Richmond: The Grand Design: The Evolution of the International Peace Architecture

Oliver P. Richmond (Univ. of Manchester - International Relations) has published The Grand Design: The Evolution of the International Peace Architecture (Oxford Univ. Press 2022). Here's the abstract:

The guiding principle of peacemaking and peacebuilding over the past quarter century has been "liberal peace": the promotion of democracy, capitalism, law, and respect for human rights. These components represent a historic effort to prevent a reoccurrence of the nationalism, fascism, and economic collapse that led to the World Wars as well as many later conflicts. Ultimately, this strategy has been somewhat successful in reducing war between countries, but it has failed to produce legitimate and sustainable forms of peace at the domestic level. The goals of peacebuilding have changed over time and place, but they have always been built around compromise via processes of intervention aimed at supporting "progress" in conflict-affected countries. They have simultaneously promoted changes in the regional and global order.

As Oliver P. Richmond argues in this book, the concept of peace has evolved continuously through several eras: from the imperial era, through the states-system, liberal, and current neoliberal eras of states and markets. It holds the prospect of developing further through the emerging "digital" era of transnational networks, new technologies, and heightened mobility. Yet, as recent studies have shown, only a minority of modern peace agreements survive for more than a few years and many peace agreements and peacebuilding missions have become intractable, blocked, or frozen. This casts a shadow on the legitimacy, stability, and effectiveness of the overall international peace architecture, reflecting significant problems in the evolution of an often violently contested international and domestic order.

This book examines the development of the international peace architecture, a "grand design" comprising various subsequent attempts to develop a peaceful international order. Richmond examines six main theoretical-historical stages in this process often addressed through peacekeeping and international mediation, including the balance of power mechanism of the 19th Century, liberal internationalism after World War I, and the expansion of rights and decolonization after World War II. It also includes liberal peacebuilding after the end of the Cold War, neoliberal statebuilding during the 2000s, and an as yet unresolved current "digital" stage. They have produced a substantial, though fragile, international peace architecture. However, it is always entangled with, and hindered by, blockages and a more substantial counter-peace framework. The Grand Design provides a sweeping look at the troubled history of peace processes, peacemaking, peacekeeping, and peacebuilding, and their effects on the evolution of international order. It also considers what the next stage may bring.

Fox: Old and New Peace Agreements

Gregory H. Fox (Wayne State Univ. - Law) has posted Old and New Peace Agreements (Seton Hall Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

What should international law make of peace agreements? In the Nineteenth Century, when treaties regularly ended inter-state armed conflicts (IACs), the answer was easy. Peace agreements were binding treaties whose terms could be freely dictated by the winning side. Peace agreements also signaled that a series of rules specific to wartime were no longer operable. Contemporary peace agreements share neither of these characteristics. This is because they largely end non-international armed conflicts (NIACs). Agreements between governments and rebels do not meet the definition of a binding treaty. And IAC agreements’ signaling function has long passed into obsolescence. How then, if at all, do new NIAC peace agreements engage with international law?

This article argues that international law has become critical to their genesis in two respects. First, the agreements parallel international law’s concern with governance issues by restructuring domestic institutions. Their governance focus is the logical consequence of international law’s refusal to “resolve” NIACs through large-scale and violent changes to national borders or demographic profiles. Former combatants must live with each other and NIAC agreements seek to structure their peaceful co-existence.

Second, all stages of NIAC agreements have become heavily multilateralized. International actors wield incentives and sanctions from the onset of conflict through the agreements’ implementation. In so doing, they radically expand the factors militating toward a peace settlement. These added factors, especially those providing a “credible commitment” of enforcing the agreement, reconfigure the parties’ incentives as to whether or not a negotiated end to conflict will serve their interests.

