Peace in an Authoritarian International Order Versus Peace in the Liberal International Order

Peacemaking and peacekeeping converged after the Cold War into a liberal peacebuilding framework aimed at maintaining the Liberal International Order (LIO). This was supposed to represent a comprehensive synergy of the scholarship and practices that emerged since the formation of the states-system itself. The limitations of such approaches, however, have effectively pitted a failing liberal international order against a burgeoning set of peace blockages and counter-peace strategies, aimed at narrowing the focus of peacemaking tools and altering the nature of international order. This process has led to the emergence of an ‘authoritarian international order’ (AIO). This paper outlines the AIO and theoretically examines and compares peacemaking under both the LIO and the AIO. It demonstrates that their mutual and differing weaknesses have muddied the critical and emancipatory potential of peacemaking ‘after liberalism’.