Peacekeeping and Transitions to Democracy
Heldt, Birger. 2011. “Peacekeeping Operations and Transitions to Democracy”, pp. 47-71 in Fjelde, Hanne and Kristine Höglund (eds.), Building Peace, Creating Conflict. Lund: Nordic Academic Press.
50 Pages Posted: 27 Sep 2011 Last revised: 4 Aug 2019
Date Written: September 15, 2011
Abstract
Inspired by well-established findings that democracy is associated with interstate peace, and the mixed findings that democracy is related to intrastate peace in general as well as post-intrastate conflict peace duration (Hegre & Fjelde 2009), it has been argued that democracy support should be part of the exit strategy of peacekeeping operations (PKOs). Democracy is seen as important for universal individual rights, but also for generating good governance, which is expected to benefit economic growth, improve efficiency of development aid, and decrease the risk of civil conflict. Indeed, some findings indicate that the presence of democracy is an important condition for successful peacekeeping in terms of absence of civil war during deployment (Heldt 2002a, 2002b, 2004). Democracy has even been used as a success criterion for PKOs (for example, Doyle & Sambanis 2000, 2006; Heldt 2005).
This chapter looks at the empirical record of international peace operations in terms of their impact on post-conflict transitions to democracy. Do peace operations contribute to transitions to democracy? The question is in general answered in the negative by case-studies, in that peace operations have allegedly hardly ever contributed to democracy and democratization. Also, traditional theories of democratization, focusing on socio-economic and cultural pillars of democracy, generate similar doubts given the character of peace operations’ democracy support. In contrast, the UN’s exit strategy builds on the assumption that the alleged socio-economic and cultural pillars of democracy may be sufficient but are not necessary, and that democracy therefore can be jump-started, after which it will become self-reinforcing.
Covering 1960-2005, this chapter assesses whether PKOs increase the probability of transitions to democracy. It is an empirical advance on previous research in several ways. First, it is one of the few studies to have assessed the question with quantitative methods. Second, it takes into account whether peace operations were mandated to support democratization. Third, it controls for the presence of non-UN operations, and assesses their impact. Finally, it uses duration models to assess the impact. In what follows, the basic distinction between the ‘precondition’ and ‘universialist’ approaches to democracy is presented; an implicit distinction that is of fundamental importance in the debate on the utility of democracy support from the outside. Previous research on the link between peace operations and post-conflict democracy is then considered, along with the research gaps. Theory, hypotheses and control variables are presented in detail, as are the statistical findings, while the chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications for future research and some thoughts on the wider significance of the findings.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
The Pooling and Tranching of Securities: A Model of Informed Intermediation
-
Security Baskets and Index-Linked Securities
By Gary B. Gorton and George Pennacchi
-
Institutional Liquidity Needs and the Structure of Monitored Finance
-
Bank Financing and Investment Decisions with Asymmetric Information
-
Portfolio Liquidation and Security Design with Private Information
-
Security Design with Investor Private Information
By Ulf Axelson
-
Stockholder Unanimity in Making Production and Financial Decisions
-
The Market Liquidty of Diamonds, Qubes, and Their Underlying Stocks
-
Market Incompleteness and Super Value Additivity: Implications for Securitization
By Vishal Gaur, Sridhar Seshadri, ...