Contemporary Peace Support Operations: The Primacy of the Military and Internal Contradictions
In this article the authors examine two set of issues that constrain contemporary peace support operations (PSOs): one centered on the kinds of knowledge prevalent in PSOs and the second involving the organizational structures that characterize them. The authors’ aim is to show the deep discursive a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Armed Forces & Society 2011-10, Vol.37 (4), p.657-679 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 679 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 657 |
container_title | Armed Forces & Society |
container_volume | 37 |
creator | Michael, Kobi Ben-Ari, Eyal |
description | In this article the authors examine two set of issues that constrain contemporary peace support operations (PSOs): one centered on the kinds of knowledge prevalent in PSOs and the second involving the organizational structures that characterize them. The authors’ aim is to show the deep discursive and structural limitations and contradictions that continue to characterize the actions of armed forces and the dominance of militaristic thinking within PSOs. This article centers on multidimensional peacekeeping marked by emphasizing two main points in regard to the complex nature of such peacekeeping. First, Western military thinking is still dominant in the professional discourse of peacekeeping despite the fact that in many cases it is less relevant to the arenas where it is applied (in weakened or failed states). Second, forces in second-generation peacekeeping missions are by definition a form of hybrid organizations, and therefore conceptual changes in regard to PSOs not only involve the realm of knowledge but also entail practical consequences for the very organizational means used to achieve their aims. The authors’ analysis demonstrates the blending, hybridization, and linkages that are an essential part of PSOs as processes that carry both advantages and disadvantages for organizational action. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0095327X10390467 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1040990144</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48609028</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_0095327X10390467</sage_id><sourcerecordid>48609028</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-2a2306d8e04272e712eb3e2344ef73e997e8398d4b2a123deea26f46296246883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkctLAzEQxoMoWKt3L0JRBC-rk2Q2j6MUX1CooIK3Jd1OpaXdrMnuwf_eLCsiBaGnYZjffPP4GDvlcM251jcANpdCv3OQFlDpPTbgea4yMGj22aArZ139kB3FuAIADoIP2OXYVw1tah9c-Bo9kytp9NLWKW9G05qCa5a-isfsYOHWkU5-4pC93d-9jh-zyfThaXw7yUrk0GTCCQlqbghQaEGaC5pJEhKRFlqStZqMtGaOM-G4kHMiJ9QClbBKoDJGDtlVr1sH_9lSbIrNMpa0XruKfBsLDgjWAkfcAU27CIO53hHNUdiEnm-hK9-GKt1cGKtQpr9Bgi7-g7jlCGg0dlOhp8rgYwy0KOqw3KQvp3lFZ1mxbVlqyfqW6D7oj-j__FnPr2Ljw68-GgU23S6_AS07mk0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1914048747</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Contemporary Peace Support Operations: The Primacy of the Military and Internal Contradictions</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Michael, Kobi ; Ben-Ari, Eyal</creator><creatorcontrib>Michael, Kobi ; Ben-Ari, Eyal</creatorcontrib><description>In this article the authors examine two set of issues that constrain contemporary peace support operations (PSOs): one centered on the kinds of knowledge prevalent in PSOs and the second involving the organizational structures that characterize them. The authors’ aim is to show the deep discursive and structural limitations and contradictions that continue to characterize the actions of armed forces and the dominance of militaristic thinking within PSOs. This article centers on multidimensional peacekeeping marked by emphasizing two main points in regard to the complex nature of such peacekeeping. First, Western military thinking is still dominant in the professional discourse of peacekeeping despite the fact that in many cases it is less relevant to the arenas where it is applied (in weakened or failed states). Second, forces in second-generation peacekeeping missions are by definition a form of hybrid organizations, and therefore conceptual changes in regard to PSOs not only involve the realm of knowledge but also entail practical consequences for the very organizational means used to achieve their aims. The authors’ analysis demonstrates the blending, hybridization, and linkages that are an essential part of PSOs as processes that carry both advantages and disadvantages for organizational action.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0095-327X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1556-0848</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0095327X10390467</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AFSOD2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Ltd</publisher><subject>Armed Forces ; Contradictions ; Cooperation ; Definitions ; Discourse ; Discourse analysis ; Dominance ; Knowledge ; Militarism ; Organizational Structure ; Peace ; Peace negotiations ; Peacekeeping ; Peacekeeping forces ; Second generation ; State building ; State Failure</subject><ispartof>Armed Forces & Society, 2011-10, Vol.37 (4), p.657-679</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2011</rights><rights>Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society 2011</rights><rights>Copyright Transaction Inc. Oct 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48609028$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/48609028$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>313,314,776,780,788,799,21798,27899,27901,27902,33751,33752,43597,43598,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Michael, Kobi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ben-Ari, Eyal</creatorcontrib><title>Contemporary Peace Support Operations: The Primacy of the Military and Internal Contradictions</title><title>Armed Forces & Society</title><description>In this article the authors examine two set of issues that constrain contemporary peace support operations (PSOs): one centered on the kinds of knowledge prevalent in PSOs and the second involving the organizational structures that characterize them. The authors’ aim is to show the deep discursive and structural limitations and contradictions that continue to characterize the actions of armed forces and the dominance of militaristic thinking within PSOs. This article centers on multidimensional peacekeeping marked by emphasizing two main points in regard to the complex nature of such peacekeeping. First, Western military thinking is still dominant in the professional discourse of peacekeeping despite the fact that in many cases it is less relevant to the arenas where it is applied (in weakened or failed states). Second, forces in second-generation peacekeeping missions are by definition a form of hybrid organizations, and therefore conceptual changes in regard to PSOs not only involve the realm of knowledge but also entail practical consequences for the very organizational means used to achieve their aims. The authors’ analysis demonstrates the blending, hybridization, and linkages that are an essential part of PSOs as processes that carry both advantages and disadvantages for organizational action.