Weller, Retter, & Varga: International Law and Peace Settlements

Marc Weller (Univ. of Cambridge - Law), Mark Retter, & Andrea Varga have published International Law and Peace Settlements (Cambridge Univ. Press 2021). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

International Law and Peace Settlements provides a systematic and comprehensive assessment of the relationship between international law and peace settlement practice across core settlement issues, e.g. transitional justice, human rights, refugees, self-determination, power-sharing, and wealth-sharing. The contributions address key cross-cutting questions on the legal status of peace agreements, the potential for developing international law, and the role of key actors – such as non-state armed groups, third-state witnesses and guarantors, and the UN Security Council – in the legalisation and internationalisation of settlement commitments. In recent years, significant scholarly work has examined facets of the relationship between international law and peace settlements, through concepts such as jus post bellum and lex pacificatoria. International Law and Peace Settlements drives forward the debate on the legalisation and internationalisation of peace agreements with diverse contributions from leading academics and practitioners in international law and conflict resolution.

Nouwen, James, & Srinivasan: Making and Breaking Peace in Sudan and South Sudan: The Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Beyond

Sarah M. H. Nouwen (European Univ. Institute), Laura M. James (Oxford Analytica), & Sharath Srinivasan (Univ. of Cambridge - Politics and International Studies) have published Making and Breaking Peace in Sudan and South Sudan: The Comprehensive Peace Agreement and Beyond (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Sudan's Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005 ended over two decades of civil war and led to South Sudan's independence. Peacemaking that brought about the agreement and then sought to sustain it involved, alongside the Sudanese, an array of regional and western states as well as international organisations. This was a landmark effort to create and sustain peace in a war-torn region. Yet in the years that followed, multiple conflicts continued or reignited, both in Sudan and in South Sudan. Peacemaking attempts multiplied. Authored by both practitioners and scholars, this volume grapples with the question of which, and whose, ideas of peace and of peacemaking were pursued in the Sudans and how they fared. Bringing together economic, legal, anthropological and political science perspectives on over a decade of peacemaking attempts in the two countries, it provides insights for peacemaking efforts to come, in the Sudans and elsewhere.

Stahn & Iverson: Just Peace After Conflict: Jus Post Bellum and the Justice of Peace

Carsten Stahn (Leiden Univ. - Law) & Jens Iverson (Leiden Univ. - Law) have published Just Peace After Conflict: Jus Post Bellum and the Justice of Peace (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

The interplay between peace and justice plays an important role in any contemporary conflict. Peace can be described in a variety ways, as being 'negative' or 'positive', 'liberal' or 'democratic'. But what is it that makes a peace just? This book draws together leading scholars to study this concept of a 'just peace', analysing different elements of the transition from conflict to peace.

The volume covers six core themes: conceptual approaches towards just peace, macro-principles, the nexus to security and stability, protection of persons and public goods, rule of law, and economic reform and accountability. Contributions engage with understudied issues, such as the pros and cons of robust UN mandates, the link between environmental protection and indigenous peoples, the treatment of illegal settlements, the feasibility of vetting practices, and the protection of labour rights in post-conflict economies. Overall, the book puts forward a case that just peace requires not only negotiation, agreement, and compromise, but contextual understandings of law, multiple dimensions of justice, and strategies of prevention.

Wählisch: Peacemaking, Power-sharing and International Law: Imperfect Peace

Martin Wählisch has published Peacemaking, Power-sharing and International Law: Imperfect Peace (Hart Publishing 2019). Here's the abstract:

This monograph provides a contemporary analysis of the frictions between peacemaking and international human rights law based on the cases of postconflict power-sharing in Lebanon and Bosnia-Herzegovina. In this context it evaluates the long-standing debate in the United Nations and human rights bodies about the 'imperfect peace'. Written from a practitioner–scholarly viewpoint and drawing from new authentic sources, the book describes the mechanisms used in peace agreements and post-conflict constitutions for managing ethnic or religious diversity, explains their legal limits under international human rights law, and provides a conceptual framework for analysing the nexus between law and peacemaking. The book argues that the relationship between the content of peace agreements and post-conflict constitutions, their negotiation process and the element of time, needs to be untangled to better understand the legal limits of statebuilding in the aftermath of armed conflict. It is a key resource for scholars in human rights law and peace and conflict studies, advisers in peace processes, constitution-makers, and peace mediators.