After Exit

View more insights in Social Sciences - Political Science - International Relations

View more figures from University of Oxford

View the page of Richard Caplan

Read the Study

Next in International Relations

Displacing the displaced

Srabonty Das Gupta | Universidad de León

Reframing International Law: The China Strategy?

Karen Alter | Northwestern University

What Happens After Peacekeeping Ends?

Image courtesy of interviewee. December 6, 2024

Log-in or Sign-up to Faculti
Currently viewing this subject insight as a guest. You have insight(s) remaining for this month. Login to view 8000+ figures on the platform.

Generating Workspace...

Export as PDF

This video describes a research project aimed at systematically studying the aftermath of United Nations peacekeeping operations, particularly focusing on the experiences of host states following the withdrawal of these operations. The project seeks to investigate the security, economic, and governance conditions in these states and to understand the impact of UN peacekeeping withdrawal on these factors.

The project has three primary aims:
1. To document the conditions in host states after UN peacekeeping withdrawal in the areas of security, governance, and economy.
2. To provide an analytical framework to explain the observed outcomes post-withdrawal.
3. To offer insights to practitioners within the UN and other stakeholders to improve exit strategies from peacekeeping missions.

The research employs various methodologies, including statistical analysis and case studies of specific countries, such as Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, and Haiti, to analyze indicators of peace and state building during three key periods: during deployment, the year of withdrawal, and ten years post-closure. Findings suggest that while UN peacekeeping generally improves conditions during deployment, withdrawal can lead to mixed outcomes—both positive and negative trends in different areas.

The project further identifies three factors influencing the outcomes after withdrawal:
1. Dependency of the host state on the peacekeeping operation.
2. Ability to substitute or mitigate the roles that the peacekeeping operation played.
3. The effectiveness of the transition process during withdrawal.

The case of East Timor is cited as an example where effective planning and gradual withdrawal allowed for the building of local capacity, ultimately resulting in sustained peace after UN withdrawal. This video concludes by highlighting the importance of sound transitional planning to manage vulnerabilities and maintain progress in post-conflict settings. The research emphasizes that understanding local dynamics can help engage constructively in the peacebuilding process.

Language:

Export as PDF

Export as PDF
Here are five key points from the video regarding the research project focused on post-peacekeeping withdrawal conditions in host states:

1. **Objective of the Research**: The research aims to systematically study the experiences of host states following the withdrawal of UN peacekeeping operations, specifically analyzing changes in security, economic, and governance conditions in these states.

2. **Three Main Aims**: The project has three broad aims: (1) documenting post-exit conditions in terms of security, governance, and economics; (2) providing an analytical framework to explain the observed outcomes in former host states; and (3) offering guidance for best practice exit strategies to UN practitioners and involved stakeholders.

3. **Methodology**: The researchers employed a combination of statistical analysis and qualitative methods, examining large-scale UN peacekeeping operations and corresponding civil conflict data since the end of the Cold War, focusing on 22 indicators across three distinct periods: during deployment, at withdrawal, and ten years post-operation.

4. **Variation in Outcomes**: The findings indicate significant variability in the post-withdrawal trajectories of different host states—while some conditions improved (e.g., GDP, education, civil liberties) during deployment, outcomes post-withdrawal differed widely depending on the specific country and the functional areas being assessed.

5. **Factors Influencing Outcomes**: The research identifies critical factors influencing the sustainability of peace and state-building efforts post-withdrawal, including the host state’s dependency on peacekeeping, the capacity for substitution or mitigation of services previously , and the effectiveness of transition processes in managing withdrawal.

Export as PDF
Here are some key quotes from the video that encapsulate the main points of the research project on the aftermath of UN peacekeeping withdrawal:

1. **Purpose of the Research**:
- "The project after exit is an investigation in the aftermath of major UN peacekeeping operations and an attempt to understand the role of UN peacekeeping withdrawal in shaping those conditions."

2. **Aims of the Project**:
- "First, given the limited knowledge that we have of post-exit conditions, our first aim is to document the conditions in host states following UN peacekeeping withdrawal."
- "The second aim is to move beyond mere description of conditions in former host states and try to understand to provide an analytical framework to explain the outcomes that we observe."
- "The third aim is to provide practitioners within the United Nations and among donor states, troop contributing countries, and other actors that are involved in peacekeeping, best practice exit strategies."

3. **Methodology**:
- "We employed a variety of research methodologies. We are a team, by the way, it's not just me alone."
- "For each of these host states, we examined various peace and state building indicators, some 22 indicators in total."

4. **Key Findings on Post-Withdrawal Conditions**:
- "On average, the indicators mostly improve during the deployment of UN peacekeeping operations."
- "We again observed positive indicators in GDP agricultural production, infant mortality, but also negative trends for several governance indicators such as electoral indices, civil liberties, and women's rights proxies in the area of education."
- "Progress in peace and state building is susceptible to backsliding."

5. **Explanatory Framework**:
- "The framework focuses on three explanatory factors: the degree of dependency of the host state, whether external actors can substitute vital roles left by the peacekeeping operation, and the nature of the transition process."

6. **Case Study - Timor**:
- "Timor's dependency on the UN peacekeeping operation until a point when primary responsibility for managing security could be transferred to the state authorities before the mission closed."
- "The UN undertook a thorough capacity mapping and rigorous monitoring to transfer responsibility for security to the Timorese with a fairly high level of confidence in the country's ability to sustain peace."

7. **Key Lessons**:
- "The key lesson is sound transitional planning. That's really important."
- "If designed and implemented effectively, transitions can help ensure sustained development and the strengthening of key sectors of a host country."

8. **Challenges and Realities**:
- "A UN peacekeeping operation may not always succeed in reducing the host state's dependency."
- "Withdraw peacekeeping operations are not always taken on the basis of sound assessments of the capacity of the host state to deliver vital public services."

These quotes collectively portray the objectives, methodologies, findings, and implications of the research project regarding UN peacekeeping withdrawals and their effects on host states.

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:90000

1
00:00:00.105 --> 00:00:02.965
Is a research project in progress.

2
00:00:03.825 --> 00:00:07.325
And, it's predicated on the fact

3
00:00:07.325 --> 00:00:10.085
that we know quite a lot about the effects

4
00:00:10.905 --> 00:00:13.165
of peacekeeping UN and otherwise.

5
00:00:13.785 --> 00:00:18.525
But there's been no systematic study of the experiences

6
00:00:18.745 --> 00:00:21.405
of host states in the aftermath

7
00:00:21.425 --> 00:00:23.045
of un peacekeeping withdrawal.

8
00:00:23.805 --> 00:00:26.405
Specifically, what security, economic

9
00:00:26.785 --> 00:00:29.125
and governance conditions obtained

10
00:00:29.745 --> 00:00:31.965
in these states following the withdrawal

11
00:00:31.965 --> 00:00:33.365
of un peacekeeping operations.

12
00:00:33.465 --> 00:00:38.245
So, for instance, do we observe changes in the incidents

13
00:00:38.325 --> 00:00:39.765
of, of violent conflict?

14
00:00:40.195 --> 00:00:44.605
Does economic growth increase, decrease, or remain the same?

15
00:00:45.545 --> 00:00:49.565
Um, how robust is, democracy before and

16
00:00:49.565 --> 00:00:51.805
after, peacekeepers leave?

17
00:00:52.185 --> 00:00:56.165
And what accounts for any variation in the experiences

18
00:00:56.195 --> 00:00:57.205
that we observe?

19
00:00:57.745 --> 00:00:58.805
So the, the project

20
00:00:58.935 --> 00:01:01.405
after exit is an investigation

21
00:01:02.235 --> 00:01:05.285
into the conditions on the ground in host states,

22
00:01:05.665 --> 00:01:10.165
in the aftermath of major UN peacekeeping operations, and a,

23
00:01:10.185 --> 00:01:12.445
and an attempt to understand the role

24
00:01:12.625 --> 00:01:16.965
of n peacekeeping withdrawal in shaping those conditions.

25
00:01:17.385 --> 00:01:19.405
And the project has three broad aims.

26
00:01:20.065 --> 00:01:23.805
Uh, first, given the limited knowledge that we have of post,

27
00:01:24.345 --> 00:01:27.805
exit conditions, our first aim is

28
00:01:27.825 --> 00:01:31.845
to document the conditions in host states following un

29
00:01:31.845 --> 00:01:35.725
peacekeeping withdrawal in each of three areas, security,

30
00:01:36.255 --> 00:01:38.085
governance, and the economy.

31
00:01:39.065 --> 00:01:42.325
The second name is to move beyond mere description

32
00:01:42.325 --> 00:01:45.125
of conditions in former host states and,

33
00:01:45.225 --> 00:01:47.525
and try to understand to, to provide an,

34
00:01:47.525 --> 00:01:51.645
an analytical framework to explain the outcomes

35
00:01:51.645 --> 00:01:55.045
that we observe in these countries following un

36
00:01:55.045 --> 00:01:56.085
peacekeeping withdrawal.

37
00:01:56.745 --> 00:01:58.085
And the third aim is

38
00:01:58.085 --> 00:02:01.245
to provide practitioners within the United Nations

39
00:02:01.345 --> 00:02:05.485
and among donor states, troop contributing countries,

40
00:02:06.025 --> 00:02:08.165
and other actors that are involved in peacekeeping,

41
00:02:08.635 --> 00:02:11.965
provide them with, with an understanding of the impact

42
00:02:12.665 --> 00:02:14.405
of peacekeeping withdrawal, so

43
00:02:14.405 --> 00:02:18.645
that best practice exit strategies can be identified.

44
00:02:18.745 --> 00:02:20.525
So that's, that's a, a,

45
00:02:20.685 --> 00:02:22.565
a broad general description of the project.

46
00:02:22.985 --> 00:02:26.885
We employ a variety of, research methodologies.

47
00:02:27.025 --> 00:02:29.165
We are a team, by the way.

48
00:02:29.355 --> 00:02:30.525
It's not just me alone

49
00:02:31.345 --> 00:02:35.125
and by means of statistical analysis to begin with.

50
00:02:35.575 --> 00:02:39.885
We've examined all large scale un peacekeeping operations

51
00:02:40.115 --> 00:02:43.565
that have been deployed to interstate conflicts

52
00:02:43.565 --> 00:02:46.285
to civil wars since the end of the Cold War.

53
00:02:46.285 --> 00:02:50.885
And that closed by the end of 2012, which gave us a,

54
00:02:50.965 --> 00:02:53.285
a window of 10 years,

55
00:02:53.345 --> 00:02:54.925
to examine conditions on the ground

56
00:02:54.925 --> 00:02:56.445
because we completed our

57
00:02:57.405 --> 00:03:00.405
research in this particular area in, 2022.

