Representing International Territorial Administration: A Critique of Some Approaches

Abstract

This piece highlights some of the ways in which the administration of territory by international organizations has been represented in certain academic texts, discussing the manner in which these representations frame the nature of and the purposes served by the practice in general and certain administration projects in particular. It draws from commentary on current and previous projects, and also considers some of the concepts with which the practice has been associated, including the 'failed states' paradigm, 'generations' of peacekeeping, and the idea of 'post-conflict reconstruction'. The point of this inquiry is to explore how accurate these representations are in their own terms, and more broadly to evaluate the political consequences of framing international territorial administration in the manner identified. It is suggested that some of the pictures painted of the recent administration missions risk undermining attempts at a critical evaluation of the missions. The risk is identified in the presence of four different discursive strategies within the texts discussed.