Abstract
ABSTRACT Peacebuilding necessitates a re-evaluation of the Western/liberal, non-Western/illiberal dichotomy. After numerous failures in liberal peacebuilding and the lack of innovative intervention approaches, scholars sought potential alternatives in emerging powers’ involvement in post-conflict reconstruction. However, the debate often oversimplifies the issue, categorizing Western peacebuilding as inherently liberal and non-Western peacebuilding as illiberal. This dichotomic understanding is problematic and hinders progress in the analysis of the subject. We contend that peacebuilding has become institutionalized as a foreign policy tool driven by national interests, with similar strategies employed by different governmental actors irrespective of their stated objectives.
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.