58
00:03:01.305 --> 00:03:05.125
And for each of these host states, we examined various peace

59
00:03:05.305 --> 00:03:09.605
and state building indicators, some 22 indicators in total.

60
00:03:10.145 --> 00:03:14.325
And we analyzed weather conditions in,

61
00:03:14.345 --> 00:03:17.005
had changed in three different periods.

62
00:03:17.335 --> 00:03:19.645
First, during the deployment

63
00:03:19.645 --> 00:03:22.885
of the peacekeeping operation, second in the year

64
00:03:22.905 --> 00:03:25.445
of withdrawal of the peacekeeping operation,

65
00:03:25.905 --> 00:03:29.485
and third in the 10 years after closure of the operation.

66
00:03:29.945 --> 00:03:34.445
And we used for this purpose, conventional data sources,

67
00:03:34.495 --> 00:03:39.125
world Development indicators, polity four, freedom House,

68
00:03:39.565 --> 00:03:42.005
UCD, prio and so forth.

69
00:03:42.175 --> 00:03:43.365
These are commonly used.

70
00:03:43.365 --> 00:03:47.205
They'll be, quite familiar to, to researchers.

71
00:03:47.825 --> 00:03:51.685
And they cover, governance, such things as democracy,

72
00:03:52.645 --> 00:03:55.245
elections, corruption, health

73
00:03:55.245 --> 00:03:57.965
and education, such things as literacy

74
00:03:58.305 --> 00:04:03.045
and, life expectancy, the economy, notably GDP,

75
00:04:03.545 --> 00:04:05.365
employment and inequality

76
00:04:05.865 --> 00:04:08.885
and security conflict, rule of law and so forth.

77
00:04:09.385 --> 00:04:11.885
And we've also done, in addition to this,

78
00:04:12.595 --> 00:04:16.085
statistical analysis, we've also done a deep dive

79
00:04:16.705 --> 00:04:19.245
and looked in detail at the experiences

80
00:04:19.625 --> 00:04:23.605
of former host states, three in particular, Liberia,

81
00:04:24.275 --> 00:04:26.005
Cote VO, and Haiti.

82
00:04:26.355 --> 00:04:29.365
Each exhibiting distinctly different post withdrawal

83
00:04:29.905 --> 00:04:30.925
tr trajectories.

84
00:04:31.425 --> 00:04:35.805
And we've collected, relevant data on these countries,

85
00:04:36.465 --> 00:04:40.245
conducted large scale public perception surveys

86
00:04:40.825 --> 00:04:42.845
in these countries, read the official

87
00:04:43.025 --> 00:04:45.925
and expert analysts accounts of the missions.

88
00:04:45.925 --> 00:04:49.805
The UN missions interviewed scores of officials from the UN

89
00:04:49.945 --> 00:04:53.085
and from host states and independent analysts as well.

90
00:04:53.625 --> 00:04:54.725
And the, the knowledge

91
00:04:54.825 --> 00:04:57.325
and data that we've gathered, qualitative

92
00:04:57.345 --> 00:05:00.325
and quantitative has given us a strong grasp

93
00:05:00.465 --> 00:05:03.605
of the conditions that obtained in these countries

94
00:05:03.625 --> 00:05:05.525
and insights into what accounts

95
00:05:05.825 --> 00:05:07.605
for the conditions that we observe.

96
00:05:07.865 --> 00:05:10.925
We do see, a lot of variation in the trajectory

97
00:05:11.105 --> 00:05:12.245
of these host states.

98
00:05:12.705 --> 00:05:17.365
On a, on a positive note, we find that on average,

99
00:05:17.665 --> 00:05:20.405
and we're talking about average effects across all

100
00:05:20.545 --> 00:05:24.685
of the host states that we, we examined on average,

101
00:05:25.625 --> 00:05:29.645
the indicators mostly improve during the deployment

102
00:05:29.645 --> 00:05:31.085
of UN peacekeeping operations.

103
00:05:31.145 --> 00:05:35.925
So, for instance, with regard to democracy, civil liberties

104
00:05:36.595 --> 00:05:40.885
education, GDP protection of civilians in these areas,

105
00:05:41.385 --> 00:05:43.685
we see improvements during the deployment

106
00:05:44.345 --> 00:05:45.685
of UN peacekeepers.

107
00:05:46.505 --> 00:05:49.285
We see that un peacekeeping withdrawal

108
00:05:50.025 --> 00:05:51.245
can have both negative

109
00:05:51.505 --> 00:05:54.845
and positive correlations depending on the question, the,

110
00:05:54.865 --> 00:05:55.885
the country in question.

111
00:05:56.545 --> 00:06:00.245
So, for instance, what's true for Liberia,

112
00:06:00.265 --> 00:06:02.605
is not necessarily true for, for Burundi,

113
00:06:02.945 --> 00:06:04.605
and the conditions also vary

114
00:06:05.395 --> 00:06:08.005
depending on the functional areas.

115
00:06:08.225 --> 00:06:12.845
So a country may experience improvements in the,

116
00:06:13.245 --> 00:06:15.285
I don't know, area of, of security

117
00:06:15.705 --> 00:06:20.365
and decline in another with respect, for instance, to,

118
00:06:20.435 --> 00:06:22.485
democracy or, or, or corruption.

119
00:06:23.105 --> 00:06:24.205
Um, and then

120
00:06:24.535 --> 00:06:27.165
after the, the, closure

121
00:06:27.745 --> 00:06:30.285
of peacekeeping o operations, we,

122
00:06:30.285 --> 00:06:34.005
again observed positive indicators, in GDP

123
00:06:34.525 --> 00:06:37.085
agricultural production, infant mortality,

124
00:06:37.145 --> 00:06:41.005
but also negative trends for several governance indicators

125
00:06:41.635 --> 00:06:44.565
such as electoral indices, civil liberties,

126
00:06:44.705 --> 00:06:48.805
and women's rights proxies in the area of education, as well

127
00:06:48.805 --> 00:06:52.165
as government spending trade and physical integrity.

128
00:06:53.105 --> 00:06:55.645
And this suggests that peacebuilding

129
00:06:55.705 --> 00:06:59.405
and state building are often not consolidated with the end

130
00:06:59.465 --> 00:07:02.405
of a peacekeeping operation, and may even reverse.

131
00:07:02.425 --> 00:07:04.925
And this is very important, to bear in mind.

132
00:07:05.065 --> 00:07:08.445
We devised, an explanatory framework,

133
00:07:08.475 --> 00:07:13.005
that we think captures the dynamics at work in a host state

134
00:07:13.225 --> 00:07:16.085
as peacekeeping missions draw down and close

135
00:07:16.625 --> 00:07:18.845
and helps us to understand the,

136
00:07:18.945 --> 00:07:20.365
the variation that we observe.

137
00:07:20.905 --> 00:07:25.205
The framework focuses on three explanatory factors or,

138
00:07:25.205 --> 00:07:28.005
or variables, one, dependency,

139
00:07:28.865 --> 00:07:30.925
two substitution or mitigation.

140
00:07:31.225 --> 00:07:33.405
And three, the transition process.

141
00:07:34.025 --> 00:07:37.125
And these factors or variables, in our view,

142
00:07:37.225 --> 00:07:39.845
inform the likelihood that peace

143
00:07:40.105 --> 00:07:43.565
and state building indicators were, I will either decline,

144
00:07:44.185 --> 00:07:46.325
remain the same or improve

145
00:07:46.895 --> 00:07:49.485
after peacekeepers exit a host state.

146
00:07:49.585 --> 00:07:52.125
So let me just explain in a, a little more detail.

147
00:07:52.915 --> 00:07:56.485
When a large scale mission leaves, there's a danger

148
00:07:56.875 --> 00:07:58.125
that the withdrawal

149
00:07:58.125 --> 00:08:00.805
of the operation will create institutional gaps

150
00:08:01.545 --> 00:08:03.605
in the pre provision of public services.

151
00:08:03.865 --> 00:08:07.085
In, in many of the areas that we're looking at, where

152
00:08:07.205 --> 00:08:10.205
that is indeed the case, progress in peace

153
00:08:10.345 --> 00:08:13.125
and state building is susceptible to backsliding.

154
00:08:13.825 --> 00:08:16.645
Now two conditions broadly inform the vulnerability

155
00:08:16.825 --> 00:08:20.365
or conversely, the resilience of a host state in the face

156
00:08:20.365 --> 00:08:21.405
of a peacekeeping exit.

157
00:08:21.785 --> 00:08:25.765
And those are, first, the degree to which the host state

158
00:08:25.765 --> 00:08:27.725
and its population are dependent

159
00:08:28.345 --> 00:08:31.005
on support from the peacekeeping mission in providing

160
00:08:31.725 --> 00:08:32.965
security governance and,

161
00:08:33.025 --> 00:08:35.885
and economic well-being at the point

162
00:08:35.945 --> 00:08:37.685
of peacekeeping exit at the time

163
00:08:37.685 --> 00:08:39.205
that the peacekeepers are leaving.

164
00:08:39.745 --> 00:08:43.825
And secondly, where host states are dependent,

165
00:08:44.295 --> 00:08:45.505
whether the UN

166
00:08:45.925 --> 00:08:50.265
or other external actors are able to substitute for any

167
00:08:50.265 --> 00:08:52.825
of the vital roles that the peacekeeping operation was

168
00:08:52.825 --> 00:08:56.125
playing or help to mitigate the need for them.

169
00:08:56.625 --> 00:08:59.725
And there's a third factor, the nature of the transition,

170
00:08:59.725 --> 00:09:03.005
the nature of the withdrawal process, that's a,

171
00:09:03.085 --> 00:09:06.205
a mediating factor, which if managed effectively

172
00:09:07.025 --> 00:09:08.685
can moderate levels of dependency

173
00:09:08.685 --> 00:09:12.685
and facilitate the introduction of substitution arrangements

174
00:09:12.705 --> 00:09:14.805
or mitigation that are tailored

175
00:09:14.905 --> 00:09:16.765
to the specific needs of the host country.

176
00:09:17.345 --> 00:09:21.125
Now, if the transition processes are inadequate or,

177
00:09:21.225 --> 00:09:22.245
or poorly managed,

178
00:09:22.635 --> 00:09:26.205
then any dependency may remain when the time comes

179
00:09:26.265 --> 00:09:27.285
for the mission to close,

180
00:09:27.785 --> 00:09:30.685
and the host country will be vulnerable to decline.

