Abstract
This chapter describes the ‘dark mood’ among the experts of peacebuilding and draws attention to the paradoxical nature of that mood. Of the various domains of contemporary peace research and peace practice, ‘peacebuilding’ has by far access to the most institutional resources and yet ‘peacebuilding,’ sometimes appears as if in mourning. The comparison with such scholarship as that on ‘pacifism’ or even on ‘nuclear elimination’ is glaring. Although one might argue that these latter projects are more fanciful, that their champions are fighting a losing battle, the optimistic mood that marks those endeavors must strike any observer, especially in comparison with the ‘dark mood’ among a large part of the peacebuilding experts. This introductory chapter will describe this dark mood as it transpires in recent scholarship, identifies the causes of that mood, and reflects on the future of peacebuilding. It predicts the perseverance of peacebuilding and recommends that it adopts a more restrained posture.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnett, M. (2009). Evolution without progress: Humanitarianism in a world of hurt. International Organization, 63(4), 621–663.
Call, C., & de Coning, C. (Eds.). (2017). Rising powers and peacebuilding: Breaking the mold. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chandler, D. (2017). Peacebuilding: The twenty years’ crisis, 1997–2017. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Duffield, M. (2010). Risk-management and the fortified aid compound: Everyday life in post-inventionary society. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 4(4), 453–474.
Gizelis, T.-I. (2009). Gender empowerment and United Nations peacebuilding. Journal of Peace Research, 46(4), 505–523.
Goetze, C. (2017). The distinction of peace: A social analysis of peacebuilding. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Hobson, C. (2015). The rise of democracy: Revolution, war, and transformations in international politics since 1776. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Hobson, C. (2016). Responding to failure: The responsibility to protect after Libya. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 44(3), 433–454.
Holanda Maschieto, R. (2016). Problematizing the “local” in peacebuilding. International Peacekeeping, 23(3), 505–512.
Krebs, H. (2014). Responsibility, legitimacy, morality: Chinese humanitarianism in historical perspective (Working Paper). London: HPG. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9139.pdf. Accessed 5 March 2020.
Kustermans, J., Sauer, T., & Segaert, B. (Eds.). (2019). Pacifism’s appeal: Ethos, history, politics. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lake, D. (2016). The statebuilder’s dilemma: On the limits of foreign intervention. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
MacGinty, R. (2014). Everyday peace: Bottom-up and local agency in conflict-affected society. Security Dialogue, 45(6), 548–564.
Mill, J. S. (1879). Utilitarianism. London: Longman, Green and Co. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/11224/11224-h/11224-h.htm. Accessed 5 March 2020.
O’Meara, W. (2015). The Aristotelian principle in Mill and Kant. Athens Journal of Humanities & Arts, 2(1), 9–18.
Orford, A. (2011). International authority and the responsibility to protect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Patomäki, H. (2006). Realist ontology for future studies. Journal of Critical Realism, 5(1), 1–31.
Reus-Smit, C. (1999). The moral purpose of the state: Culture, social identity, and institutional rationality in international relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Ring, L. (2006). Everyday peace in a Karachi apartment building. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Saint Augustine. (2004). City of God. London: Penguin.
Sauer, T., Kustermans, J., & Segaert, B. (Eds.). (2020). Non-nuclear peace: Beyond the nuclear ban treaty. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sending, O. J. (2015). The politics of expertise: Competing for authority in global governance. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Steele, B. (2019). Restraint in international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
von Billerbeck, S., & Tansey, O. (2019). Enabling autocracy? Peacebuilding and post-conflict authoritarianism in the Democratic Republic of Congo. European Journal of International Relations, 25(3), 698–722.
Wallensteen, P. (2015). Quality peace: Peacebuilding, victory and world order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zürn, M. (2018). A theory of global governance: Authority, legitimacy, and contestation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kustermans, J., Sauer, T., Segaert, B. (2021). Peacebuilding’s Predicament: A Dark Mood Among the Experts. In: Kustermans, J., Sauer, T., Segaert, B. (eds) A Requiem for Peacebuilding? . Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56477-3_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56477-3_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-56476-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-56477-3
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)