Abstract
This is a polemic against the concept and practice of stabilization as practiced by leading states from the global north in peace support interventions. It is not an argument against stability. Instead, it depicts stabilization as an essentially conservative doctrine that runs counter to its stated aims of enhancing local participation and legitimacy. It is an agenda of control that privileges notions of assimilation with international (western) standards and mainstreams the military into peace-support operations. As a result, the value of peace is undercut.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 20-30 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Stability: International Journal of Security and Development |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2012 |
Research Beacons, Institutes and Platforms
- Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute