About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

15 Int'l Peacekeeping 1 (2008)

handle is hein.journals/intlpkpg15 and id is 1 raw text is: OVERVIEW Introduction - The US Role in Contemporary Peace Operations: A Double-Edged Sword? IAN JOHNSTONE and ETHAN CORBIN As the globe's dominant power with interests and influence around the world, the United States has been an essential yet uneasy partner in peace operations. This article considers three contemporary challenges that illustrate the double-edged nature of US involvement: the increasingly robust nature of peace operations, the importance of long-term political engagement, and the need for new institutional partnerships to meet increasing demand. The United States is uniquely capable of facilitating success in all three areas, yet its global status tends to raise questions about the motives of US involvement in peace operations and its ability to serve collective purposes. US involvement in peace operations is a double-edged sword. The United States can shape the size, scope and degree of success of many operations, yet because of its influence and interests around the world, its motives tend to be greeted with suspicion. As peace operations have become more robust and intrusive, the dilemma has worsened. The use of force by any state is controversial; when used by the world's dominant power, it is doubly so. Long-term political engage- ment in peacebuilding is always sensitive; when the principal 'nation-builder' is the United States, fears of ulterior motives are bound to be more acute. This dilemma relates to its own ambivalent engagement with multilateral institutions, particularly the UN.1 The United States was an enthusiastic creator of the UN and NATO, and has been influential in shaping other organizations that engage in peace operations, including the European Union (EU) and the African Union (AU). Yet American leaders have been reluctant to have their hands tied by inter- national rules, or to strengthen international institutions that may inhibit their ability to operate bilaterally or through ad hoc coalitions. The result is a peace operations policy that has fluctuated between entrepreneurial leadership and outright disdain. This special issue of International Peacekeeping is the first volume-length attempt to assess the complex US relationship with peace operations. The pendulum in US government and military circles has swung back to a keen interest in the success of the enterprise, not least because of the hard lessons being learned in Afghanistan and Iraq. Meanwhile, peace operations have become a priority in foreign policy for many states in the global North and South, both traditional peace- keepers and new participants. This surge of national interest has had a transforma- tive effect on peacekeeping organizations, most of which are facing growing International Peacekeeping, Vol.15, No.1, February 2008, pp.1-17 ISSN 1353-3312 print/1743-906X online DOI:10.1080/13533310701879845 © 2008 Taylor & Francis

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most