The concluding chapter wraps up the various arguments and pieces of evidence presented in this book in favor of our peace formula. Overall, the first take-home message to be highlighted is the need for smart idealism – as neither the cold-hearted egotist nor the naïve idealist will be able to curb conflict. Secondly, it is again stressed which concrete policies are key to making a difference, creating a synthesis of the various points of the previous chapters. In particular, we emphasize the key role of a democratic voice, security warranties, promoting productive work, fostering trust and reconciliation, accelerating a well-managed green energy transition and stepping up international coordination across a variety of issues. The final point is that since we are all affected by conflict, we should all be part of the solution. It turns out that several studies have found that pressure from the public opinion matters, both in the implementation of policies and in preventing atrocities. There is a job to be done, so let us work together to make a change.

As shown in this chapter, state capacity and security warranties are further key factors in the peace formula. In particular, besides certain institutional features, the overall strength of the state is a major determinant of political stability, as illustrated by examples and recent research on Iraq, Somalia, Niger and the origins of the Mafia in southern Italy. Drawing on cutting-edge studies, it is argued that being feared (by extremist groups) may be more important than being loved (by the population at large). In order to win the hearts and minds of the population, it is essential that first public safety is guaranteed and that basic services are delivered efficiently. This is easier said than done. It is shown that when foreign military aid aims at capacity building, it often backfires. In contrast, UN peacekeeping troops have been demonstrated to play a key role. We end this chapter by emphasizing the several domestic factors that can help the building of lasting state capacity, with a special emphasis on well-designed welfare programs such as Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal.

This chapter starts off by explaining that we are in the midst of a critical historical juncture with a record number of wars and conflicts around the world, calling for urgent action. Next, we discuss in depth three common but disastrous misconceptions, namely that shady deals leaving autocrats in power can bring peace, that “buying” peace through simple cash transfers works, and that charm offensives and communication efforts suffice to do the job. Drawing on a number of examples, the book highlights the pitfalls of these common misconceptions before turning to success stories. Illustrated by examples of the successful postwar reconstruction of Germany and Japan, the fall of apartheid in South Africa and democratization of Uruguay, Chile and Peru, the chapter then formulates the key components of what is called the peace formula – a set of key policies that constitute crucial ingredients for a successful and lasting pacification process. Finally, it is stressed that to counter distorted incentives for peace we need smart idealism – pairing good intentions with evidence-based policy knowledge.

This chapter explains the legal and political features of the United Nations. It begins with a short introduction to the UN Charter, which shows the framework of international law that defines, limits and empowers the organisation. It then puts these into a more practical setting, which emphasises how the United Nations is at the same time an actor, a forum and a resource for governments.

As the three primary cases do not show every configuration of independent variables that should lead to failed concealing, this chapter begins with two more circumscribed explorations of failed concealing in Tanzania and Honduras. It then explores the other strategies and examines their long-term effects. Although concealing is intrinsically risky since a ruler cannot know their own state’s legibility and presence of a strong enough asymmetrically interdependent relationship until these are tested in action, these other strategies may carry even bigger risks. As such, we should expect to see rulers, especially those with reasonable patronage-based capacity but little autonomy from outsiders’ interests and interference in their domestic affairs to try to conceal unsavoury domestic practices. It is therefore important to remain mindful of the effects successful concealing can have on global norms of human rights and good governance.

International Relations theory has dealt extensively with norms and agency in normative environments, including the impact of norms on state behaviour; their diffusion and localisation; and their evolution, contestation, and change. Yet, to date the issue of norm conflict has remained theoretically and empirically understudied in International Relations. We still have little understanding of the judgements that governments or institutions make regarding compliance when the directives inherent in the norms to which they have committed appear to be mutually exclusive. The objective of this chapter is to conceptualise norm conflict as a challenge to decision-making in normative international environments and to outline a theoretical framework for studying and understanding norm conflict, including – most importantly – the ways in which states and international institutions seek to resolve it. In so doing, we draw from International Law and Sociology, two disciplines that have extensively dealt with norm conflict.

The United Nations was designed to be the central world institution for peace and security, with the Security Council at its core. This chapter looks at the law and history of the UN’s role in international peace and security, along with the secondary role played by the General Assembly. The Security Council is at the intersection of law, politics, and enforcement in world politics. The chapter looks at the formal powers given to the Security Council in the UN Charter and then examines how the practical life of the Council since 1945 has been both more than and less than what the Charter says. Case studies of mass killings in Sudan, Rwanda, and Syria show the limits of Council power under the influence of the US, Russia, and other powerful governments.

