IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pepspp/v29y2023i1p71-94n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the United Nations Good Offices for Conflict Resolution in Yemen

Author

Listed:
  • Al-Tamimi Adeb Abdulelah Abdulwahid
  • Venkatesha Uddagatti

    (Department of Studies and Research in political Science, Kuvempu University, Shivamoga, India)

Abstract

The current study examines the United Nations Good Offices and their ability to enhance stability and peace in Yemen where political and socioeconomic strife is existing. It highlights the constant efforts done by the United Nations for achieving peace since the outbreak of the Youth Revolution (Arabic spring) in 2011 and how these efforts attempt to stop the war and fulfill peace in the context of the Yemeni conflict. This study adopts both exploratory and empirical methods to shed light on the roles of the good offices of the UN for conflict resolution in Yemen, testing the multiple regressions between the good offices and resolving conflict in Yemen, as well as, analyzing why these efforts have failed to overcome this chaos. The study shows the positive impact of the good offices on stopping war and controlling conflict in Yemen through the UNSC resolutions which have a high influence among other efforts. Therefore, it is discovered in this article that the UN Good Offices have failed to accomplish their primary objectives of attaining peace and ending the continuous war because of some obstruction within the UN itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Al-Tamimi Adeb Abdulelah Abdulwahid & Venkatesha Uddagatti, 2023. "Assessment of the United Nations Good Offices for Conflict Resolution in Yemen," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 29(1), pages 71-94, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:29:y:2023:i:1:p:71-94:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/peps-2022-0031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/peps-2022-0031
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/peps-2022-0031?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:29:y:2023:i:1:p:71-94:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.