</description><subject>Armed Forces</subject><subject>Contradictions</subject><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>Definitions</subject><subject>Discourse</subject><subject>Discourse analysis</subject><subject>Dominance</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Militarism</subject><subject>Organizational Structure</subject><subject>Peace</subject><subject>Peace negotiations</subject><subject>Peacekeeping</subject><subject>Peacekeeping forces</subject><subject>Second generation</subject><subject>State building</subject><subject>State Failure</subject><issn>0095-327X</issn><issn>1556-0848</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkctLAzEQxoMoWKt3L0JRBC-rk2Q2j6MUX1CooIK3Jd1OpaXdrMnuwf_eLCsiBaGnYZjffPP4GDvlcM251jcANpdCv3OQFlDpPTbgea4yMGj22aArZ139kB3FuAIADoIP2OXYVw1tah9c-Bo9kytp9NLWKW9G05qCa5a-isfsYOHWkU5-4pC93d-9jh-zyfThaXw7yUrk0GTCCQlqbghQaEGaC5pJEhKRFlqStZqMtGaOM-G4kHMiJ9QClbBKoDJGDtlVr1sH_9lSbIrNMpa0XruKfBsLDgjWAkfcAU27CIO53hHNUdiEnm-hK9-GKt1cGKtQpr9Bgi7-g7jlCGg0dlOhp8rgYwy0KOqw3KQvp3lFZ1mxbVlqyfqW6D7oj-j__FnPr2Ljw68-GgU23S6_AS07mk0</recordid><startdate>20111001</startdate><enddate>20111001</enddate><creator>Michael, Kobi</creator><creator>Ben-Ari, Eyal</creator><general>Sage Publications, Ltd</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Transaction Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>U9A</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111001</creationdate><title>Contemporary Peace Support Operations</title><author>Michael, Kobi ; Ben-Ari, Eyal</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-2a2306d8e04272e712eb3e2344ef73e997e8398d4b2a123deea26f46296246883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Armed Forces</topic><topic>Contradictions</topic><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>Definitions</topic><topic>Discourse</topic><topic>Discourse analysis</topic><topic>Dominance</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Militarism</topic><topic>Organizational Structure</topic><topic>Peace</topic><topic>Peace negotiations</topic><topic>Peacekeeping</topic><topic>Peacekeeping forces</topic><topic>Second generation</topic><topic>State building</topic><topic>State Failure</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Michael, Kobi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ben-Ari, Eyal</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Armed Forces & Society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Michael, Kobi</au><au>Ben-Ari, Eyal</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Contemporary Peace Support Operations: The Primacy of the Military and Internal Contradictions</atitle><jtitle>Armed Forces & Society</jtitle><date>2011-10-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>657</spage><epage>679</epage><pages>657-679</pages><issn>0095-327X</issn><eissn>1556-0848</eissn><coden>AFSOD2</coden><abstract>In this article the authors examine two set of issues that constrain contemporary peace support operations (PSOs): one centered on the kinds of knowledge prevalent in PSOs and the second involving the organizational structures that characterize them. The authors’ aim is to show the deep discursive and structural limitations and contradictions that continue to characterize the actions of armed forces and the dominance of militaristic thinking within PSOs. This article centers on multidimensional peacekeeping marked by emphasizing two main points in regard to the complex nature of such peacekeeping. First, Western military thinking is still dominant in the professional discourse of peacekeeping despite the fact that in many cases it is less relevant to the arenas where it is applied (in weakened or failed states). Second, forces in second-generation peacekeeping missions are by definition a form of hybrid organizations, and therefore conceptual changes in regard to PSOs not only involve the realm of knowledge but also entail practical consequences for the very organizational means used to achieve their aims. The authors’ analysis demonstrates the blending, hybridization, and linkages that are an essential part of PSOs as processes that carry both advantages and disadvantages for organizational action.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>Sage Publications, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1177/0095327X10390467</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0095-327X |
ispartof | Armed Forces & Society, 2011-10, Vol.37 (4), p.657-679 |
issn | 0095-327X 1556-0848 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1040990144 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; SAGE Complete; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Armed Forces Contradictions Cooperation Definitions Discourse Discourse analysis Dominance Knowledge Militarism Organizational Structure Peace Peace negotiations Peacekeeping Peacekeeping forces Second generation State building State Failure |
title | Contemporary Peace Support Operations: The Primacy of the Military and Internal Contradictions |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T15%3A46%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Contemporary%20Peace%20Support%20Operations:%20The%20Primacy%20of%20the%20Military%20and%20Internal%20Contradictions&rft.jtitle=Armed%20Forces%20&%20Society&rft.au=Michael,%20Kobi&rft.date=2011-10-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=657&rft.epage=679&rft.pages=657-679&rft.issn=0095-327X&rft.eissn=1556-0848&rft.coden=AFSOD2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0095327X10390467&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E48609028%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1914048747&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=48609028&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0095327X10390467&rfr_iscdi=true |