Abstract
This article outlines the important contribution made by the Department of Peace Studies, particularly the Centre for Conflict Resolution (CCR), at the University of Bradford, the field of international peacekeeping and peacebuilding. It adds Woodhouse's examination of the crucial role of Adam Curle, the first chair of the department, in the field of peace studies (Woodhouse, 2010). In the spirit of Woodhouse, this article provides further investigation into how the department has developed research into one of Curle's main strands of activity relevant peacemaking, to nurture social and economic systems which engender cooperation rather than conflict (Woodhouse, 2010, p. 2). Woodhouse's article speaks of how Peace Studies at Bradford University explored this strand with a focus on research on institutions for international co-operation and interdependence (Woodhouse, 2010, p. 2). This article complements the approach by examining the impact the Centre for Conflict Resolution has had on the practice of peacekeeping over three generations, and how, in turn, the practice of peacekeeping has informed critical enquiry of peacekeeping and peacebuilding.
Highlights
This article outlines the important contribution made by the Department of Peace Studies, the Centre for Conflict Resolution (CCR), at the University of Bradford, to the field of international peacekeeping and peacebuilding
In the 1950s, and as it became established as an academic discipline, the concept of international peacekeeping as a method of conflict management was being implanted in the United Nations (UN)
In outlining the contribution of the Bradford School to peacekeeping research, this article has outlined the critical role played by the Centre for Conflict Resolution in approaching the micro-level debates over peacekeeping practice, and linked them to wider understandings of the process of conflict resolution in post-conflict environments
Summary
This links to Woodhouse and Ramsbotham’s 2005 article, Cosmopolitan Peacekeeping and the Globalisation of Security, where the authors examined how future peacekeeping and peacebuilding operations could work within an emancipatory framework. It posits that the framework of cosmopolitan peacekeeping is situated in conflict resolution theory and practice, engaging with peacekeeping practice in a way in which the authors believe critical theory does not For peacekeeping to be effective, he argued, it must protect those who are trying to alter the status quo and remove the violent structures that are creating conflict This is an area where critical theorists have made an important contribution. Woodhouse and Ramsbotham’s work on cosmopolitan peacekeeping elaborates on Galtung’s ‘one-way wall’ concept of peacekeeping operations, but instead of protecting what Galtung termed the freedom fighter, it protects the vulnerable groups within conflict zones, who may possess the capacity for emancipatory political transformation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
