections.” Journal of Eastern African Studies 13, no. 4 (2019): 601–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Musu, Costanza. European Union Policy Towards the Arab-Israeli Peace Process: The Quicksands of Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Oberson, Frederic. “OSCE Special Monitoring in Ukraine.” In Between Peace and Conflict in the East and the West: Studies on Transformation and Development in the OSCE Region, ed. Anja Mihr, 47–76. Cham: Springer, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Orlandi, Eni. Les formes du silence: dans le mouvement du sens. Paris: Editions des Cendres, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission – Interim Report SEC.FR530/98.” 16 November 1998.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission – Interim Report period covered 2nd and 3rd January 1999. SEC.FR1/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission – Interim Report Period Covered 4th January 1999. SEC.FR4/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission report period covered 13th January 1999. SEC.FR22/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission KVM Human Rights Report 18-28 January 1999. SEC.FR67/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission Report Period Covered 4th February 1999. SEC.FR79/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission Report Period Covered 5th February 1999. SEC.FR80/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission Report Period Covered 9th February 1999. SEC.FR94/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Racak Victims Remain Unburied.” Pristina (10 February 1999).
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission Report period Covered 13th and 14th February 1999. SEC.FR102/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission Report Period Covered 22nd February 1999. SEC.FR129/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Kosovo Verification Mission Report Period Covered 16th March 1999. SEC.FR226/99.” 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. “Agreement on the OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission.” Die Friedens-Warte 73, no. 4 (1998): 530–33.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. Kosovo as Seen, as Told. Warsaw: OSCE, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• OSCE. Recommendations for Quoting OSCE Documents and Using Restricted Documents as Primary Sources for Academic Research on OSCE Related Subjects. Prague: OSCE, n.d.
   Google Scholar
• Palik, Júlia. “Watchdogs of Pause: the Challenges of Ceasefire Monitoring in Yemen.” International Peacekeeping 28, no. 3 (2021): 444–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palik, Júlia, Siri Aas Rustad, and Frederic Methi. Conflict Trends: A Global Overview, 1946–2019. Oslo: PRIO, 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Pinaud, Margaux. “Home-Grown Peace: Civil Society Roles in Ceasefire Monitoring.” International Peacekeeping 28, no. 3 (2021): 470–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinaud, Clémence. War and Genocide in South Sudan. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Potter, Antonia. Ceasefire Monitoring and Verification: Identifying Best Practice. Geneva: Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Samset, Ingrid. “Trapped in the Peace Process: Ceasefire Monitoring in Sri Lanka.” Working Group on Peace Support Operations, Occasional Paper Series (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Sassoli de Bianchi, Massimiliano. “The Observer Effect.” Foundations of Science 18 (2013): 213–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schatzki, Theodore. Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Schröter, Melani. Silence and Concealment in Political Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Spano, Richard. “Observer Behavior as a Potential Source of Reactivity: Describing and Quantifying Observer Effects in a Large-Scale Observational Study of Police.” Sociological Methods & Research 34, no. 4 (2006): 521–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sticher, Valerie and Aly Verjee. “Do Eyes in the Sky Ensure Peace on the Ground? The Uncertain Contributions of remote Sensing to Ceasefire Compliance.” International Studies Review 25, no. 3 (2023): viad039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornberg, Robert. “Informed Grounded Theory.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 56, no. 3 (2012): 243–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. “Guidance on Mediation of Ceasefires,” New York, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• United States Department of State. “Ambassador William Walker: On-the-Record Briefing on the Kosovo Verification Mission.” 8 January 1999. Washington, DC. https://1997-2001.state.gov/policy_remarks/1999/990108_walker_kosovo.html
   Google Scholar
• UN Security Council. “OSCE Monthly Report on Kosovo Situation Submitted by UN SG to Security Council.” S/1999/214.” (26 February 1999).
   Google Scholar
• Verjee, Aly. Ceasefire Monitoring in South Sudan 2014–2019: ‘A Very ugly Mission.’ PeaceWorks 150. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Verjee, Aly. Monitoring Ceasefires is Getting Harder: Greater Innovation is Required. Geneva: Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Verjee, Aly. “Ceasefire Monitoring Under Fire: The OSCE, Technology, and the 2022 War in Ukraine.” Global Policy 13, no. 5 (2022): 808–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verjee, Aly. “Pleading for peace.” (Unpublished manuscript, University of Gothenburg, 2023).
   Google Scholar
• Verjee, Aly. To aid South Sudan’s Cease-Fire, Increase Transparency. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 28 November 2018.
   Google Scholar
• von Billerbeck, Sarah. “No Action without Talk? UN Peacekeeping, Discourse, and Institutional Self-Legitimation.” Review of International Studies 46, no. 4 (2020): 477–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, William G. “OSCE Verification Experiences in Kosovo: November 1998-June 1999.” The International Journal of Human Rights 4, no. 3-4 (2000): 127–42.
   Google Scholar
• Whalan, Jeni. How Peace Operations Work: Power, Legitimacy, and Effectiveness. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Wiehler, Claudia. “Deciding on the Tit for the Tat: Decision-Making in the Wake of Ceasefire Violations.” International Peacekeeping 28, no. 3 (2021): 416–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, Oran R. “Discussions and Reviews : Intermediaries: additional thoughts on third parties” Journal of Conflict Resolution 16, no. 1 (1972): 51–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar