Aishwarya Choudhary

Role of International Organisations in Peacebuilding From the very fabrication of international organizations (IOs), it has arguably led to drastic changes in conflict resolution, both internationally and nationally. Although IOs carry a variety of roles, a number of organizations, such as the United Nations (UN) or the African Union (AU), have been designed to mitigate disputes internally and between countries. These organizations operate based on international law and universal principles, such as peace and cooperation, and work towards promoting them. Violence, abuse of HRs and breaches of international law are part of a reality that is yet to be changed. Part of the reason, as many argue, why the international system has not reached the idealistic picture painted by Woodrow Wilson in 1918, may be that the means and mechanisms employed by international organizations are yet to be completely efficient. This write-up aims to evaluate the efficiency of international organizations in conflict resolution, by analysing the factors that often prevent them from achieving peace, and those that, on the other side, help them be successful. Efficiency implies the correct functioning of the institutional systems and the methodology used by IOs, and is often affected by their degree of centralization and independence, as well as which roles they employ within the international arena and between States. This would be analyzed in light of the Goal 10: “Reduce inequality within and among countries” and Goal 16: “Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels” of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) or the Global Goals adopted by the UN. This will be further examined by assessing the role and contribution of developing countries in the central debates on the United Nations’ (UN) peacebuilding approach to conflict-affected countries. Finally, a conclusion shall be drawn as to whether or not the SDGs are fulfilled by the IGOs. IO: Definition Largely, an International Organisation is an institutionalized arrangement among members of the international system to solve tasks which have evolved from systemic conditions. The organization therefore reflects the attributes, aspirations and preoccupations of its members. That would mean that it is the member States (MSs) that give the organization sovereignty and power, as well as drafting its objectives and roles. Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding by IO: International organizations such as the UN or the AU, due to their structural complexity and varied institutions within them, undertake a variety of objectives, one of which is conflict resolution. A growing number of IOs mandate missions in which they engage with peace-making, peacekeeping and peacebuilding activities. A mission mandated by an IO is not limited to the achievement of a settlement or of a ceasefire (i.e., Peacekeeping), but it has the task of ensuring consolidation of peace through monitoring measures (i.e., Peacebuilding). Efficiency of IOs: Following the premise stated above regarding the MSs being the source of power and sovereignty of the IOs, it can be stated that the quality and efficiency of an international organization is a reflection of the quality and efficiency of the cooperation between its member States. Moreover, efficiency of IOs is also seen in the quality of the agreement itself and whether it includes efficient means to carry out a specific mission the organization is set to accomplish. In order to further assess efficiency of an international organization, its degree of centralization is essential. Indeed, the higher the degree of centralization, the better the support for State interaction the IO provides. This occurs because such organizations are, supposedly, neutral forums for negotiation, creation of political coalitions and enforcement of international norms, where power differences are eliminated and States can interact in a way where their interests can be protected. With a high level of centralization, operational activities such as pooling of authority and resources, joint production and norm elaboration and coordination, can be carried out efficiently because of the hierarchical structure of most international organizations, in which member States supervise each other and cooperate through the creation of agreements. The Problem with Centralization and its Non Inclusivity: When discussing whether centralization in IOs is efficient, it is, however, relevant to consider that functions of IOs as discussed earlier are often disregarded because of the lack of a complete body of laws and of a single dispute resolution tribunal with mandatory jurisdiction in international law. Therefore, it is often hard to regulate States’ behaviour and their consideration of other States’ interest, because their disregard of international law frequently goes unpunished. According to the SDG goals 10&16 there must be equality and inclusivity in the institutions at all levels. However the Global North, that is, the developed countries’ model of centralization while peacebuilding: first, tends to be overly technocratic, disempowering local voices and interests; second, the “security-development nexus” tends to treat non-Western states as a blank sheet, disregarding their indigenous institutions and complex authority structures, imposing a top-down, donor-driven approach; third, “the liberal project is largely advanced with external strategic objectives rather than local needs in mind”. Conclusion: Developing countries present several political, economic, and social limitations. Their performance on those fields is an important indicator on how they are going to continue influencing the UN and other intergovernmental institutions. In the wake of their recent economic growth and contested political stabilization, countries like Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, among others from the “South”, became much more involved in the security, development, and humanitarian business. IGOs have the ability to stress values, like religious tolerance, to their member states and to hold those states accountable to these shared values. Therefore, these organisations should be more representative and use different tools for peacemaking according to the different backgrounds and needs of the country or region affected in consonance with the SDGs.