Atomised and Subordinated? Unpacking the role of International Involvement in ‘The Local turn’ of Peacebuilding in Nepal and Cambodia

Abstract

The local turn debate sometimes falls into the trap of romanticising the local, while vilifying international involvement in peacebuilding. Although this post-colonially informed argument makes immediate theoretical sense, there is a dearth of empirically driven comparative research which explores whether, and if so how, an international presence actually influences local peacebuilding efforts. In order to address this research gap, the present article sets out to study the execution of local peacebuilding programmes in two relatively similar cases where one (Nepal) has enjoyed little international peacebuilding presence, while the other (Cambodia) has seen a massive influx of international actors and funding in its peacebuilding endeavour. Our empirical material indicates that international support for the local peacebuilding process in Cambodia has bolstered it, while the locally owned process in Nepal has been far from successful in forging the conditions for sustainable peace. To fathom why these particular outcomes have occurred, however, the full answers are unlikely to be found by merely scrutinising whether the peacebuilding processes have been primarily internationally or locally driven. Instead, we suggest that peacebuilding outcomes are better understood by studying situated practices.