• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Disasters >Who owns the peace? Aid, reconstruction, and peacebuilding in Afghanistan
【24h】

Who owns the peace? Aid, reconstruction, and peacebuilding in Afghanistan

机译：谁拥有和平？阿富汗的援助，重建与和平建设

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

It is unclear how international donors' stated commitment to ownership and partnership ‘translates’ in fragile state or ‘post-conflict’ settings. The very notion of ownership is violently contested in Afghanistan and donors have to negotiate with, and choose between, multiple state and non-state interlocutors. The developmentalist principles outlined in the 2005 Paris Declaration may carry little meaning in such contexts and their application can have paradoxical effects that impede the emergence of broad-based ownership. The limitations of, and alternatives to, developmentalist approaches in fragile states, are explored here with reference to donor policies and practices in Afghanistan, focusing on the period following the 2001 Bonn Agreement. This paper examines how aid policies and programmes have become part of a complex bargaining game involving international actors, domestic elites, and societal groups. It argues that international donors' failure to appreciate or engage sensitively and strategically with these bargaining processes, when combined with contradictory intervention objectives, has contributed to the steady unravelling of a fragile war-to-peace transition in Afghanistan.
机译：目前尚不清楚国际捐助者如何声明对所有权和伙伴关系的承诺在脆弱的国家或“冲突后”环境中“转变”。所有权这一观念在阿富汗遭到激烈争论，捐助者必须与多个国家和非国家对话者进行谈判，并在其中进行选择。在这种情况下，2005年《巴黎宣言》概述的发展主义原则可能没有什么意义，其适用可能会产生悖论性的影响，从而阻碍基础广泛的所有权的出现。此处参照阿富汗的捐助者政策和做法探讨了脆弱国家发展主义方法的局限性和替代方法，重点是2001年《波恩协定》之后的时期。本文探讨了援助政策和计划如何成为国际参与者，国内精英和社会团体参与的复杂讨价还价游戏的一部分。它辩称，国际捐助者未能将这些讨价还价过程与敏感和战略性地结合起来，或者与相互矛盾的干预目标结合起来，就使阿富汗脆弱的战争过渡到和平的进程不断瓦解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号