Peace has finally come to Aceh. The Indonesian province has suffered for over 30 years through conflict with the Indonesian army. Instrumental in having achieved this peaceful outcome has been the role of the European Union (EU). Its crucial monitoring role and long term commitment had a profound impact on the province, helping to end the hostilities and to rebuild Aceh. The EU-led Aceh Monitoring Mission (AMM) is the central feature of this thesis. Like Aceh, Europe has experienced wars. However, since the beginnings of Western European institution building, peace and cooperation in the region transpired. This phenomenon has spread across the continent. The progressive structure enabled the EU to flourish as a cooperative institution, especially in the aftermath of the Cold War east-west division. This period also gave the EU an opportunity to expand its peaceful legacy by exporting its values abroad. The development of the EU's external capability to deliver such aspirations is a central part of this thesis. The thesis seeks to draw a connection with the EU's quest to bring peace to Aceh with international relations (IR) theory. As such, it assesses the EU's motives and interests in the Aceh peace process to discover what they were based on. After assessing both realist and liberalist IR viewpoints, the thesis’ central findings confirm the liberal motives of the EU. The EU has predominantly acted in the interests of Aceh. It helped bring many liberal based values to the province and experienced constructive relations with Indonesia and other powers in the region. Whilst realist orientated EU power motives are outlined, the EU's liberal agenda based on mediation, peace and security, multilateralism, democracy and human rights - as core liberal elements - are more convincing explanations as this thesis argues.

In 1996 the state of Nepal was challenged by a Maoist insurgency, resulting in a decade-long civil war. During the course of the subsequent peace process the parliamentary parties found themselves agreeing to significant political changes, including a republican constitution. This study approaches the Nepal case on the assumption that the discursive aspect of social relations is one important factor in understanding how specific events unfold and why actors do one thing and not another. Two frames are investigated using frame analysis in terms of their representation of problem, cause and solution: a terrorism frame from the period of conflict and a peace frame from the period of conflict resolution. The terrorism frame is categorised as a negative frame and the peace frame as a positive frame. This overarching difference is found to have implications for the effects of the respective frames. In contrast to traditional frame analysis, which tends to focus on the success of a frame and the effects on a specific audience, this study investigates the effects of frames on the actors involved in the framing process in terms of their perceived manoeuvrability for action. This approach is formalised in a model of four types of logic of actor effects that is applied to the Nepal case. The analysis of frame effects is based on first-hand interviews with key actors, such as former prime ministers and top leaders of political parties and civil society. From this material, the study gives insight into how the two frames influenced the actors’ perceived manoeuvrability. This actor-centred approach shows that the frames affected the actors in both enabling and restrictive ways and thus influenced the outcome in Nepal. For example, it is shown that frames created during the conflict were considered a prerequisite for the legitimate use of military force. The study also shows the unintended effects of framing, captured in the model as the effect of self-entrapment, and highlights the coercive character of ideas in making actors perceive themselves as forced to take a certain action or position.

Esta pesquisa tem como objetivo central a identificação e análise dos principais atores e temas envolvidos na internacionalização do conflito armado na Colômbia. Este estudo entende por internacionalização a participação de atores estrangeiros na formulação e/ou implementação das tentativas de resolução do referido conflito. O recorte temporal pertinente aos propósitos da pesquisa estende-se do Governo César Gaviria (1990-1994) ao final do primeiro governo de Álvaro Uribe (2002-2006), na medida em que, no período anterior, não era possível observar um envolvimento externo considerável nos processos de paz na Colômbia. Os atores selecionados para uma análise mais atenta foram: EUA e OEA, cujas agendas correspondem à proposta hemisférica predominante; e UE e ONU, as quais representam as iniciativas globais voltadas à resolução do conflito. A principal conclusão deste estudo incide sobre o agrupamento das propostas internacionais em torno desses dois pólos: hemisféricas (das quais os EUA constituem o principal expoente) e globais (que têm na UE o seu ponto focal). A primeira é dotada de vultosos recursos, apresenta um caráter marcadamente militar e encontra na erradicação das drogas e no confronto às guerrilhas as suas principais estratégias. Por outro lado, o traço preponderante da segunda é a ênfase nos direitos humanos, na ajuda humanitária e na negociação com as guerrilhas. A proposta emergente do pólo europeu não foi capaz de oferecer um contra-peso à intervenção estadunidense, tanto em termos de recursos financeiros, como de fatores geopolíticos. Assim, a principal conclusão desta pesquisa é que a internacionalização do conflito armado não se manifesta de forma homogênea: embora a participação dos atores estrangeiros tenha ocorrido no âmbito global, as iniciativas hemisféricas são predominantes, especialmente se analisarmos as preferências do governo colombiano. / This study aims to identify and analyze the main actors and themes related to the Colombian armed conflict internationalization. It understands internationalization as the participation of foreign players in the designing and implementation of programs regarding the resolution of the conflict. The period of interest to this study dates back to the government César Gaviria (1990-1994) until the end of the first Álvaro Uribe administration, since there was no considerable external participation on Colombia peace processes previously. The selected players for a more detailed approach were: US and OAS, whose agendas correspond to the predominant proposal in the hemisphere; and EU and UN, which represent the global initiatives towards the conflict resolution. The main conclusion of this study is related to the concentration of international proposals around these poles: hemispheric (whose main exponent is the US) and global (concentrated on EU). The first involves a huge amount of resources, presents a markedly military aspect and privileges the illicit crops eradication and confrontation against guerrillas as strategies. On the other hand, the dominant characteristic of the second is the emphasis on human rights, humanitarian aid and the negotiation with the guerrillas. The proposal that emerged from Europe was not able to offer compensation to American intervention in terms of financial resources and geopolitical factors. Therefore, the main conclusion of this study is that the internationalization of the armed conflict is not homogeneous throughout the world: the participation of external actors is global, but the hemispherical initiatives are predominant, especially if we consider Colombian governments preferences.

