Explore the vast range of titles available.

The literature on environmental peacemaking claims that groups in conflict can put aside their differences and cooperate in the face of shared environmental challenges, thereby facilitating more peaceful relations between them. This study provides the first comprehensive review of the widely dispersed empirical evidence on such environment-peace links. In order to do so, it distinguishes three understandings of peace and identifies four mechanisms connecting environmental cooperation to peace. The results suggest that environmental cooperation can facilitate the absence of violence within states as well as symbolic rapprochement within and between states, although such links are strongly dependent on the presence of several contextual factors. The most relevant mechanisms connecting environmental cooperation to peace are an increase in understanding and trust and especially the build-up of institutions. By contrast, environmental peacemaking is unlikely to have an impact on substantial integration between states or groups. Based on these findings, the article offers four suggestions for future research: (i) assess the relevance of environmental cooperation vis-à-vis other (presumably less contextdependent) drivers of peacemaking, (ii) pay more attention to the mechanisms connecting environmental cooperation to peacemaking, (iii) focus on the interactions between and the different time horizons of the three understandings of peace, and (iv) study the downside of environmental peacemaking to provide a more nuanced assessment and identify further relevant contextual factors.

This paper investigates the role of family relationships and interactions in developing the skills and strategies necessary for peacefully navigating daily conflicts and contributing to a broader stable peace. Three main activities of family life are identified as contributing factors: developing relational capacities, facilitating learning, and practicing peaceable attitudes and strategies in repeated interactions. While the family environment is not the only place where peacemaking skills are developed, it is an important hub of cooperation that prepares individuals to peacefully navigate everyday interactions in a broad range of social situations.

Direct legislation through ballot measures is an increasingly common strategy to institutionalize conflict resolution. This article aims to analyze and quantify the structural causes that led to the rejection of the 2016 Colombian peace plebiscite, with a particular focus on how the terms of the peace accord influenced voting patterns. Addressing Colombia’s 2016 accord, we argue that personal, relational, and cultural dimensions encompass causes closely related to voters’ attitudes. However, when the terms of a peace deal are considered structural causes, they are strongly linked to the societal fractures that the agreement seeks to address. To formalize the role of these terms within the structural dimension, simple variables associated with each term were tested using OLS and logit regression models. The results indicate that areas characterized by rural poverty, coca cultivation, victimization, remoteness from the administrative and economic centers, and a strong presence of rebel groups were positively associated with the Yes vote; they also reveal a heterogeneous influence of the warring parties and show that the No vote prevailed in areas with larger populations and higher abstention rates. The article presents empirical limitations due to its heterodox methodological approach, which omits conventional post-positivist stages. Data limitations also arise from the simplicity of the variables.

Failures to bring internationalised civil wars, such as in Syria, Libya, or Yemen, to a negotiated agreement have led to a questioning of the UN's role in peacemaking. The literature explains such mediation outcomes by examining micro-level aspects pertaining to either the mediation process or the conflict context. While both are important, they are influenced by macro-level dynamics related to world politics that have received less attention. Yet, such an awareness of the structural context in which mediation takes place is particularly relevant in times of tectonic shifts in world politics, such as the current change in world order from unipolarity to multipolarity. This article fills this gap by exploring the mechanisms through which macro- and micro-level factors interact in mediation, illustrated by the case of the UN mediation in Syria. The article thereby makes two contributions. First, it provides an analysis of the link between world politics and UN mediation by complementing micro-level explanations with a macro-level perspective. Second, it allows for a better understanding of UN mediation in internationalised civil wars, and particularly in Syria. Overall, the article contributes to reflections on how the UN can keep its relevance in peacemaking in a shifting world order.

This article is interested in the interface between internationally supported peace operations and local approaches to peace that may draw on traditional, indigenous and customary practice. It argues that peace (and security, development and reconstruction) in societies emerging from violent conflict tends to be a hybrid between the external and the local. The article conceptualizes how this hybrid or composite peace is constructed and maintained. It proposes a four-part conceptual model to help visualize the interplay that leads to hybridized forms of peace. Hybrid peace is the result of the interplay of the following: the compliance powers of liberal peace agents, networks and structures; the incentivizing powers of liberal peace agents, networks and structures; the ability of local actors to resist, ignore or adapt liberal peace interventions; and the ability of local actors, networks and structures to present and maintain alternative forms of peacemaking.

