This thesis investigates the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) mapping in UN Peace Operations. On the one hand, GIS use has been assumed to increase the efficiency and coordination of multi-dimensional peace missions. On the other, the Western universalist epistemology underlying GIS is thought to render its application, particularly in non-Western contexts neo-colonialist. These two framings of GIS as either inherently scientifically progressive or politically oppressive are over-deterministic. I argue that the politics of GIS use is contingent upon the ways in which understandings of the map are negotiated in practice. As an ethnographic study of three UN GIS mapping sites (a field mission in Timor-Leste, the Cartographic Section at the UN headquarters, and the GIS Center at the UN Logistics Base), drawing on interviews with practitioners, the thesis gives an account of a) the role of GIS in the field mission, b) GIS practitioners’ management of the technology and their everyday interaction with their clients, and c) its organization within the United Nations. In the thesis I conceptualize an epistemological fault between the professional communities of mappers and their clients which organizes GIS use. This fault separates those who understand the map as political abstract model from those who see it as a mere image of the world. As a consequence, it also separates those who understand mapping as a political practice from those who see it as mere matter of logistics. The meaning and organization of GIS use is thus contingent upon how these different understandings are contested or affirmed in the interaction between mappers and clients. Overall, this thesis emphasizes the role of understanding technology, space and logistics in the context of the politics of Peace Operations.

In this thesis, I investigate to what extent and how the normative changes in UN peace operations have left an imprint on Swedish foreign policy tradition. Departing from a constructivist point of view, this thesis explores to what extent the changing international norms on UN peace operations translate to the national level. By way of this, the thesis aims to contribute to the theoretical discussion on how international norms and ideas imprint on a national level. The analysis focuses on the heightened threat level, the increased authorisation of the use of force, the inclusion of new military domains and humanitarian and civilian aspects. The Swedish approach is analysed through parliamentary debates and government propositions on MINUSMA between 2021-2022, where MINUSMA represents the normative changes UN peace operations have undergone. The material is analysed through qualitative content analysis. The results of the analysis indicate that Sweden aligns regarding the acceptance of increased military influence over MINUSMA and also accepts the heightened threat level. At the same time, the mission’s own use of force is played down by the government and parliamentarians, instead choosing to emphasise civilian and humanitarian factors. As a result, the alignment regarding the aspect of the use of force is more difficult to draw firm conclusions around.

Non-UN peace operations are becoming an increasingly important conflict mitigating tool. Whilst many studies find these operations unable to mitigate conflict and promote peace, the explanations for these findings mainly focus on material aspects like mission size and peacekeepers’ capability. In order to better understand the discrepancies between UN and non-UN peace operations’ success, this thesis argues that UN operations might be more efficient due to higher perceived legitimacy. In order to analyze whether the superior legitimacy of the UN explains their higher ability to mitigate conflict, this study analyzes whether non- UN peace operations authorized by the UN are more able to mitigate conflict than non-authorized peace operations. The argument is tested by applying an OLS regression to a data frame including all intrastate conflicts between 1993 and 2016 to study the covariation between conflict intensity and the presence of UN authorized and non-authorized peace operations. The results do not support the hypothesis that UN authorization increases non-UN peace operations’ conflict mitigating abilities. This suggests that material factors might better explain peace operations’ success or that UN authorization does not substantially increase the perceived legitimacy of non-UN peace operations.

China and USA in UN Peace Operations in 1989-2010 Mgr. Jitka Evanová Summary The thesis discusses the growing role of China and decreasing role of USA in UN peace operations since 1989 with the aim to find the reasons behind their behavior. First, two chosen theories of international relations - neorealism and its modified version and English school - are described, independent variables determined and consequent hypotheses formulated. Second, the increasing Chinese and decreasing American activities in UN peace operations is shown by describing their gradually changing behavior in three areas: voting in the Security Council, personnel contributions to peacekeeping operations and financial contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget. Third, the hypotheses are tested using the congruence method that examines the explanatory power of the theories. If a reality is consistent with the hypotheses' prediction, there is a possiblity of a causal relationship between independent variable and the dependent one. I conclude that modified neorealim has the highest explanatory power as its predictions are consistent with the outcome in both cases. English school can to a certain degree explain Chinese behavior but is weak in the American case. Neorealist predictions are weak in both cases. In the end, I suggest possible...