The perils of peacebuilding: legitimacy and evolutionary intervention in Côte d’Ivoire

Abstract

The last decade has seen a shift in the practice of intervention to incorporate the authorisation
to use force for the purpose of implementing broad multidimensional mandates. This shift has
been characterised by the emergence of what can be referred to as ‘evolutionary
interventions’ or those comprised of peacekeeping, peacebuilding, and peace-enforcement
components. While much scholastic debate has been dedicated to understanding what
constitutes legitimate use of force in acute humanitarian intervention, the processes of
obtaining and maintaining legitimacy in evolutionary intervention contexts have been largely
neglected in discussion thus far. This thesis seeks to contribute to understandings of
legitimacy in broader intervention contexts by arguing that intervenors attempting to
implement an evolutionary intervention mandate experience an erosion of legitimacy over
time that can necessitate the unjustifiable use of force when conflicts re-escalate.
Reconstructing the legitimacy narrative of the United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire
(UNOCI) from its inception in 2004 to its use of force to end of the post-election crisis in
April 2011 exposes a pattern of legitimacy erosion illustrative of the difficulties and potential
risks that intervenors face when attempting to maintain legitimacy in long-term interventions.
By using a communicative ethics approach, this analysis elucidates the inherent
communicative components of legitimacy and exposes communicative means through which intervenors like UNOCI can minimize delegitimizing behaviour in future intervention
practice.