Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Success and Failure of UN Peacekeeping Operations: UNMIS in Sudan

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

Some UN peacekeeping operations are generally regarded as a success, e.g. El Salvador, Sierra Leone and Mozambique. Other missions are seen as obvious failures, such as Rwanda and Somalia. Not only do these mixed results justify research into the question “do peacekeeping operations actually contribute to durable peace?”, but both academic scholars and policy makers also try to identify factors explaining these differences. In earlier research, factors for success and failure were distilled from literature to explain the differing contributions of UN peacekeeping operations. After further research on the cases of Rwanda, Mozambique, El Salvador and Cambodia nine factors for success and failure were identified. According to these nine factors the probability that a peacekeeping operation makes a positive contribution to durable peace increases if: 1) the parties are sincere and willing to cooperate with the implementation of the operation; 2) the operation is able to provide a sufficient sense of security to the parties; 3) the operation has sufficient attention to the causes of the conflict both in depth and in breadth; 4) the operation receives co-operation from important outside actors and parties; 5) the operation is deployed timely and at the right time; 6) the operation is implemented by competent personnel under competent leadership, and with clear command structures; 7) the operation is part of a long term approach; 8) the ‘policy tools’ implemented in the operation are coordinated within the operation, as well as externally; and 9) the operation provides ‘ownership’. The questions addressed in this paper are: a) to what extent does UNMIS meet these different factors for success and failure for UN peacekeeping operations?; and b) to what extent does this picture match the image that results from a review of the North-South conflict and peace process, the role of UNMIS, and an analysis of the extent of durable peace? The answers to these two questions allow more insight into the chances for success or failure of UNMIS and provide further knowledge on factors for success and failure of UN peacekeeping operations.


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Journal of International Peacekeeping — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation