Recent years have seen an increasing emphasis on local ownership in United Nations peacekeeping. Advocates assert that it boosts the legitimacy and sustainability of peacekeeping by helping to preserve the principles of self-determination and non-imposition in an activity that can contravene them. However, whether this assertion holds in practice has not been backed up by careful conceptual and empirical analysis. This book fills this gap by mapping the discourse, understandings, and operationalization of local ownership in UN peacekeeping, both from the perspective of the UN and local actors. Drawing on the case of the UN peacekeeping operation in DR Congo and a number of other cases, it shows that despite its regular invocation of local ownership discourse, the UN operationalizes ownership in restrictive ways that are intended to protect the achievement of operational goals but which consequently limit self-determination and increase external imposition on the host country. This gap between the rhetoric and reality of ownership suggests that the UN uses local ownership primarily as a discursive tool for legitimation, one intended to reconcile conflicting normative and operational imperatives that it faces. However, because its actions do not match its rhetoric, the UN's attempts to generate legitimacy through discourse appear to fall flat, particularly in the eyes of local actors, and because of contradictions in the ways that the UN operationalizes local ownership, it also inhibits the achievement of its operational goals as well.

The book provides critical perspectives that reach beyond the technical approaches of international financial institutions and proponents of the liberal peace formula. It investigates political economies characterized by the legacies of disruption to production and exchange, by population displacement, poverty, and by 'criminality'.

This book examines local ownership in UN peacekeeping and how national and international actors interact and share responsibility in fragile post-conflict contexts.

What is the relationship between leadership and peace? What kind of leadership styles, processes and strategies are required to gain a deeper understanding of local context while at the same time maintaining the trust and cooperation of host authorities and other stakeholders on the ground? As concerns mount about the continued relevance and efficiency of UN peace operations, Youssef Mahmoud – who led several challenging peace missions in Africa – draws on many years of experience to offer insights into how political leadership might be exercised to help restore and nurture peace. Mahmoud makes the case for a paradigm shift in the type of leadership required to bring about strong, global diplomacy for peace. Making extensive use of the authors' unique personal experiences in Burundi, Central African Republic and Chad, the book offers an unparalleled insight into the leadership challenges of complex and often seemingly intractable conflict situations.

What is the relationship between leadership and peace? What kind of leadership styles, processes and strategies are required to gain a deeper understanding of local context while at the same time maintaining the trust and cooperation of host authorities and other stakeholders on the ground? As concerns mount about the continued relevance and efficiency of UN peace operations, Youssef Mahmoud – who led several challenging peace missions in Africa – draws on many years of experience to offer insights into how political leadership might be exercised to help restore and nurture peace. Mahmoud makes the case for a paradigm shift in the type of leadership required to bring about strong, global diplomacy for peace. Making extensive use of the authors' unique personal experiences in Burundi, Central African Republic and Chad, the book offers an unparalleled insight into the leadership challenges of complex and often seemingly intractable conflict situations.

This book critically explores the practices of peacebuilding, and the politics of the communities experiencing intervention. The contributions to this volume have a dual focus. First, they analyse the practices of western intervention and peacebuilding, and the prejudices and politics that drive them. Second, they explore how communities experience and deal with this intervention, as well as an understanding of how their political and economic priorities can often diverge markedly from those of the intervener. This is achieved through theoretical and thematic chapters, and an extensive number of in-depth empirical case studies. Utilising a variety of conceptual frameworks and disciplines, the book seeks to understand why something so normatively desirable – the pursuit of, and building of, peace – has turned out so badly. From Cambodia to Afghanistan, Iraq to Mali, interventions in the pursuit of peace have not achieved the results desired by the interveners. But, rather, they have created further instability and violence. The contributors to this book explore why. This book will be of much interest to students, academics and practitioners of peacebuilding, peacekeeping, international intervention, statebuilding, security studies and IR in general.

International peacebuilding has reached an impasse. Its lofty ambitions have resulted in at best middling success, punctuated by moments of outright failure. The discrediting of the term ‘liberal peacebuilding’ has seen it evolve to respond to the numerous critiques. Notions such as ‘inclusive peace’ merge the liberal paradigm with critical notions of context, and the need to refine practices to take account of ‘the local’ or ‘complexity’. However, how this would translate into clear guidance for the practice of peacebuilding is unclear. Paradoxically, contemporary peacebuilding policy has reached an unprecedented level of vagueness. Peace in political unsettlement provides an alternative response rooted in a new discourse, which aims to speak both to the experience of working in peace process settings. It maps a new understanding of peace processes as institutionalising formalised political unsettlement and points out new ways of engaging with it. The book points to the ways in which peace processes institutionalise forms of disagreement, creating ongoing processes to manage it, rather than resolve it. It suggests a modest approach of providing ‘hooks’ to future processes, maximising the use of creative non-solutions, and practices of disrelation, are discussed as pathways for pragmatic post-war transitions. It is only by understanding the nature and techniques of formalised political unsettlement that new constructive ways of engaging with it can be found.