AN EXAMINATION OF TYPES OF PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY by Sheri D. Sunderland December 2015 Examining Committee Members: Mark A. Pollack, Advisory Chair, Political Science K. Orfeo Fioretos, Political Science Richard Deeg, Political Science Andrew Gaskievicz, External Member, Mansfield University ABSTRACT The current scale and scope of peacekeeping missions is unprecedented and with this increasing reliance on peacekeeping as a tool to manage threats to peace and security come questions about who should keep the peace. Is it, as many assume, the United Nations? Is it a regional organization, such as the African Union? Or is it an individual state? Each of these different types of peacekeeping operations have different strengths and weaknesses associated with them in terms of legitimacy, institutional capacity, local and regional awareness, resources, and military effectiveness. This dissertation analyzes types of peacekeeping operations to determine which is the most effective in restoring peace and stability and why. I use a structured, focused comparative case study methodology to examine eight cases of peacekeeping, across two countries, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sierra Leone, each of which has been subject to all three types of peacekeeping operations. This approach allows me to hold a number of control variables constant, providing a clear test of the impact of the type of intervention. I found that the type of PKO makes a difference to the success or failure of that mission. PKOs run by lead states are more likely to be successful because they are more willing to use force and they are more likely to have the resources and capabilities necessary to implement that force. Further, I found that two types of PKOs working together can use their strengths to compensate for each other’s weaknesses. I also present a quantitative study with a larger sample size that both substantiates my findings and allows me to generalize them to a wider universe of cases. ii This dissertation is dedicated with love to my children, Luke and Lena Grace. As much as I sometimes wanted to give up, I wanted to teach you perseverance more. I hope you always pursue your dreams – even when the path is difficult. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Since I began this pursuit for a Ph.D., I married my love, moved to a new town, and had two beautiful children; meanwhile, my dissertation lingered in the background. It would have been easy to give up. Although at times I may have doubted myself, my dad, Dr. Eldon Sunderland, never did. His support for me never wavered, and he never once suggested that I quit. I only wish that I had a modicum of his work ethic. Without my dad’s extraordinary example and steadfast support, I could not have finished this dissertation. My mom, Doreen Sunderland, helped me in many ways – probably more than even she realizes. However, I relied on her most for her invaluable spiritual and emotional support. She was always there to encourage me and to pray for me. My husband, JC, is also my best friend and academic partner. The burden of this dissertation weighed just as heavily on him as me. At times, he may have struggled as to which advice to provide me, but he always assured me that he would love me no matter the outcome. I valued his input and he often delivered the nudge that I needed to finish a section or write a paragraph. Thank you for the countless hours that you listened patiently to the many variations of my arguments and for being my chief proofreader. I dedicated my dissertation to my children, Luke and Lena Grace, because I wanted them to remember the importance of perseverance in life. There is no other role that I cherish more than mother and they were the source of my motivation in so many big and small ways. There is a saying that it takes a village, and in my case, my Wellsboro family offered a tremendous support network for me. I could always depend on my friends for iv moral support, childcare, or a much needed break. I am particularly grateful to Anne, Lindsey, Kate, and Wendy – these women are truly like sisters to me. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge my brother and sister-in-law, Ken and Stacey Sunderland. They never missed an opportunity to “check” on my progress. Despite their (mostly) good intentions, which I may not have appreciated at the time, I am certainly grateful now, especially since it provided additional motivation not to quit. Finally, I would like to thank my dissertation committee: K. Orfeo Fioretos, Richard Deeg, and in particular, Mark Pollack who was my dissertation chair. Mark is someone who I respect immensely as an academic and as a person. It was only due to his conscientious and thorough comments on my drafts that my work was elevated to the next level required to successfully defend my dissertation. I am so grateful for his guidance and his patience throughout this process – especially when it would’ve been so much easier for him to write me off. He will always have my heartfelt gratitude. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………ii DEDICATION…………………………………………………………….………...……iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………….…………………………….iv LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………..……………….viii LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………ix LIST OF ACRONYMS……………………………………………………..………….…x CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION…………….………………………………………………………..1 Three Peacekeeping Operation Types and Competing Hypotheses…….….............….4 Criteria for Determining Peacekeeping Success……..……………………………….14 Five Categories for Understanding Successful PKO by Type…………………….….17 Conclusion……………………………………………………………...…...………..26 2. PEACEKEEPING THEORY AND METHODOLOGY………………….…………..31 Theories of Civil War and Competing Variables……...……………………………..33 Methodology and Case Study Selection……...………..……………………………..39 Conclusion………………………………...………...………………………………..52 3. PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO………………………………………….………………………………………53 Africa’s World War………...………………………………………………………...55 Measuring Peacekeeping Success in the DRC…………...……………………….…..65 vi Factors Affecting PKO Outcomes in the DRC………...……………………………..87 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………...110 4. PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS IN SIERRA LEONE…………………….……..114 Background………………………………………………………...………………..115 Measuring Peacekeeping Success in Sierra Leone…...……………….……………..120 Factors Affecting PKO Outcomes in Sierra Leone…...……………………………..144 Conclusion…………………...……………………………………………………...156 5. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………160 Findings…………………...…………………...……………………………………161 Discussion……………………………...……………………………………………167 Competing Variables………………...………………………………………….…..169 Generalizing to a Wider Universe of Cases……………………………...………….174 REFERENCES CITED…………………………………………………………..……..185 APPENDICES A. United Nations Peace Operations in Africa, 1996-present ........................................206 B. Non-UN Peace Operations, 1996-present ..................................................................207 C. Peacekeeping Operations in Africa, 1996-present .....................................................208 D. Level of Difficulty in the DRC ..................................................................................211 E. Level of Difficulty in Sierra Leone ............................................................................212 F. Human Rights in the DRC by Year ...........................................................................213 G. Human Rights in Sierra Leone by Year .....................................................................218 H. Democratic Republic of the Congo Timeline ............................................................219 I. Sierra Leone Timeline................................................................................................224 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. The Relative Strengths and Weaknesses of the Types of PKOs in Five Key Catgories………………………………………………………….………………..18 2. Level of Difficulty……………………….……………………………..……….....48 3. Number of Estimated Conflict-Related Deaths in DRC by Year………………….68 4. A Comparison of Refugee, Returned Refugee and IDPs in DRC by year.….…….74 5. Pushkina’s Criteria for Success Applied to PKOs in the DRC………........…...….86 6. A Comparison of PKOs in the DRC in Five Key Categories…………..........…...113 7. Number of Estimated Conflict-Related Deaths in Sierra Leone by year…............122 8. A Comparison of Refugee, Returned Refugee and IDPs in Sierra Leone Year…………………...…………….………..………………………….…..........136 9. Pushkina’s Criteria for Success Applied to PKOs in Sierra Leone………...……..143 10. A Comparison of PKOs in Sierra Leone in Five Key Categories……...…………157 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Level of Difficulty (Bar Graph)….…………………………….……………....….48 2. Level of Difficulty (Fortna's statistically significant indicators) …………………50 3. Map of Rebel Groups in the DRC ……………………………………..…...…....106 4. UN PKOs in Africa, 1996-present, Difference in Political Stability and Human Rights over Period of PKO ………………………………………...........177 5. Regional PKOs in Africa, 1996-present, Difference in Political Stability and Human Rights over Period of PKO ……………………………..……………….178 6. Lead State PKOs in Africa, 1996-present, Difference in Political Stability and Human Rights over Period of PKO ……………………..……………...………..179 7. Peacekeeping in Africa, 1996-present: “Progress Rate”………...…......………..180 8. Average