181
00:09:30.745 --> 00:09:33.805
So in short, the less dependent

182
00:09:34.485 --> 00:09:37.205
a host country is at the time of peacekeeping withdrawal,

183
00:09:37.785 --> 00:09:40.605
the greater the likelihood of continuity

184
00:09:40.665 --> 00:09:43.525
or improvement in the areas that I've, that I've mentioned.

185
00:09:43.945 --> 00:09:45.685
But where dependency is strong,

186
00:09:46.345 --> 00:09:49.725
if there's a suitable substitution of the UN mission,

187
00:09:50.225 --> 00:09:52.165
for instance, a, a successor mission

188
00:09:52.505 --> 00:09:56.525
or a regional operation, if there's a suitable substitution

189
00:09:56.625 --> 00:10:00.765
or mitigation of the dependency, the likelihood

190
00:10:00.765 --> 00:10:03.245
of continuity or improvement will also be higher.

191
00:10:03.385 --> 00:10:05.485
So let me, let me illustrate with, with an example.

192
00:10:05.765 --> 00:10:07.205
I think East Timor team

193
00:10:07.205 --> 00:10:10.645
or less stays a good example of the, the dynamic

194
00:10:10.795 --> 00:10:11.805
that I'm describing.

195
00:10:11.945 --> 00:10:16.645
So Timor was, a Portuguese colony, a Portuguese colony,

196
00:10:16.645 --> 00:10:21.125
which, Indonesia invaded and annexed in 1976.

197
00:10:22.185 --> 00:10:24.325
And with the help of the United Nations,

198
00:10:25.015 --> 00:10:28.485
Timor achieved independence in 2002,

199
00:10:29.465 --> 00:10:31.205
but prior to and

200
00:10:31.295 --> 00:10:35.805
after it achieved independence, Timor was highly dependent

201
00:10:36.425 --> 00:10:38.285
on the UN for the provision

202
00:10:38.285 --> 00:10:40.845
of security both internally and externally.

203
00:10:41.305 --> 00:10:43.565
So much so that when,

204
00:10:43.565 --> 00:10:46.845
the UN peacekeeping operation withdrew,

205
00:10:47.215 --> 00:10:50.605
unset in 2005, the capacity

206
00:10:51.145 --> 00:10:52.765
of the Timorese police and with

207
00:10:52.785 --> 00:10:54.645
and military was still too weak

208
00:10:55.145 --> 00:10:57.365
to sustain peace and security.

209
00:10:58.385 --> 00:11:00.845
And within a year of the UN withdrawal,

210
00:11:01.335 --> 00:11:03.125
Timor suffered a breakdown of order

211
00:11:03.785 --> 00:11:05.725
and an outbreak of violence.

212
00:11:06.425 --> 00:11:07.805
So, what happened

213
00:11:07.805 --> 00:11:09.885
as a consequence was the United Nations had

214
00:11:09.885 --> 00:11:12.965
to deploy a new peacekeeping force unmet,

215
00:11:13.425 --> 00:11:16.365
and with the deployment of that force,

216
00:11:16.795 --> 00:11:18.965
extensive security sector reforms,

217
00:11:19.685 --> 00:11:21.125
capacity building programs,

218
00:11:21.745 --> 00:11:25.365
and, the facilitation of regional security op,

219
00:11:25.365 --> 00:11:28.285
cooperation by the UN saw,

220
00:11:28.515 --> 00:11:32.205
Timor's dependency on the UN peacekeeping operation

221
00:11:32.265 --> 00:11:34.445
for security at least reduce over time

222
00:11:35.295 --> 00:11:39.045
until a point when primary responsibility for

223
00:11:39.565 --> 00:11:41.765
managing security for the provision of security

224
00:11:42.415 --> 00:11:45.485
could be transferred, to the state authorities

225
00:11:45.485 --> 00:11:46.685
before the mission closed.

226
00:11:47.225 --> 00:11:50.525
Now, how did the UN know that Timor achieved,

227
00:11:51.025 --> 00:11:54.445
had been able to overcome the barriers to sustainable peace?

228
00:11:55.185 --> 00:11:59.285
The, the UN undertook a thorough capacity mapping

229
00:12:00.025 --> 00:12:02.605
and, rigorous monitoring, monitoring

230
00:12:02.865 --> 00:12:06.565
of timor's progress, thus making it possible for the UN

231
00:12:06.565 --> 00:12:10.485
to transfer responsibility for security to the Timorese

232
00:12:10.755 --> 00:12:12.325
with a fairly high level

233
00:12:12.385 --> 00:12:15.725
of confidence in the country's ability

234
00:12:15.785 --> 00:12:17.485
to sustain, to sustain peace.

235
00:12:18.025 --> 00:12:21.325
And I liken this to the, the stress tests

236
00:12:21.915 --> 00:12:24.765
that banks in many countries have been subject

237
00:12:24.785 --> 00:12:29.605
to since the global financial crisis of 2008, to,

238
00:12:29.985 --> 00:12:33.885
evaluate the resilience of these banks,

239
00:12:34.295 --> 00:12:36.525
under adverse economic conditions.

240
00:12:37.065 --> 00:12:41.205
And as a consequence of the, the reduction of dependency

241
00:12:42.005 --> 00:12:43.925
security continued to be sustained

242
00:12:43.925 --> 00:12:46.885
and t more continued to this day,

243
00:12:46.885 --> 00:12:49.045
after the withdrawal of the U peacekeepers.

