The Resolution of Civil Wars: Changing International Norms of Peace-Making and the Academic Consensus

References

• Abboud, S., 2021. Making peace to sustain war: the Astana process and Syria’s illiberal peace. Peacebuilding, 9 (3), 326–343. doi:10.1080/21647259.2021.1895609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abella, A., 2009. Soldiers of reason: the Rand corporation and the rise of the American empire. Orlando, FL: Mariner Books.
   Google Scholar
• Arı, B., 2023. Peace negotiations in civil conflicts: a new dataset. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 67 (1), 150–177. doi:10.1177/00220027221111735.
   Google Scholar
• Autesserre, S., 2021. The frontlines of peace: an insider’s guide to changing the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780197530351.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Azar, E.E. and Moon, C.I., 1986. Managing protracted social conflicts in the third world: facilitation and development diplomacy. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 15 (3), 393–406. doi:10.1177/03058298860150030601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldwin, D.A., 1995. Security studies and the end of the Cold War. World Politics, 48 (1), 117–141. doi:10.1353/wp.1995.0001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, M., 1995. The new United Nations politics of peace: from juridical sovereignty to empirical sovereignty. Global Governance, 1 (1), 79–98. doi:10.1163/19426720-001-01-90000007.
   Google Scholar
• Bellamy, A.J. and Williams, P.D., 2004. Introduction: thinking anew about peace operations. International Peacekeeping, 11 (1), 1–15. doi:10.1080/1353331042000228427.
   Google Scholar
• Bellamy, A.J. and Williams, P.D., 2020. Understanding peacekeeping. Cambridge; Malden, MA: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bercovitch, J. and Jackson, R., 2009. Conflict resolution in the twenty-first century: principles, methods, and approaches. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. doi:10.3998/mpub.106467.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, P.G., 1970. Review of controlling small wars: a strategy for the 1970s. By Lincoln P. Bloomfield and Amelia C. Leiss. American Political Science Review, 64 (2), 670–672. doi:10.1017/S0003055400130308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boutros-Ghali, B. 1992. An agenda for peace: preventive diplomacy and other matters. New York: United Nations. Available from: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/145749?ln=en [Accessed 2 June 2023].
   Google Scholar
• Bright, J. and Gledhill, J., 2018. A divided discipline? Mapping peace and conflict studies. International Studies Perspectives, 19 (2), 128–147. doi:10.1093/isp/ekx009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, J.W., 1990. Conflict: resolution and provention. Basingstoke; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-21005-3_20.
   Google Scholar
• Cerny, P.G., 1998. Neomedievalism, civil war and the new security dilemma: globalisation as durable disorder. Civil Wars, 1 (1), 36–64. doi:10.1080/13698249808402366.
   Google Scholar
• Clapham, C., 1998. Rwanda: the perils of peacemaking. Journal of Peace Research, 35 (2), 194–210. doi:10.1177/0022343398035002003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clausen, M.L. and Albrecht, P., 2021. Interventions since the Cold War: from statebuilding to stabilization. International Affairs, 97 (4), 1203–1220. doi:10.1093/ia/iiab084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collier, P., et al., 2003. Breaking the conflict trap: civil war and development policy. Washington, DC; New York: World Bank; Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, N., Turner, M., and Pugh, M., 2011. The end of history and the last liberal peacebuilder: a reply to Roland Paris. Review of International Studies, 37 (4), 1995–2007. doi:10.1017/S0260210511000143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crocker, C.A., Hampson, F.O., and Aall, P.R., 1999. Herding cats: multiparty mediation in a complex world. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cumings, B., 1997. Boundary displacement: area studies and international studies during and after the Cold War. Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 29 (1), 6–26. doi:10.1080/14672715.1997.10409695.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng, F.M., et al., 1996. Sovereignty as responsibility: conflict management in Africa. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Deng, F.M. and Zartman, I.W., 1991. Conflict resolution in Africa. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, M.W. and Sambanis, N., 2006. Making war and building peace: United Nations peace operations. Princeton, NJ; Oxford: Princeton University Press. doi:10.1515/9781400837694.
   Google Scholar
• Duffield, M., 1997. Evaluating conflict resolution: context, models and methodology. Chr Michelsen Institute, Development Studies and Human Rights.
   Google Scholar
• Duffield, M., 2001. Global governance and the new wars: the merging of development and security. London; New York, NY: Zed Books and Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Fanon, F., 1972 [1959]. Sociologie d’une révolution: L’an V de la révolution algérienne. Paris: François Maspero.
   Google Scholar
• Fjelde, H., Hultman, L., and Nilsson, D., 2018. Protection through presence: UN peacekeeping and the costs of targeting civilians. International Organization, 73 (1), 103–131. doi:10.1017/S0020818318000346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galtung, J., 1969. Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6 (3), 167–191. doi:10.1177/002234336900600301.
