Call for papers vol 9, no. 1, 2018 is open until 30 March 2018


Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrintE-mail


point: “A single paradigm -liberal internationalism- appears to guide the work of most international agencies engaged in peace building. The central tenet of this paradigm is the assumption that the surest foundation for peace, both within and between states, is market democracy, that is, a liberal democratic policy and a market-oriented economy.” (p. 56) Ahearne (2009) makes a similar point that “the prescribed remedy these peace building operations have sought to apply is the establishment of liberal democracy and a free market economy based upon neoliberal criteria as the surest foundations for peace”( p. 2).
The first step toward the laying of foundations for peace is the peace accords. Most of these documents are broad and far-reaching. For example, Bosnia and Herzegovina's peace agreement deals with: military aspects of the peace settlement, regional stabilization, interentity boundaries, elections, arbitration, human rights, refugees, national monuments, public corporations, international police task-force and civilian implementation. In the case of Kosovo post-war reforms included “media and election rules, the courts and judicial system, economic policy and the constitutional division of powers“(Chandler quoted in Latif, 2005, p. 250).
To summarize, peace building is imagined to be an effort to bring lasting peace that will ensure peace and development for the war-torn countries of the Global South, but
with the tools and instruments that are conceptualized, engineered and implemented by the powerful, developed West. Paris (2002) draws a clear picture of the peace building operations as “not merely exercises in conflict management, but instances of a much larger phenomenon: the globalization of a particular model of domestic governance—liberal market democracy—from the core to the periphery of the international system” (p. 638). This corresponds to the idea of normalization (Kolozova 2011 & Buden 2007) which the countries of the former Eastern bloc need to go through to reach the capitalist liberaldemocracy.


Neoliberalism, being the ideological paradigm of the day, occupies more or less the same period in history - the last 30 years in which peace building also became an important part of the agenda of the international community. Thus it is not unusual to see that neoliberal criteria are used as a yardstick to measure the progress of every country, including those who emerge from armed conflict. Briefly, according to this economic paradigm, every state action is viewed as a distortion of the free market. That is why intervention in fiscal and monetary policy by the government, institutions for social protection and organizations of workers such as trade unions are merely obstacles to the market forces. Therefore, the role of the state should be

Creative Commons License
Security Dialogues by Toni Mileski is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at

Copyright © 2012 Security Dialogues. Designed by Cube Systems