244
00:12:49.065 --> 00:12:51.845
We haven't seen, any,

245
00:12:51.845 --> 00:12:56.325
significant violence in the country, since, since the,

246
00:12:56.425 --> 00:12:57.925
the, the un redeployed there.

247
00:12:57.985 --> 00:12:59.685
As I've already kind of alluded to, I think

248
00:12:59.685 --> 00:13:03.005
that the key lesson is sound transitional planning.

249
00:13:03.005 --> 00:13:06.365
That's really important. So if designed and,

250
00:13:06.665 --> 00:13:10.765
and implemented well, transition plans can help to manage,

251
00:13:11.065 --> 00:13:15.565
vulnerabilities and help to ensure sustained development

252
00:13:15.625 --> 00:13:20.045
and the strengthening of key sectors of a host country in,

253
00:13:20.105 --> 00:13:23.765
in many areas of security governance and, and the economy.

254
00:13:23.985 --> 00:13:26.925
So, to come back to Timor as an example,

255
00:13:27.185 --> 00:13:31.525
the UN's withdrawal, is I think an, an an illustration

256
00:13:31.525 --> 00:13:34.565
of best practice in terms of transition planning.

257
00:13:35.635 --> 00:13:38.205
Omit the operation that was redeployed

258
00:13:38.535 --> 00:13:43.365
after the collapse of security, was thorough in terms of

259
00:13:44.005 --> 00:13:47.405
capacity mapping, planning a gradual withdrawal,

260
00:13:48.055 --> 00:13:51.125
generating benchmarks to monitor progress.

261
00:13:51.625 --> 00:13:53.805
And following those, benchmarks,

262
00:13:53.805 --> 00:13:55.285
carefully tracking progress.

263
00:13:55.425 --> 00:13:58.525
And the outcome was positive across the three piece

264
00:13:58.545 --> 00:14:00.605
and state building indicators that I,

265
00:14:00.765 --> 00:14:04.285
I I mentioned the pillars of,

266
00:14:05.165 --> 00:14:06.805
security governance and, and the economy.

267
00:14:07.465 --> 00:14:09.645
And Timor wasn't alone in this regard.

268
00:14:09.915 --> 00:14:13.965
Liberia followed many similar practices, il

269
00:14:13.965 --> 00:14:16.805
the peacekeeping operation there gradually downsized

270
00:14:17.005 --> 00:14:19.125
peacekeeping troops over 10 years.

271
00:14:19.825 --> 00:14:21.445
It followed a phased approach

272
00:14:21.985 --> 00:14:24.965
and transferred responsibility for, security

273
00:14:25.025 --> 00:14:27.445
to Liberian forces two years

274
00:14:27.665 --> 00:14:29.805
before the peacekeeping operation closed.

275
00:14:29.805 --> 00:14:34.765
So it gave it an opportunity to observe how well the,

276
00:14:34.945 --> 00:14:37.565
the Liberian security forces were able

277
00:14:37.565 --> 00:14:39.365
to manage their own own security.

278
00:14:39.705 --> 00:14:43.085
So I think it's another good example of,

279
00:14:43.085 --> 00:14:45.125
broadly well-planned and,

280
00:14:45.185 --> 00:14:47.085
and managed transition, at least in the,

281
00:14:47.085 --> 00:14:48.165
in the security sector.

282
00:14:48.825 --> 00:14:50.965
Now, of course, a un peacekeeping

283
00:14:51.045 --> 00:14:54.485
Operation may not always succeed in,

284
00:14:54.545 --> 00:14:56.645
in reducing the host state's dependency.

285
00:14:57.185 --> 00:14:59.885
The, the mandate, the peacekeeping mandate may not be

286
00:14:59.885 --> 00:15:00.885
appropriately designed.

287
00:15:01.465 --> 00:15:04.125
Uh, the mission may be under-resourced,

288
00:15:04.125 --> 00:15:07.285
the host state may be unwilling, or uncooperative.

289
00:15:07.905 --> 00:15:09.885
Uh, all these things are possible, and,

290
00:15:09.905 --> 00:15:12.445
and there may be some conflict situations, frankly,

291
00:15:12.875 --> 00:15:16.005
that are intractable at least for a, a period of time.

292
00:15:16.665 --> 00:15:20.565
We also know that the decisions to, to draw down

293
00:15:20.585 --> 00:15:24.005
and withdraw peacekeeping operations are not always taken on

294
00:15:24.005 --> 00:15:27.845
the basis of sound assessments of the capacity

295
00:15:27.845 --> 00:15:31.205
of the host state to deliver, vital public services.

296
00:15:31.715 --> 00:15:35.085
Sometimes the, the UN Security Council decides to,

297
00:15:35.465 --> 00:15:38.445
to reconfigure a peacekeeping operation

298
00:15:38.445 --> 00:15:40.885
because of budgetary concerns or

299
00:15:40.885 --> 00:15:44.085
because a key member state has competing priorities.

300
00:15:44.375 --> 00:15:46.285
These are realities, realities that we,

301
00:15:46.465 --> 00:15:47.605
we have to accommodate.

302
00:15:48.225 --> 00:15:51.685
But this doesn't, I think, undermine the validity,

303
00:15:51.905 --> 00:15:56.605
and I'd add the utility of the explanatory framework that I,

304
00:15:56.725 --> 00:15:58.845
I just described for the purpose of,

305
00:15:59.065 --> 00:16:01.245
of understanding the trajectories

306
00:16:01.265 --> 00:16:05.165
of host states when peacekeeping operations withdraw.