   Google Scholar
• Gleditsch, N.P., Nordkvelle, J., and Strand, H., 2014. Peace research: just the study of war? Journal of Peace Research, 51 (2), 145–158. doi:10.1177/0022343313514074.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gowan, R. and Stedman, S.J., 2018. The international regime for treating civil war, 1988–2017. Daedalus, 147 (1), 171–184. doi:10.1162/DAED_a_00482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurr, T.R., 2015 [1970]. Why men rebel. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hampson, F.O., 1996. Nurturing peace: why peace settlements succeed or fail. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hehir, A., 2018. Hollow norms and the responsibility to protect. Basingstoke; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90536-5.
   Google Scholar
• Hellmüller, S., 2022. Peacemaking in a shifting world order: a macro-level analysis of UN mediation in Syria. Review of International Studies, 48 (3), 543–559. doi:10.1017/S026021052200016X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt, V.K., Taylor, G., and Kelly, M., 2009. Protecting civilians in the context of UN peacekeeping operations: successes, setbacks and remaining challenges. Stimson Centre, 2009. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/52399ae24.pdf [Accessed 18 August 2023].
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, C.T., 2023. How many turns make a revolution? Whither the ‘dialogue of the deaf’ between peacebuilding scholars and practitioners. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 1–18. doi:10.1080/17502977.2023.2197446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joshi, M., Lee, S.Y., and Mac Ginty, R., 2014. Just how liberal is the liberal peace? International Peacekeeping, 21 (3), 364–389. doi:10.1080/13533312.2014.932065.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaldor, M., 1999. New and old wars: organized violence in a global era. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kalyvas, S.N., 2011. The changing character of civil wars, 1800–2009. In: H. Strachan and S. Scheipers, eds. The changing character of war. Oxford; New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 202–219. doi:10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199596737.003.0012.
   Google Scholar
• Krause, K., 2019. Emancipation and critique in peace and conflict research. Journal of Global Security Studies, 4 (2), 292–298. doi:10.1093/jogss/ogy049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, K. and Williams, M.C., 1996. Broadening the agenda of security studies: politics and methods. Mershon International Studies Review, 40 (2), 229–254. doi:10.2307/222776.
   Google Scholar
• Kreutz, J., 2010. How and when armed conflicts end: introducing the UCDP conflict termination dataset. Journal of Peace Research, 47 (2), 243–250. doi:10.1177/0022343309353108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, D., Heathershaw, J., and Megoran, N., 2018. Illiberal peace? Authoritarian modes of conflict management. Cooperation and Conflict, 53 (4), 486–506. doi:10.1177/0010836718765902.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licklider, R., 1995. The consequences of negotiated settlements in civil wars, 1945-1993. The American Political Science Review, 89 (3), 681–690. doi:10.2307/2082982.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ling, J., 18 Mar 2023. Russian mercenaries are pushing France out of Central Africa. Foreign Policy. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/03/18/russian-mercenaries-are-pushing-france-out-of-central-africa/[Accessed 2 Apr 2023].
   Google Scholar
• Lundgren, M. and Svensson, I., 2020. The surprising decline of international mediation in armed conflicts. Research & Politics, 7 (2), 2053168020917243. doi:10.1177/2053168020917243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luttwak, E.N., 1999. Give war a chance. Foreign Affairs, (July/August).
   Google Scholar
• Mac Ginty, R. and Richmond, O.P., 2013. The local turn in peace building: a critical agenda for peace. Third World Quarterly, 34 (5), 763–783. doi:10.1080/01436597.2013.800750.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, T.D., et al., 2011. When civil wars recur: conditions for durable peace after civil wars. International Studies Perspectives, 12 (2), 171–189. doi:10.1111/j.1528-3585.2011.00426.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehler, A., 2009. Peace and power sharing in Africa: a not so obvious relationship. African Affairs, 108 (432), 453–473. doi:10.1093/afraf/adp038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melander, E., Oberg, M., and Hall, J., 2009. Are ‘new wars’ more atrocious? Battle severity, civilians killed and forced migration before and after the end of the Cold War. European Journal of International Relations, 15 (3), 505–536. doi:10.1177/1354066109338243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melber, H. and Saunders, C., 2007. Conflict mediation in decolonisation: Namibia’s transition to independence. Africa Spectrum, 42 (1), 73–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Modelski, G., 1964. International settlement of internal war. In: J.N. Rosenau, ed. International aspects of civil strife. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 122–153.
   Google Scholar
• Montgomery, M.E., 2003. Working for peace while preparing for war: the creation of the United States institute of peace. Journal of Peace Research, 40 (4), 479–496. doi:10.1177/00223433030404007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morjé Howard, L.M. and Stark, A., 2018. How civil wars end: the international system, norms, and the role of external actors. International Security, 42 (3), 127–171. doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Obamamoye, B.F., 2023. Beyond neo-imperialist intentionality: explaining African agency in liberal peace interventions. Third World Quarterly, 44 (7), 1380–1397. doi:10.1080/01436597.2023.2188186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paffenholz, T., 2015. Unpacking the local turn in peacebuilding: a critical assessment towards an agenda for future research. Third World Quarterly, 36 (5), 857–874. doi:10.1080/01436597.2015.1029908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paris, R., 2004. At war’s end: building peace after civil conflict. Cambridge; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511790836.