The topic of this thesis is the question of EU's involvement in the resolution of the Middle East conflict (in a narrower sense the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians) and the survey of common positions and differences of the EU and other significant participants (especially the USA and the USSR/Russia). The ultimate objective is to assess the contribution and role of the EU in the whole process based on its analysis. The first part of the thesis outlines the evolution of the Middle East conflict from the creation of the State of Israel up to the present (May 2008), the second part deals with the analysis of West European states' and EU's approach towards the Peace Process and the the third part contains a comparison of the EU's positions with selected key participants (the USA and the USSR/Russia).

Cette thèse étudie la persistance du conflit angolais entre 1991 et 2002. Elle entend revenir sur les causes de la faillite des processus de paix de Bicesse et de Lusaka. La signature des accords de Bicesse entre le MPLA et l’UNITA, le 31 mai 1991, ne permit guère à l’Angola d’accéder à une paix durable. Après les élections des 29 et 30 septembre 1992, la guerre reprit sur l’ensemble du territoire. Le gouvernement MPLA et l’UNITA signèrent un nouvel accord de paix à Lusaka le 30 novembre 1994. Mais, celui-ci n’eut guère plus de réussite que le précédent malgré l’inauguration d’un Gouvernement d’unité et de réconciliation nationale en avril 1997. Les deux camps s'affrontèrent de nouveau en décembre 1998 et fut alimentée par les entrées d’armes au profit des deux camps, qui finançaient leur effort de guerre grâce au pétrole pour le MPLA et aux diamants pour l’UNITA. L’affaiblissement politique et militaire de l’UNITA permit au MPLA de défaire ce mouvement en tuant son chef le 22 février 2002. / This PhD dissertation examines the persistence of the Angolan conflict between 1991 and 2002. It goes back over the causes of the failure of the Bicesse and Lusaka peace processes. The signing of the Bicesse accords between MPLA and UNITA, on May 31st, 1991, did not permit Angola to reach a lasting peace. After the elections, which took place on September 29 and 30, 1992, the war started again on the whole territory. The MPLA government and UNITA signed a new peace accord in Lusaka on November 30,1994. Nevertheless, it had as little success as the former peace accord, despite the inauguration of a new government of unity and national reconciliation in April 1997. A new war began in December 1998 and was fueled by weapon supplies for the two groups, which financed their war effort thanks to oil resources for MPLA and diamonds for UNITA. UNITA's political and military weakening allowed MPLA to defeat this organization by killing its leader on February 22nd, 2002.

Diploma thesis Conflict Resolution in International Relations: The Case Study of Northern Ireland Conflict examines development of the conflict and peace process between the years of 1980 and 2007. A complex concept of conflict analysis by Peter Wallensteen is applied to the case of Northern Ireland. Using the method of process tracing allows for a detailed understanding of the transformation of conflict dynamics from negative to positive. Such a transformation results from behavior and attitudes of individual actors who act positively and in a constructive way. The following actors were identified as the main parties to the conflict: IRA, Northern Ireland political parties - mostly the UUP, DUP, SDLP, and SF - governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Development of their attitudes and interests is examined with respect to five distinct categories: involvement of independent authorities and/or third parties; ideology and understanding of the main goals; economic conditions; cultural aspects; and the matter of decommissioning. The Northern Ireland case illustrates that the change of behavior eventually led to the transformation of the conflict and its resolution. However, it also illustrates how painfully slow process it was.