307
00:16:05.555 --> 00:16:08.125
It's not rocket science, it's just a way

308
00:16:08.225 --> 00:16:10.525
of understanding the local dynamics

309
00:16:10.835 --> 00:16:13.045
that highlights the opportunities for

310
00:16:13.605 --> 00:16:14.285
constructive engagement.

Investigating Post-Peacekeeping Withdrawal Effects

00:00:00 - Is a research project in progress. And, it's predicated on the fact that we know quite a lot about the effects of peacekeeping UN and otherwise. But there's been no systematic study of the experiences of host states in the aftermath of un peacekeeping withdrawal. Specifically, what security, economic and governance conditions obtained in these states following the withdrawal

00:00:33 - So, for instance, do we observe changes in the incidents of, of violent conflict? Does economic growth increase, decrease, or remain the same? how robust is, democracy before and after, peacekeepers leave? And what accounts for any variation in the experiences that we observe? So the, the project after exit is an investigation

00:01:05 - in the aftermath of major UN peacekeeping operations, and a, and an attempt to understand the role of n peacekeeping withdrawal in shaping those conditions. And the project has three broad aims. first, given the limited knowledge that we have of post, exit conditions, our first aim is to document the conditions in host states following un peacekeeping withdrawal in each of three areas, security,

Analyzing Outcomes of UN Peacekeeping Withdrawal

00:01:39 - The second name is to move beyond mere description of conditions in former host states and, and try to understand to, to provide an, an analytical framework to explain the outcomes that we observe in these countries following un peacekeeping withdrawal. And the third aim is to provide practitioners within the United Nations and among donor states, troop contributing countries, and other actors that are involved in peacekeeping,

00:02:12 - of peacekeeping withdrawal, so that best practice exit strategies can be identified. So that's, that's a, a, a broad general description of the project. We employ a variety of, research methodologies. We are a team, by the way. It's not just me alone and by means of statistical analysis to begin with. We've examined all large scale un peacekeeping operations

00:02:43 - to civil wars since the end of the Cold War. And that closed by the end of 2012, which gave us a, a window of 10 years, to examine conditions on the ground because we completed our research in this particular area in, 2022. And for each of these host states, we examined various peace and state building indicators, some 22 indicators in total.

Analyzing Post-Peacekeeping Conditions: A Three-Phase Study

00:03:14 - had changed in three different periods. First, during the deployment of the peacekeeping operation, second in the year of withdrawal of the peacekeeping operation, and third in the 10 years after closure of the operation. And we used for this purpose, conventional data sources, world Development indicators, polity four, freedom House, UCD, prio and so forth.

00:03:43 - They'll be, quite familiar to, to researchers. And they cover, governance, such things as democracy, elections, corruption, health and education, such things as literacy and, life expectancy, the economy, notably GDP, employment and inequality and security conflict, rule of law and so forth. And we've also done, in addition to this,

00:04:16 - and looked in detail at the experiences of former host states, three in particular, Liberia, Cote VO, and Haiti. Each exhibiting distinctly different post withdrawal tr trajectories. And we've collected, relevant data on these countries, conducted large scale public perception surveys in these countries, read the official

Assessing Variations in Host State Conditions Post-UN Peacekeeping

00:04:45 - The UN missions interviewed scores of officials from the UN and from host states and independent analysts as well. And the, the knowledge and data that we've gathered, qualitative and quantitative has given us a strong grasp of the conditions that obtained in these countries and insights into what accounts for the conditions that we observe. We do see, a lot of variation in the trajectory of these host states. On a, on a positive note, we find that on average,

00:05:20 - of the host states that we, we examined on average, the indicators mostly improve during the deployment of UN peacekeeping operations. So, for instance, with regard to democracy, civil liberties education, GDP protection of civilians in these areas, we see improvements during the deployment of UN peacekeepers. We see that un peacekeeping withdrawal

00:05:51 - and positive correlations depending on the question, the, the country in question. So, for instance, what's true for Liberia, is not necessarily true for, for Burundi, and the conditions also vary depending on the functional areas. So a country may experience improvements in the, I don't know, area of, of security and decline in another with respect, for instance, to,

Post-Peacekeeping Outcomes: Economic Progress vs. Governance Decline

00:06:23 - and then after the, the, closure of peacekeeping o operations, we, again observed positive indicators, in GDP agricultural production, infant mortality, but also negative trends for several governance indicators such as electoral indices, civil liberties, and women's rights proxies in the area of education, as well as government spending trade and physical integrity.

00:06:55 - and state building are often not consolidated with the end of a peacekeeping operation, and may even reverse. And this is very important, to bear in mind. We devised, an explanatory framework, that we think captures the dynamics at work in a host state as peacekeeping missions draw down and close and helps us to understand the, the variation that we observe. The framework focuses on three explanatory factors or,

00:07:28 - two substitution or mitigation. And three, the transition process. And these factors or variables, in our view, inform the likelihood that peace and state building indicators were, I will either decline, remain the same or improve after peacekeepers exit a host state. So let me just explain in a, a little more detail. When a large scale mission leaves, there's a danger

Understanding Host State Resilience Post-Peacekeeping Withdrawal

00:07:58 - of the operation will create institutional gaps in the pre provision of public services. In, in many of the areas that we're looking at, where that is indeed the case, progress in peace and state building is susceptible to backsliding. Now two conditions broadly inform the vulnerability or conversely, the resilience of a host state in the face of a peacekeeping exit. And those are, first, the degree to which the host state and its population are dependent

