You claim that Rwanda is a concrete example of a case where peacebuilding could have averted the conflict, but it’s not obvious to me how.
More concrete examples would’ve helped too. What do you think about South Sudan for instance?
We’ll probably have to differentiate between “ok” and “excellent” peacebuilding efforts, but it’s not clear if that is likely to be sufficiently easy to make this a high-impact area.
Thanks Jonas! I agree, there is a lot more to talk about about how peacebuilding can be more effective. I hope the tractability section discusses that in my suggested areas for investment.
Regarding Rwanda: Its quite clear that the international community hesitated in Rwanda and could have done much more to stop the genocide. See Shake Hands With The Devil, written by Romeo Dallaire, the Canadian general who led UN peacekeeping forces in Rwanda in 1994.
Lots of the discussion here is that the debate surrounds counterfactuals. What could peacebuilding have done to prevent the South Sudan conflict? These questions can never be resolved, and point to additional thorny questions such as what conflicts has peacebuilding prevented? One area in which peacebuilding does have more concrete areas to discuss this is in areas where conflict has occurred but appears to have been stopped from being rekindled (so far). Examples here could include Northern Ireland, Nigeria,Western Africa , and East Timor.
Regarding Ok and Excellent peacebuilding efforts, I think that there are degrees of success in every cause area. Not every malaria net that is distributed will be used, or used correctly, but that does not mean that the whole intervention is discarded. All interventions require a sincere effort to make them work before their effect can be fully evaluated.
Interesting post! Two comments:
You claim that Rwanda is a concrete example of a case where peacebuilding could have averted the conflict, but it’s not obvious to me how.
More concrete examples would’ve helped too. What do you think about South Sudan for instance?
We’ll probably have to differentiate between “ok” and “excellent” peacebuilding efforts, but it’s not clear if that is likely to be sufficiently easy to make this a high-impact area.
Thanks Jonas! I agree, there is a lot more to talk about about how peacebuilding can be more effective. I hope the tractability section discusses that in my suggested areas for investment.
Regarding Rwanda: Its quite clear that the international community hesitated in Rwanda and could have done much more to stop the genocide. See Shake Hands With The Devil, written by Romeo Dallaire, the Canadian general who led UN peacekeeping forces in Rwanda in 1994.
Lots of the discussion here is that the debate surrounds counterfactuals. What could peacebuilding have done to prevent the South Sudan conflict? These questions can never be resolved, and point to additional thorny questions such as what conflicts has peacebuilding prevented? One area in which peacebuilding does have more concrete areas to discuss this is in areas where conflict has occurred but appears to have been stopped from being rekindled (so far). Examples here could include Northern Ireland, Nigeria, Western Africa , and East Timor.
As a further interesting source on more concrete efforts in peacebuilding, see the UN Peacebuilding Commission’s 2022 Programme of Work .
Regarding Ok and Excellent peacebuilding efforts, I think that there are degrees of success in every cause area. Not every malaria net that is distributed will be used, or used correctly, but that does not mean that the whole intervention is discarded. All interventions require a sincere effort to make them work before their effect can be fully evaluated.