ABSTRACT

Despite the importance of having continuity in third-party involvement, many third parties lack the ability to commit as long-term peace guarantors. We argue that non-state actors and third parties with vested interests in peace and stability will be more likely to sustain involvement in post-conflict periods. Analysis of monthly level data from the Managing Intrastate Conflict (MIC) project confirms that third parties that have had wartime experience as conflict managers are more likely to get involved in post-conflict peace processes, regardless of whether the conflict management is in the form of peacekeeping missions, mediation or good offices; regardless of whether the third party is geographically proximate; and regardless of whether the third party is a state or non-state actor. The results also confirm that third-party geographic proximity and other measures of vested interests additively increase the propensity for postwar involvement. However, wartime conflict management experience matters less for third parties with vested interests, suggesting the additional importance of demand-side determinants of third-party conflict management.

抽象的

尽管保持第三方参与的连续性很重要，但许多第三方仍缺乏作为长期和平担保人的能力。我们认为具有既得利益的非国家行为者和第三方和平与稳定方面的冲突将更有可能在冲突后时期持续参与。对管理内部州际冲突（MIC）项目的月度数据的分析证实，拥有战时经验的第三方作为冲突管理者，更有可能参与冲突后和平进程，而不论冲突管理是否采用以下形式：维和特派团，调解或good旋；不论第三方在地理位置上是否接近；并且无论第三方是国家行为者还是非国家行为者。结果还证实，第三方地理邻近性和既得利益的其他措施会增加战后介入的倾向。但是，战时冲突管理经验对拥有既得利益的第三方的影响较小，