This article examines the effectiveness of religion as a solution to ethno-nationalist conflicts, drawing on the case of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan [PKK]) in Turkey. We utilize an original data set that contains data on Turkey’s state-sponsored mosques between 1980 and 2016 to test for the purported peacemaking potential of religion. Results from this data set, coupled with an alternative measure of the state’s involvement in religion, show that increased Islamization has no discernible impact on lowering support for the ethno-nationalist Kurdish political parties or insurgency.

In the face of the current decline or spectacular collapse of peace processes, this article investigates whether peace has become systematically blocked. It investigates whether the ineffectiveness of an ‘international peace architecture’ (IPA) can be explained by a more potent counterpeace system, which is growing in its shadow. It identifies counterpeace as proto-systemic processes that connect spoilers across all scales (local, regional, national, transnational), while exploiting structural blockages to peace and unintended consequences of peace interventions. It elaborates three distinct patterns of blockages to peace in contemporary conflicts across the globe: the stalemate, limited counterpeace, and unmitigated counterpeace. Drawing on the counterrevolution literature, this research asks: Have peace interventions become the source of their own undoing? Which factors consolidate or aggravate emerging conflict patterns? Are blockages to peace systemic enough to construct a sedimentary and layered counterpeace edifice?

Yoruba women have always played a unique role in the reconciliation and peace process in the extended family in traditional society as a whole, and that this puts them in a strong position to encourage dialogue between disputing parties. However, much work still needs to be done in regard of the role of women as peacemakers in traditional family settings in Africa. This study appraises the Iyawo Ile traditional institution in Yoruba as the transmitters of peace values through the use of diplomatic measures such as secrecy, negotiation and respect for the elders.

This essay offers a discussion and critique of Alon Ben-Meir’s (2022) proposal entitled, “The Case for an Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian Confederation: Why Now and How?” Incorporating elements of other viewpoints and prior proposals to add nuance, I explore Ben-Meir’s concerted attempt to think past the exemplary twostate model for settling the Palestine and Israel conflict and to introduce thoughts on how policy makers and common actors can apply a confederal system later on. Given the entrenched one-state reality, I argue that the liberation of Palestinians through emancipation in a solitary popularity-based nation is the most thoughtfully clear option in contrast to many years of failed endeavors. Este ensayo ofrece una discusión y crítica de la propuesta de Alon Ben-Meir (2022) titulada “El caso de una confederación israelí-palestina-jordana: ¿por qué ahora y cómo? Al incorporar elementos de otros puntos de vista y propuestas previas para agregar matices, exploro el intento concertado de Ben-Meir de pensar más allá del modelo ejemplar de dos estados para resolver el conflicto de Palestina e Israel y presentar ideas sobre cómo los responsables de la formulación de políticas y los actores comunes pueden aplicar un modelo confederal. sistema más adelante. Dada la arraigada realidad de un solo estado, argumento que la liberación de los palestinos a través de la emancipación en una nación solitaria basada en la popularidad es la opción más clara y reflexiva en contraste con muchos años de esfuerzos fallidos. 本文对Alon Ben-Meir (2022) 撰写的《以色列-巴勒斯坦-约旦联盟案例： 为何现在结盟，如何结盟？》一文进行探讨和批判。结合其他观点的要 素和先前的提议以增加细微性，我探究了这种协同尝试，以期不局限于 思考用于解决巴勒斯坦和以色列冲突的示范性两国模式，并介绍了决策 者和共同行动者如何能在今后应用一种联盟制度。鉴于根深蒂固的一国 现实，我论证认为，与多年的失败尝试相比，通过在一个以独居为基础 的国家中解放巴勒斯坦人是最深思熟虑的明确选择。

A popular view holds that foreign policy hawks have an advantage at bringing about rapprochement with international adversaries. This idea is rooted in domestic politics: voters respond more favorably to efforts at reconciliation when their own leader has a hawkish rather than a dovish reputation. Yet, domestic reactions are only part of the equation—to succeed, rapprochement must also evoke a favorable response by the adversary. In this research note, we argue that hawks who make conciliatory gestures may face international liabilities that could offset their domestic advantages. Foreign audiences should view doves who make overtures as more sincere and should therefore be more willing to support cooperation with foreign doves than with foreign hawks. We field a pair of survey experiments to examine whether Americans respond differently when foreign hawks versus foreign doves deliver the olive branch. We find that foreign doves fare better at eliciting cooperation because they are deemed more sincere, though the prospect of military vulnerability limits how willing Americans are to respond positively even to a dove who makes a gesture. Thus, while past research has shown that hawks are better positioned domestically to initiate rapprochement, our findings suggest that they have a harder time eliciting a favorable response from the adversary.