No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This study considers the role of antiwar organisations in the construction of national identity and resultant foreign policy norms. It is broadly concerned with the way that support for international actions is developed and maintained in conjunction with particular national ideals and expectations. Most significantly, I suggest that such constructions are not created in isolation through mono-directional broadcasts by elite actors but develop instead in conflict and conjunction with oppositional discourses at multiple levels of society. Furthermore, I suggest that identity construction is innately performative, and I apply a Performance Studies framework of analysis using Mikhail Bakhtin to explore the dialogic components of identity processes. In doing so this work engages with the underlying hierarchies of encoded power that influence identity construction at the domestic level and beyond. This necessitates a greater recognition of the role of dissenting actors in mainstream national narratives, particularly those that embrace identities traditionally used to uphold dominant ideals, such as women and soldiers. To support this hypothesis I offer an analysis of two prominent antiwar groups at the centre ofthe domestic American War on Terror debate, and show how these organisations work both within and among the official regulated discourses, achieving a level of norm eo-construction through a variety of performative tactics. The findings that result imply a more active role for oppositional discourse than has previously been embraced in analyses of national identity constructions and subsequent foreign policy goals.

Which international actors are best suited to the military challenges of peace enforcement? Within contemporary peace operations scholarship and policy. the answer to this question is typically framed by the division of the global peacekeeping community into a small group of capable, "first tier" Western states - limited largely by a lack of political will to act and their less-capable developing world counterparts who lack capabilities hut form the bulk or contributions to contemporary peace operations. This "West and the 'Rest'" hierarchy relies upon a set of assumptions regarding the transformative potential of Western military power for conflict management, and a bias towards Northern knowledge and best practice common throughout international security and development policy communities. In the following thesis, I challenge and problematise this conventional wisdom through a critical review of the peacekeeping literature, and a qualitative case-study analysis comparing Western and developing world militarics in peace enforcement operations. , identify a set of premises regarding Western and non-Western peace en forcement capabilities - which I refer to collectively as the " Hierarchical Assumption" of global peace enforcement capacity - and level three central critiques against the empirical and conceptual validity of this assumption using a dcconstructive review of contemporary peacekeeping scholarship and policy discourse, supported by interviews with policymakers and peacekeeping practitioners. I next contrast the capacity and mission effectiveness of four cases - the Indian Peacekeeping Force (IPKF) in Sri Lanka, the Nigerian-led Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group (ECOWAS) in Liberia, the US in Somalia, and the UK in Sierra Leone-to demonstrate how such broad divisions between Northern and Southern PE capability and efficacy arc blurred in practice. I conclude by discussing the troubling record of peace enforcement in practice by both developing world peacekeepers and their well-equipped, well-resourced Western counterparts-a conclusion with significant implications for global peace enforcement policy and practice.

This research examined the theoretical underpinnings of the conflict transformation approach and the practical value of this approach in the building of sustainable peace. Uniquely drawing on the 'process-structure' concept (Lederach), this research found that a core dimension of conflict transformation consisted in the development of cooperative relationships and appropriate supportive socio-political structures. The appropriateness of supportive structures was found to depend on their capacity for inclusiveness of all diverse groups of a society, and the structural prevalence of a participatory model of decision-making. The research further found that a pluralistic form of governance would lead to the development of both inclusive socio-political structures and a participatory decision-making system. This 'process- structure' would need to be supplemented with peace and human rights education programmes at all levels of a particular society, in order to create the necessary awareness and skills. In addition to the existing forms of peace education through formal and non-formal education, this research found that peace education programmes specifically tailored for political leaders would enhance the needed awareness and skills among those stakeholders who have an immediate influence on policy. Through a qualitative research strategy using semi-structured interviews, a framework comprising peace education and pluralistic governance processes was investigated within the context of Angola. Forty-five interviews were conducted with government officials, representatives of political parties and the NGO community. The following evidence emerged: • An attempt at pluralising governance was developing in the form of decentralisation; • Some learning opportunities for political leaders occurred through non-governmental initiatives, besides the provision of peace and human rights education to other members of the society. On the basis of these results; a critical analysis offered insights into how inclusive structures and citizen participation could be enhanced within the ongoing decentralisation process. This framework would have relevance to many other conflict affected contexts, especially in Africa, where the failure to reflect societal diversity in governing structures helps perpetuate conflict, hampers state-building and human development.

While the objective of peacemaking efforts is the institution of a self-sustaining peace, the international community has not been able to accomplish this important goal in many war-torn societies around the world. Thus, the challenge to peacemakers is not necessarily the negotiation of a peace agreement, but its implementation in order to re-integrate a divided society and allow former combatants to address contentious issues non-violently. In light of this reality, this doctoral thesis argues that contemporary peace initiatives have not established conditions of self-sustaining peace because the majority of peacemakers have conceive their efforts according to the tenets of the strategic approach to peacemaking. The strategic approach strongly believes that a self-sustaining peace can be achieved through state-building practices. Hence the international community has devoted much of its time and resources to strengthen state structures, strongly arguing that a strong state can integrate society and make negotiated peace agreements self-sustaining. Influenced by Habermasian critical theory, this thesis presents the theoretical foundations of the communicative approach to peacemaking. The communicative approach argues that state-building projects will not integrate society, at least in the short term, but foster more conflicts between contending groups. It places a higher premium on reconciliation efforts, civil society movements, and deliberative forms of democracy. Using the Dayton peace initiative as a case study, the thesis shows the reasons why the Office of the High Representative and other international agencies in Bosnia have been unable to establish a self-sustaining peace. It also critically reviews different 'bottom-up', society-centred peacebuilding programmes practiced in Bosnia since the signing of the peace agreement, exposing both its limitations and potentials. As a result, this doctoral thesis concludes by showing that new peacebuilding strategies must incorporate aspects of both approaches to peacemaking to make peace in Bosnia self-sustaining.

No description available.