The Case for Strategic Traditionalism: War, National Interest and Liberal Peacebuilding

Liberal peacemaking and peacebuilding are an inherently dangerous enterprise, which should be approached with great caution. This was demonstrated by numerous problematic liberal peacebuilding efforts in the 1990s and 2000s, events that underlined the view that there has been no fundamental global c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International peacekeeping (London, England) England), 2009-11, Vol.16 (5), p.717-734
Main Author: Walton, C. Dale
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Cultural tradition
Democracy
Humanitarianism
International relations theory
Liberalism
National interest
Peace
Peace building
Peace negotiations
Political culture
Political leadership
Realpolitik
Strategic studies
Violence
War
Warfare
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Liberal peacemaking and peacebuilding are an inherently dangerous enterprise, which should be approached with great caution. This was demonstrated by numerous problematic liberal peacebuilding efforts in the 1990s and 2000s, events that underlined the view that there has been no fundamental global change in attitudes toward the use of violence for the attainment of political ends. As a result, Western leaders are likely to be much less inclined to undertake large-scale and/or difficult peacebuilding missions in the future. This is a desirable trend, as peacebuilding efforts undertaken by democracies should be guided fundamentally by national interests rather than humanitarian goals.
ISSN:1353-3312
1743-906X
DOI:10.1080/13533310903303354