ABSTRACT

Over the last decade there has been increasing attention within peace and conflict studies on the so-called ‘local turn’ in peacebuilding where the role of local actors, their agency and their relationship to international actors is strongly emphasised. Still, even with widespread academic optimism about the emancipatory potential of the local, strong caveats of ‘not romanticising the local’ are constantly repeated. By looking at the Balkan countries and their traditional practices of peacebuilding, this article asks whether the local has the potential to be the empowering agent or if such expectations are much too ambitious, both at the academic and policy level. Drawing on the research findings which show the persistence of coercive and noncoercive local peacebuilding practices, the article poses the Paris question once again: should liberal peacebuilding be saved, and if so, where are the locals in this rescue attempt?

摘要

在过去十年中，在和平与冲突研究中，人们越来越关注建设和平中所谓的“地方转向”，在那里，地方行动者，他们的代理机构以及与国际行动者的关系得到了强有力的强调。尽管如此，即使学术界普遍对本地的解放潜力感到乐观，“不浪漫化本地”的强烈警告仍在不断地重复。通过考察巴尔干国家及其传统的和平建设做法，本文提出了在学术和政策层面上，当地人是否有潜力成为赋权代理，或者这种期望是否过于雄心勃勃。文章根据研究结果表明了当地的强制性和非强制性和平建设做法的持续存在，本文再次提出了巴黎问题：