Suchergebnisse

Originally published in Just Security.

Originally published in Just Security.

UN secretary-general António Guterres conceived the upcoming Summit of the Future as an opportunity for visionary thinking about our global future. But member states have far more pressing concerns.

Abstract
In 2018, the author and Stephen John Stedman posited the existence of a post-Cold War "standard treatment" for civil wars based on mediation and peacekeeping, often implemented through the United Nations. Other scholars have questioned how durable this treatment proved to be, suggesting that it lost traction as the United States and other powers opposed mediation involving jihadist groups. Growing major power tensions further undermined the use of the treatment. Nonetheless, states and international organizations still use elements of the mediation-peacekeeping package in responding to civil wars, suggesting that it is adaptable or at least "sticky" enough to outlast the circumstances in which it first emerged. This article explores the evolution and after-lives of the standard treatment for civil wars and asks what may follow it.

AbstractThis article focuses on the way that China and the main Western states on the United Nations Security Council have pursued "mutual accommodation" as China's geopolitical weight has grown in recent years. China still only rarely uses its veto and typically avoids taking responsibility for drafting Council products. Western powers are nonetheless careful to acknowledge and accommodate China's interests wherever possible, through tactics like watering down proposed Council products and avoiding confrontational meetings. China reciprocates by not blocking Western actions outright, but can take advantage of Western caution to gain leverage in the Council. In light of their toxic relationship with Russia, the United States, the United Kingdom and France see avoiding a strategic breakdown in their relations with China as in their strategic interests. Overall, the article highlights how the structural power inherent in the mutual constitution of the capacities and identities of the permanent members of the Security Council influences the social relations of the members and helps them to reach a compromise over many challenging issues The article illustrates this argument with detailed examples from Council diplomacy over Myanmar and Ukraine.