   Google Scholar
• Paris, R., 2023. The past, present, and uncertain future of collective conflict management: peacekeeping and beyond. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 17 (3), 235–257. doi:10.1080/17502977.2023.2170546.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patomäki, H., 2001. The challenge of critical theories: peace research at the start of the new century. Journal of Peace Research, 38 (6), 723–737. doi:10.1177/0022343301038006005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pillar, P.R., 2014 [1980]. Negotiating peace: war termination as a bargaining process. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Richmond, O.P., 2005. The transformation of peace. Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Rocha Menocal, A., 2011. State building for peace: a new paradigm for international engagement in post-conflict fragile states? Third World Quarterly, 32 (10), 1715–1736. doi:10.1080/01436597.2011.610567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, P. and Ramsbotham, O., 1999. Then and now: peace research, past and future. Political Studies, 47 (4), 740–754. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.00229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer, J.D., 1972. The ‘correlates of war’ project: interim report and rationale. World Politics, 24 (2), 243–270. doi:10.2307/2009738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer, J.D., 1976. An assessment of peace research. International Security, 1 (1), 118–137. doi:10.2307/2538580.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, C.Q., et al., 2020. Illiberal peacebuilding in Asia: a comparative overview. Conflict, Security and Development, 20 (1), 1–14. doi:10.1080/14678802.2019.1705066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Söderberg Kovacs, M., 2020. Negotiating sacred grounds? Resolving Islamist armed conflicts. International Negotiation, 25 (3), 375–388. doi:10.1163/15718069-BJA10016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stedman, S.J., 1991. Peacemaking in civil war: international mediation in Zimbabwe, 1974-1980. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. doi:10.1515/9781685855956.
   Google Scholar
• Stedman, S.J., 1997. Spoiler problems in peace processes. International Security, 22 (2), 5–53. doi:10.1162/isec.22.2.5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stedman, S.J., Rothchild, D.S., and Cousens, E.M., 2002. Ending civil wars: the implementation of peace agreements. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, I., 2007. Mediation with muscles or minds? Exploring power mediators and pure mediators in civil wars. International Negotiation, 12 (2), 229–248. doi:10.1163/138234007X223294.
   Google Scholar
• Taw, J., 2012. Mission revolution: the U.S. military and stability operations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. doi:10.7312/taw-15324.
   Google Scholar
• Tilly, C., 1990. Coercion, capital and European states: AD 990-1992. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Toft, M.D., 2010. Ending civil wars: a case for rebel victory? International Security, 34 (4), 7–36. doi:10.1162/isec.2010.34.4.7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UK Department for International Development, 2010. Building peaceful states and societies. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/building-peaceful-states-and-societies-a-dfid-practice-paper [Accessed 26 July 2023].
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, 2000. Report of the Panel on United Nations peace operations [Brahimi Report]. Available from: https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/brahimi-report-0 [Accessed 2 June 2023].
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, 2008. United Nations peacekeeping operations: principles and guidelines [Capstone Doctrine]. Available from: https://police.un.org/en/united-nations-peace-operations-principles-and-guidelines-capstone-doctrine [Accessed 28 July 2023].
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, 2012. Civil affairs handbook. Department of peacekeeping operations and department of field support. Available from: https://peacekeeping.un.org/sites/default/files/civil_affairs_handbook.pdf [Accessed 2 June 2023].
   Google Scholar
• United Nations, 2015. The challenge of sustaining peace: report of the advisory group of experts for the 2015 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. Available from: https://www.un.org/pga/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/07/300615_The-Challenge-of-Sustaining-Peace.pdf [Accessed 26 July 2023].
   Google Scholar
• Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP). UCDP background. Available from: https://www.pcr.uu.se/research/ucdp/about-ucdp/ucdp-background/ [Accessed 2 April 2023].
   Google Scholar
• Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) 2021. UCDP Conflict Termination Dataset version 3-2021. Available from: https://ucdp.uu.se/downloads/index.html#termination [Accessed on 18 August]
   Google Scholar
• Vieira De Mello, S., 2000. Enough is enough. Foreign Affairs, 79 (1), 187–188. doi:10.2307/20049626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter, B.F., 1997. The critical barrier to civil war settlement. International Organization, 51 (3), 335–364. doi:10.1162/002081897550384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter, B.F. 2021. The extraordinary relationship between peacekeeping and peace. British journal of political science, 51 (4), 1705–1722. doi:10.1017/S000712342000023X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstein, J., 2005. Autonomous recovery and international intervention in comparative perspective. Working Paper 57. New York: Center for Global Development. Available at: http://www.cgdev.org/publication/autonomous-recovery-andinternational-intervention-comparative-perspective-working-paper [Accessed 2 June 2023].
   Google Scholar
• Wheeler, N.J., 2000. Saving strangers: humanitarian intervention in international society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zartman, I.W. and Touval, S., 1985. International mediation: conflict resolution and power politics. Journal of Social Issues, 41 (2), 27–45. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1985.tb00853.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zedong, M. and Griffith, S.B., 1961. Mao Tse-tung on guerrilla warfare. In: Fleet marine force reference publication (FMFRP). Washington, D.C: US Marine Corps, pp. 12–18.
   Google Scholar