Costruire la pace tra Stato e territori: i dilemmi del peacebuilding

I capitoli in questo volume confermano e approfondiscono un aspetto noto nella letteratura specialistica, e cioè che il ruolo degli attori internazio- nali nel sostenere la liberalizzazione economica e politica sia stato contrad- dittorio e talvolta deludente.2 A fronte di un’enfasi posta sulla necessità di promuovere la democrazia, le organizzazioni internazionali hanno spesso 1 Si veda, ad esempio, Roland Paris, At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict, Cam- bridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004. 2 Anna Jarstad e Timothy D. Sisk (a cura di), From War to Democracy: Dilemmas of Peace- building, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008; Roland Paris e Timothy D. Sisk (a cura di), The Dilemmas of Statebuilding: Confronting the Contradictions of Postwar Peace Operations, London, Routledge, 2009. Introduzione 17 18 Costruire la pace tra Stato e territori imposto in maniera verticistica, e talvolta persino autocratica, le proprie priorità economiche e politiche. Nel tentare di sostenere la costruzione e il consolidamento delle istituzioni politiche locali, gli attori internazionali hanno frequentemente fornito legittimità a protagonisti locali responsabili di crimini e malversazioni. Di più, la promozione di un’economia di mercato ha favorito la svendita di industrie nazionali a mafiosi oppure a potentati economici internazionali con scarso beneficio per la popolazione locale. Non sorprende, quindi, che il tipo di società che emerge nelle zone di crisi e conflitto sia spesso assai distante dagli standard promossi, almeno in linea di principio, dall’azione internazionale. Le istituzioni locali hanno una par- venza di democraticità, ma sono regolarmente percepite come illegittime e inefficaci dai cittadini di quei Paesi. Le minoranze etniche e nazionali continuano a essere oggetto di discriminazione, nonostante la presenza di legislazioni in linea con gli standard internazionali sui diritti umani e le libertà civili e politiche. L’economia ha talvolta vissuto un revival, sostenuto anche dagli aiuti internazionali, ma non è di norma in grado di soddisfare i bisogni della popolazione

NGO Hybridisation as an Outcome of HIV Services Delivery in Global Fund-Supported Programmes in Ukraine

Ukraine has one of the world's fastest growing HIV rates and was one of the largest recipients of funding from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GF). Doctoral research recently completed by the author investigates the conduct and practice of international and national nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) as Principal Recipients of GF grants in Ukraine from 2004 to 2012. The study aimed to understand how NGO-based services were implemented in the context of a state-owned health care system. An ethnographic enquiry including 50 participant interviews was conducted in three oblasts in Ukraine, and in its capital, Kyiv, between 2011 and 2013. The paper is based on a doctoral research and presents some of the findings that emerged from the analysis. The author argues that the accent on NGO-run services promoted by GF has rendered the original grass roots, community-based NGOs, to be undermined or replaced by 'quasi', hybrid NGOs created by health officials and AIDS centres head doctors. The outcome of such hybridization is a weakened civil society that is dependent on external funding and is unable to genuinely represent their communities. 2015 International Society for Third-Sector Research and The Johns Hopkins Universitysch_iihpub3992pu

From a regional hegemony to a global power in potency: the EU’s Global Strategy

This chapter offers an analysis of the potential implications of the 2016 European Global Strategy on the spaces around the EU and further afield. While the European Neighbourhood Policy sought to gradually Europeanise the Mediterranean and the Eastern European and Caucasian countries, the European Global Strategy (EUGS) aims to redefine the EU’s mission in a highly complex and rapidly mutable international environment. The EUGS endeavours to profile a broader mission for the EU, elevating it from a regional to a global player while establishing more balanced relations with the external partners, whether they are states, communities, or people. While it is not yet clear how concretely the EU will operate to further the others’ resilience—the key goal of the EUGS—it is thus clear that it will renounce to exert a structural influence. The EU will not frame the neighbours’ policies, but it will help them instead, guided by a principled pragmatism, to enhance a reforming process domestically generated and crafted

Greater synergy and improved collaboration: Do complex partnerships deliver on the promise in countries emerging from armed conflict?

Complex or multi-stakeholder partnerships—those that include several actors of different types, i.e. public, private or civic—are becoming increasingly popular in different contexts and across policy domains. This is also the case in countries emerging from armed conflict, where many donors are actively promoting partnerships of different kinds that are seen as a solution to a number of concerns from efficiency and effectiveness to empowerment, trust building and local ownership. However, the actual evidence supporting these assumptions remains scarce. This article focuses on several core characteristics of intra-partnership dynamics through original empirical research on complex partnerships operating in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and the DRC. It concludes by showing that real existing complex partnerships in countries emerging from armed conflict demonstrate compositional characteristics typically attributed to complex partnerships but not the modes of governance expected of such partnerships, failing to exploit their added value as a result

Facing a fragmented neighbourhood: The EU and six eastern partnership countries

After the so-called eastern crisis engulfed the EU Neighbourhood, attention was drawn in particular to the mismatch between eastern neighbours' needs and vulnerabilities and the EU assistance, to the changing geopolitical context in the region as well as to the limits of the EU transformative power. This chapter focuses on six countries-Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan-that fall under the EU-Eastern Partnership framework. It takes stock of the 'pre-crisis' evolution of the European Neighbourhood Policy in the east by crossing two dimensions: the outside-in policies promoted by the EU vis-à-vis its eastern neighbours and the inside-in practices of adaptation, contestation, or subversion of EU programmes by local actors. This exploration helps illuminate broader questions about the limits and enabling conditions for the EU's transformative power in its neighbourhood