This chapter presents an analysis on Kofi Annan’s mediation efforts in Syria and focuses on his agency when overseeing the UN’s entry into the Syrian conflict. The chapter is divided in three main sections. The first offers a concise background of the main mediation initiatives pursued during Annan’s time as mediator. Of which there were five main mediation policies and responses – the mediator’s entry into the conflict, the Six-Point Plan, the nationwide ceasefire and deployment of UNSMIS, the Geneva I process, and the mediator’s resignation. Using a first-level analysis, the second section continues to elucidate the agency of the mediator in shaping each of these mediation outcomes. Finally, the third section explores the dynamics behind the mediator’s decision-making. Specifically, it examines how the mediator’s key strategic perceptions influenced his decision-making. Drawing on the contingency model, four categories of perceptions are studied – the identity of the mediator, the context of mediation, the parties, and the process of mediation. Building off this analysis, the chapter proposes general links between each category of perceptions and specific mediation behaviors.

With a focus on the African Union, this chapter examines the Security Council’s practices when interacting with regional organisations in collaborative peace operations. The Security Council plays a critical role in two ways: (i) it identifies security threats and the required responses, and it authorises UN missions to deal with them; and (ii) it determines the role, if any, to be played by regional organisations and authorises the action they can take to address threats to peace in their regions. Africa is both the site of conflicts that have necessitated UN peace operations or the Council’s authorisation of enforcement actions, as in Libya in 2011, and home to that regional organisation which has engaged the most with the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security. The overarching argument of this chapter is that – notwithstanding changes in the post-Cold-War international political landscape and the rise of other voices from the periphery – the status of the Security Council as custodian of the collective security system remains undiminished. Its centrality and primacy have not been challenged or usurped by the African Union or other regional organisations.

The principle of distinction in International Humanitarian Law sets up two entities, the civilian and the combatant, and organises the relationship between them. This socio-legal chapter draws on original research from South Sudan to explore how this principle is operationalised in humanitarian–peacekeeper interactions. Humanitarian actors routinely invoke ‘distinction’ as they navigate operational dilemmas with respect to the use of military assets, and in their relationship with the UN Mission in South Sudan more generally. Two ‘ideal types’ of humanitarian actor emerge here. The first type takes a strict approach to distinction, thinking long term and eschewing military asset use that undermines distinction. The second type interprets distinction flexibly and balances it with other goals such as reaching people in need; this exposes a hidden conflict between the principles of distinction and humanity. Through these everyday interactions – which sometimes involve drawing lines within the civilian category – humanitarian actors produce distinction in law, in practice, and in perception.

Chapter 5 examines the powers of the UN Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security and how the notion of collective security has developed since the Charter was adopted. It also looks at the role of peacekeeping and regional organizations within the overall context of collective security.

This chapter examines post–Cold War debates in the United States over the US Army’s participation in peacekeeping operations. Peacekeeping missions may have been a central concern of the US Army in the 1990s, but they also exposed deeper fissures within the Army and broader American society about the organisation’s proper role and the sort of attributes that American soldiers would need in the twenty-first century. Army leaders and personnel deployed on peacekeeping operations struggled to articulate which martial values best applied to peacekeeping. Political commentators tended to be much less ambivalent about peacekeeping, with some neoconservative observers enthusiastic about using such operations to practice ‘soft’ skills that would be useful in later wars, while most conservatives displayed a deep antipathy for such interventions, arguing that they corroded valuable warfighting skills and were symptomatic of an Army that had lost its way. For the few liberal commentators engaged in debates over Army policy, peacekeeping operations represented an opportunity to showcase American values and even to promote a deeper connection between the US military and broader American society.

The chapter discusses the mechanisms international alw has at its disposal to stimulate compliance with its rules: sanctions, counter-measures, colelctive action

Chapter 5 argues that the UN peacekeepers’ efforts to install stability in Cyprus forged a political environment of stagnation, fostering an entrenchment of hostilities between the divided communities. Once on the ground, peacekeepers improvised and favoured palliative solutions, so as to establish stability as quickly as possible, establishing dependence on external sources of relief and increasing displaced populations’ vulnerability to political instrumentalisation. The mission also expanded armed peacekeeping functions to recruit a UNFICYP mediator. However, the Turkish government’s controversial response to the UN mediator’s report exposed the extent of the UN’s powerlessness in the face of member-state criticism. The repercussions of the second mediator’s report highlighted the stagnation of the Cyprus mission and ignited internal discussions about the damage of the mission’s presence and mandate. It also demonstrated the incompatibility of functioning as an active military participant on the ground whilst simultaneously leading diplomatic negotiations for the resolution of the conflict. By 1971, the UN leadership and contributing nations openly questioned the future role of the UN in international conflict response following the organisation’s experience in Cyprus.