(Un)sustainable peacebuilding: NATO's suitability for postconflict reconstruction in multiactor environments

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Debate/Erratumpeer-review

12 Scopus citations


Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO has progressively adapted itself to the new strategic environment. This has meant a shift from a defensive posture to a more proactive risk management strategy. A key component of this mandate is contributions to international peacemaking and peacebuilding operations. In both the Balkans and Afghanistan, NATO has worked to utilize its military assets to create and maintain peace so that civilian organizations can administer aid, development programs, and good governance projects. These multifaceted operations, however, are complex and rely on well-structured relationships between the different civilian-led international organizations on the ground and NATO. Sadly, as the case of Afghanistan illustrates, these organizations have proved woefully inadequate in terms of providing sustainable peacebuilding. The hypothesis is that international organizations do not play well on the ground in conflict or postconflict environments because they were meant to manage a balance of power, rather than an absence of power. These organizations are more worried about their bureaucratic turf than they are sustainable outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)115-134
Number of pages20
JournalGlobal Governance
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes


  • Afghanistan
  • NATO
  • Peacekeeping

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • General Environmental Science
  • Safety Research
  • Political Science and International Relations


Dive into the research topics of '(Un)sustainable peacebuilding: NATO's suitability for postconflict reconstruction in multiactor environments'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this