The role of the United Nations in international peace and peacekeeping has traditionally been supported by the Russian Federation, promoting the UN as a central actor in international politics and using force in the establishment of peace in Russian peacekeeping operations. However, blocking several military interventions and UN resolutions on peacekeeping and criticising the use of the UN as a political tool for western states, the Russian perception of peace in the UN remains uncharted. In an attempt to provide new knowledge to the Russian perception of peace, this thesis investigates Russian ideas of peace expressed in national policy documents and UN Security Council statements between 2019 and 2020, concerning the establishment of peace in international conflicts. Using an ideational analysis, Russian ideas of peace are interpreted according to the theoretical framework of situational and relational peace, developed by Jarstad et al. (2019), examining peace as situational security and political order, and as a relational behaviour, attitudes and ideas. The analysis reveals that Russian ideas can be interpreted as characterised by both situational and relational peace, promoting peace and peacekeeping based on international law, establishing security and stability through peaceful means of conflict management rather than promoting forceful military means. Further, ideas of peacekeeping are interpreted as promoting a return to status quo, and state responsibility.

2 Abstract Thi di er a ion e plore he e of coercion in he EU liberal peaceb ilding frame ork in Palestine. Palestine has a long- anding hi or of foreign ac or in ol emen . Since he 1993 O lo Accord , he EU peaceb ilding role a one of Pale ine main financial donors has increased. There is scholarly disagreement and a lack of understanding on the role of coercion in peacebuilding practices. While scholars argue that coercion is a core element for human organisations, others do not recognise the negative impact of coercion in peacebuilding when this does not entail the use of force. Furthermore, the peacebuilding scholarship offers little to no conceptualisation of coercion. Therefore, this dissertation explores how coercion manifests in peacebuilding practices, looking at the case of the EU liberal peacebuilding activities in Palestine. In doing so, the research emphasises on how local Palestinian recipients perceive coercion. The current liberal approach of the EU is built upon the economic dependency of Palestinians, which essentially constitutes a coercive structure. The asymmetric power relations between different actors in the region allows space for the contestation of coercion. This dissertation argues that coercion in this context goes beyond its traditional understanding, and therefore requires...

This thesis examines how, and the extent to which, the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) Accord of Bangladesh contributed to transform conflicting relations of the parties, and communities living in the CHT. This case study research has combined two methods: (i) key informant interviews and (ii) consultation of wider secondary literature, reports of accord signing parties, international organizations, NGOs and other stakeholders, newspaper articles, working papers etc. We have developed a process-oriented analytical framework through reviewing eight widely studied peace agreements and their following conflict transformation processes. This theme-based distinctive framework has guided us to conduct a comprehensive analyse of the CHT case. We argue that the 1997 CHT Accord, developed as a part of an internal strategic conflict management and negotiation process, and stipulated for limited territorial power-sharing and localized proportional power-sharing of communities, to a considerable extent helped to transform parties’ conflicting relations, and the conflict itself, despite the Accord’s limited nature and partial implementation. The post-accord immediate implementation of some key provisions helped to build confidence of the parties and engaged them in decision-making process. This restrained them not to return to violence, although an incremental accord implementation process helped to address some complexities but created contradictions and dubious relations between them over some issues. The accord considerably contributed to improve socio-economic conditions of CHT people. Nevertheless, it shifted the dynamics of original conflict towards an intra-ethnic dimension, whereas the inter-community relations remained highly polarized due to inadequate attention paid by relevant stakeholders to bridge their gaps for peace. / Commonwealth Scholarship Commission

This thesis seeks to answer the following question: How and to what extent does identity and Self-Other perception influence the foreign policy of the EU and Russia toward the establishment of a sovereign and viable Palestinian State? The thesis scrutinises the assumption that identity and Self-perception as well as perception of ‘otherness’ play a vital role in defining foreign policy-making, with policy toward the Middle East being no exception. The investigation focuses on how the EU’s and Russia’s desire to reinforce their ‘global actorness’ on the international stage informs their involvement in the Middle East peace process. This assumption brings into the analysis the dynamic of constructivism in the shaping of foreign policy. Through a constructivist approach, the thesis attempts to explore how Self-Other perception informs foreign policy-making, specifically by the EU and Russia, in relation to Palestinian statehood. Thus the thesis problematises existing views about the role of established IR schools in understanding foreign policy-making (namely, in terms of peace-making). The study seeks to deepen our understanding of the role of identity and Self-Other perception in EU and Russian foreign policy-making by going beyond conventional understanding of foreign policy-making that are fixated on ‘power’, with special reference to the question of Palestinian statehood. In this vein, I advance the argument that, contrary to the old assumptions of schools such as realism and liberalism, there is a role played by identity and ideas that needs to be assessed in the context of EU and Russian peace-making in the Middle East. The thesis tests these assumptions using a qualitative methodology to investigate the making of foreign policy by the EU and Russia. Discourse analysis is the main method employed to interpret the role of identity and Self-Other perceptions. This is done through a study of discourse made up of official documents and statements as well as interviews with diplomats with current and past involvement in the formulation of EU and Russian foreign policy.