UN MONUC DRC United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo
EU Artemis DRC Military Operation in the Democratic Republic of Congo
AU AMIS Sudan African Union Mission in Sudan
EU Sudan European Union Civilian-Military Action to Support AMIS
NATO Sudan NATO Assistance to AMIS
UN UNMIS Sudan United Nations Mission in the Sudan
AU/UN UNAMID Sudan African Union-United Nations Hybrid
Operation in Darfur
AU AMISOM Somalia African Union Mission in Somalia
NATO Somalia NATO Assistance to AMISOM
EU EUTM
Somalia Somalia
European Union Training Mission in Somalia
UN UNSOM Somalia United Nations Assistance Mission in Somalia
ECOWAS AFISMA Mali African-led International Support Mission
to Mali
EU EUTM Mali Mali European Union Training Mission in Mali
UN MINUSMA Mali United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali
Figure 3: Sample Case Selection Table
The cases for this project have been selected in order to account for as much variation in outcomes as possible. In other words, while it remains difficult to classify
interorganizational dynamics precisely, these cases demonstrate cooperation, noncooperation, and competition. It is also important to note that, within a given case, both cooperation and competition may have occurred, in some cases due to changing dynamics over time, and in others due to differing relationships between the multiple organizations involved (e.g. the AU and the UN did not cooperate, but the EU and the UN did).
In order to more easily isolate causal factors, several other factors have been held constant. First, as briefly mentioned above, the time period has been held constant. By doing so, the project only includes cases in which organizational capacities—that is, the mechanisms, policies, and decision-making structures that allow them to deploy missions—are operational, stable, and thereby do not inherently prevent them from cooperating with other organizations on the ground.
Second, the factor of participation has been held constant. While much of the research within the peacekeeping literature has focused on why organizations choose to deploy in the first place, this question of participation muddles and complicates the analysis of interorganizational cooperation and competition rather than simplifying it. Therefore, this project takes organizational participation as a given and does not attempt to explain in detail why an organization has chosen to deploy, instead focusing on why they choose to either coordinate their efforts or not once deployed.
The first case, the DRC, was selected because it marked the beginning of military coordination between the EU and the UN, allowing for the examination of the origins of interorganizational cooperation. Further, the DRC is a useful example of parallel cooperation between organizations during peace operations, with the EU and the UN
sharing strategic goals but ultimately pursuing operational autonomy (and therefore noncooperation) on the ground. The second case is Sudan, which illustrates the development of the hybrid model of cooperation between the AU and the UN, but also examines the competition that have emerged in the execution of UNAMID. Third, the case of Mali has been selected because it has witnessed cooperation between the EU and the UN, but intense competition between the AU (and ECOWAS) and the UN. The fourth case is Somalia, which is somewhat of an extension case, as it has not included multiple military missions on the ground, but rather a single military operation (the AU’s AMISOM) supported financially, politically, and logistically by the EU, NATO, and the UN. The case of Somalia is important because it demonstrates that the analytical frameworks used in this project can be applied as a potential new mode of interorganizational cooperation, in which organizations take on specialized, compartmentalized roles on the ground. Overall, by exploring a high level of variation between cases, this project intends to draw out generalizable conclusions regarding interorganizational cooperation and competition.
Evidence and Data
This project draws upon research composed of both primary and secondary sources. Academic journals, articles, and other related sources constituted the majority of the literature review, which focused both on theoretical works related to institutional cooperation and texts that track trends in peacekeeping. These secondary sources, paired with resolutions, proceedings, memorandums, and other documents from international organizations, also form much of the background information within the case studies.
However, primary sources set this project apart both in terms of depth and originality. First, a summer of field research conducted in Kenya out of the Hekima Institute of Peace Studies and International Relations—including interviews and visits with nongovernmental organizations and government officials working in areas such as security and refugee issues—provided a firsthand account of interorganizational cooperation.
Second, this thesis utilizes interviews with officials and academics connected to the AU, the EU, and the UN. Conducted electronically and in person in locations such as Nairobi, Johannesburg, Paris, Abuja, and Brisbane, these interviews provided accounts of organizational actions by the policymakers themselves, who were able to pinpoint the precise and critical factors that influenced various institutional decisions. Further, by including prominent voices of African diplomats representing both states and the AU, interviews helped expand the information available from more traditional sources, such as Western think tanks, universities, and political institutions. In sum, these primary sources contribute to a much more comprehensive and accurate account of interorganizational dynamics.
Chapter Overview
This thesis will proceed by first outlining important trends in the development and regionalization of peace operations that are key in aiding comprehension of the peacekeeping regime complex. It will next turn to the four cases, providing a brief background of each before analyzing them through the lenses of the theoretical frameworks. The cases will be discussed chronologically, with the exception of Somalia, which
represents a slightly differing model of interorganizational dynamics. The project will conclude by presenting findings, as well as discussing the academic and policy implications of this research. These conclusions will not only add to the current understanding of regime complexity within international relations, but also suggest several recommendations for developing more efficient and effective peace operations in the future. And ultimately, such improvements are vital because better missions translate to an increased ability to protect innocent civilians during crises.