IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v40y2023i4p398-418.html

Sticking it out: Instability, regime type, and personnel withdrawals from UN peacekeeping operations

Author

Listed:
  • Molly M. Melin

    (Department of Political Science, Loyola University Chicago, USA)

  • Jacob D. Kathman

    (Department of Political Science, SUNY Buffalo, USA)

Abstract

What explains UN member-state personnel withdrawals from peacekeeping operations? Withdrawals can occur at the behest of contributor states, as contributions are voluntary. We argue that withdrawal is motivated by violence in the peacekeeping operation host state. Research shows that well-resourced missions improve the prospects of success. Personnel withdrawals are dangerous, as they are more likely when continued deployments are needed. We thus need to understand why some states resist withdrawing in the face of instability. We argue that democracies are more stalwart than their counterparts given their constituency interests, the democratic benefits of peacekeeping and the political cover offered to democratic policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Molly M. Melin & Jacob D. Kathman, 2023. "Sticking it out: Instability, regime type, and personnel withdrawals from UN peacekeeping operations," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(4), pages 398-418, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:40:y:2023:i:4:p:398-418
    DOI: 10.1177/07388942221147862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/07388942221147862
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/07388942221147862?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pevehouse, Jon & Russett, Bruce, 2006. "Democratic International Governmental Organizations Promote Peace," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 969-1000, October.
    2. Gartner, Scott Sigmund, 2008. "The Multiple Effects of Casualties on Public Support for War: An Experimental Approach," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 95-106, February.
    3. Jacob Kathman & Michelle Benson, 2019. "Cut Short? United Nations Peacekeeping and Civil War Duration to Negotiated Settlements," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(7), pages 1601-1629, August.
    4. Hultman, Lisa & Kathman, Jacob & Shannon, Megan, 2014. "Beyond Keeping Peace: United Nations Effectiveness in the Midst of Fighting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 737-753, November.
    5. Scott Gates & Håvard Hegre & Mark P. Jones & Håvard Strand, 2006. "Institutional Inconsistency and Political Instability: Polity Duration, 1800–2000," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(4), pages 893-908, October.
    6. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-82, January.
    7. Weeks, Jessica L., 2012. "Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 326-347, May.
    8. Debs, Alexandre & Goemans, H.E., 2010. "Regime Type, the Fate of Leaders, and War," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 430-445, August.
    9. de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno & Siverson, Randolph M., 1995. "War and the Survival of Political Leaders: A Comparative Study of Regime Types and Political Accountability," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 841-855, December.
    10. Croco, Sarah E., 2011. "The Decider's Dilemma: Leader Culpability, War Outcomes, and Domestic Punishment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 457-477, August.
    11. Marina E. Henke, 2019. "UN fatalities 1948–2015: A new dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(4), pages 425-442, July.
    12. Weeks, Jessica L., 2008. "Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 35-64, January.
    13. Reiter, Dan & Stam, Allan C., 1998. "Democracy, War Initiation, and Victory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(2), pages 377-389, June.
    14. J. Michael Greig, 2005. "Stepping Into the Fray: When Do Mediators Mediate?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 249-266, April.
    15. Gleditsch, Kristian Skrede & Ward, Michael D., 2006. "Diffusion and the International Context of Democratization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 911-933, October.
    16. Gelpi, Christopher F. & Griesdorf, Michael, 2001. "Winners or Losers? Democracies in International Crisis, 1918–94," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(3), pages 633-647, September.
    17. Vincenzo Bove & Leandro Elia, 2011. "Supplying peace: Participation in and troop contribution to peacekeeping missions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 48(6), pages 699-714, November.
    18. Carnegie, Allison & Mikulaschek, Christoph, 2020. "The Promise of Peacekeeping: Protecting Civilians in Civil Wars," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 810-832, October.
    19. Lisa Hultman & Jacob Kathman & Megan Shannon, 2013. "United Nations Peacekeeping and Civilian Protection in Civil War," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(4), pages 875-891, October.
    20. Tomz, Michael R. & Weeks, Jessica L. P., 2013. "Public Opinion and the Democratic Peace," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(4), pages 849-865, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiaojun Li & Dingding Chen, 2021. "Public opinion, international reputation, and audience costs in an authoritarian regime," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(5), pages 543-560, September.
    2. Matthew Hauenstein, 2020. "The conditional effect of audiences on credibility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 422-436, May.
    3. Jeff Carter, 2024. "Introduction to special issue: New research on leaders and peace science," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(2), pages 99-109, March.
    4. Daehee Bak, 2020. "Autocratic political cycle and international conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(3), pages 259-279, May.
    5. Randolph M Siverson & Richard AI Johnson, 2018. "Trigger-happy? Military regimes and the timing of conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(5), pages 544-558, September.
    6. Joseph Wright, 2009. "How Foreign Aid Can Foster Democratization in Authoritarian Regimes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 552-571, July.
    7. Barış Arı & Theodora-Ismene Gizelis & Wakako Maekawa, 2025. "How United Nations peace operations can help overcome perils to post-conflict elections," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2257-2272, December.
    8. Wakako Maekawa, 2025. "Introducing new data on UN Special Political Mission Mandated Tasks (UNSPMMT)," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(6), pages 2148-2161, November.
    9. Keisuke Nakao, 2026. "Democratic victory and war duration: Why are democracies less likely to win long wars?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(3), pages 264-285, May.
    10. Andrew Levin, 2021. "Peacekeeper Fatalities and Force Commitments to UN Operations," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(3), pages 292-315, May.
    11. Deniz Cil & Hanne Fjelde & Lisa Hultman & Desirée Nilsson, 2020. "Mapping blue helmets: Introducing the Geocoded Peacekeeping Operations (Geo-PKO) dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(2), pages 360-370, March.
    12. Carolyn Chisadza & Matthew W. Clance & Romuald Meango & Charl van Schoor, 2025. "Women's Agency in Conflict Settings: Evidence from Peace Agreements," Working Papers 202510, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    13. Andrew Kenealy, 2025. "The democratic patience," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(3), pages 675-689, May.
    14. Andrew Boutton & Vito D’Orazio, 2020. "Buying blue helmets: The role of foreign aid in the construction of UN peacekeeping missions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(2), pages 312-328, March.
    15. Timothy JA Passmore & Megan Shannon & Morgan Nadeau, 2023. "Financial contributions to United Nations peacekeeping, 1990–2010: A new dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 40(1), pages 88-107, January.
    16. Christopher Gelpi, 2017. "Democracies in Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(9), pages 1925-1949, October.
    17. Giacomo Chiozza, 2017. "Presidents on the cycle: Elections, audience costs, and coercive diplomacy," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(1), pages 3-26, January.
    18. Michael C. Horowitz & Philip Potter & Todd S. Sechser & Allan Stam, 2018. "Sizing Up the Adversary," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(10), pages 2180-2204, November.
    19. Shawn L. Ramirez, 2018. "Mediation in the shadow of an audience: How third parties use secrecy and agenda-setting to broker settlements," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 30(1), pages 119-146, January.
    20. Jeff Carter, 2024. "Political leaders and military spending," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(2), pages 132-154, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:compsc:v:40:y:2023:i:4:p:398-418. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.