00:08:31 - security governance and, and economic well-being at the point of peacekeeping exit at the time that the peacekeepers are leaving. And secondly, where host states are dependent, whether the UN or other external actors are able to substitute for any of the vital roles that the peacekeeping operation was playing or help to mitigate the need for them. And there's a third factor, the nature of the transition,

00:09:03 - a mediating factor, which if managed effectively can moderate levels of dependency and facilitate the introduction of substitution arrangements or mitigation that are tailored to the specific needs of the host country. Now, if the transition processes are inadequate or, or poorly managed, then any dependency may remain when the time comes for the mission to close, and the host country will be vulnerable to decline.

Post-Peacekeeping Withdrawal: The Case of East Timor

00:09:34 - a host country is at the time of peacekeeping withdrawal, the greater the likelihood of continuity or improvement in the areas that I've, that I've mentioned. But where dependency is strong, if there's a suitable substitution of the UN mission, for instance, a, a successor mission or a regional operation, if there's a suitable substitution or mitigation of the dependency, the likelihood

00:10:03 - So let me, let me illustrate with, with an example. I think East Timor team or less stays a good example of the, the dynamic that I'm describing. So Timor was, a Portuguese colony, a Portuguese colony, which, Indonesia invaded and annexed in 1976. And with the help of the United Nations, Timor achieved independence in 2002, but prior to and

00:10:36 - on the UN for the provision of security both internally and externally. So much so that when, the UN peacekeeping operation withdrew, unset in 2005, the capacity of the Timorese police and with and military was still too weak to sustain peace and security. And within a year of the UN withdrawal,

Timor's Path to Sustainable Peace: UN Peacekeeping and Transition Dynamics

00:11:03 - and an outbreak of violence. So, what happened as a consequence was the United Nations had to deploy a new peacekeeping force unmet, and with the deployment of that force, extensive security sector reforms, capacity building programs, and, the facilitation of regional security op, cooperation by the UN saw, Timor's dependency on the UN peacekeeping operation

00:11:35 - until a point when primary responsibility for managing security for the provision of security could be transferred, to the state authorities before the mission closed. Now, how did the UN know that Timor achieved, had been able to overcome the barriers to sustainable peace? The, the UN undertook a thorough capacity mapping and, rigorous monitoring, monitoring

00:12:06 - to transfer responsibility for security to the Timorese with a fairly high level of confidence in the country's ability to sustain, to sustain peace. And I liken this to the, the stress tests that banks in many countries have been subject to since the global financial crisis of 2008, to, evaluate the resilience of these banks,

Importance of Sound Transitional Planning in Post-Peacekeeping Contexts

00:12:37 - And as a consequence of the, the reduction of dependency security continued to be sustained and t more continued to this day, after the withdrawal of the U peacekeepers. We haven't seen, any, significant violence in the country, since, since the, the, the un redeployed there. As I've already kind of alluded to, I think that the key lesson is sound transitional planning. That's really important. So if designed and,

00:13:11 - vulnerabilities and help to ensure sustained development and the strengthening of key sectors of a host country in, in many areas of security governance and, and the economy. So, to come back to Timor as an example, the UN's withdrawal, is I think an, an an illustration of best practice in terms of transition planning. Omit the operation that was redeployed

00:13:44 - capacity mapping, planning a gradual withdrawal, generating benchmarks to monitor progress. And following those, benchmarks, carefully tracking progress. And the outcome was positive across the three piece and state building indicators that I, I I mentioned the pillars of, security governance and, and the economy. And Timor wasn't alone in this regard.

Challenges and Considerations in Peacekeeping Transitions

00:14:13 - the peacekeeping operation there gradually downsized peacekeeping troops over 10 years. It followed a phased approach and transferred responsibility for, security to Liberian forces two years before the peacekeeping operation closed. So it gave it an opportunity to observe how well the, the Liberian security forces were able to manage their own own security. So I think it's another good example of,

00:14:45 - and managed transition, at least in the, in the security sector. Now, of course, a un peacekeeping Operation may not always succeed in, in reducing the host state's dependency. The, the mandate, the peacekeeping mandate may not be appropriately designed. the mission may be under-resourced, the host state may be unwilling, or uncooperative. all these things are possible, and, and there may be some conflict situations, frankly, that are intractable at least for a, a period of time.

00:15:20 - and withdraw peacekeeping operations are not always taken on the basis of sound assessments of the capacity of the host state to deliver, vital public services. Sometimes the, the UN Security Council decides to, to reconfigure a peacekeeping operation because of budgetary concerns or because a key member state has competing priorities. These are realities, realities that we, we have to accommodate.

Understanding Host State Dynamics Post-Peacekeeping Withdrawal

00:16:13 - and I'd add the utility of the explanatory framework that I, I just described for the purpose of, of understanding the trajectories of host states when peacekeeping operations withdraw. It's not rocket science, it's just a way of understanding the local dynamics that highlights the opportunities for constructive engagement.

Faculti AI can make mistakes

Research

Policy

Analysis

Data

Originals

Explainers

Podcasts

Faculti

New on Faculti

Idea Explorer

Exploratory Questions

Faculti AI Answers

Research Summaries

After Exit

Next in International Relations