reform following peacekeeping operations is less than
encouraging. Roland Paris criticizes the peacekeeping
operations of the 1990s for their narrow focus on elections and economic liberalization, which lacked the
necessary commitment to institution building to make
reform “stick.”40 Studies on the effect of peacekeeping on democratization are somewhat sparse. Some
evidence suggests that outright victory, specifically
rebel victory, improves the prospect for democracy,
but these results are heavily disputed and any positive impact might be many years in coming.
Does peacekeeping lead to a more democratic future for post-war societies? Given that most peacekeeping operations are designed with democratic
reform in mind, it is surprising that there is little evidence that peacekeeping interventions have any effect
on democracy. Most authors who examine the effect
of peacekeeping on democratization find no strong or
consistent effect in the short- or long-term.41 Fortna
finds that when compared to cases where wars end
without outside involvement, peacekeeping has no
significant effect on the quality of democracy in the
year following the war, three years out, or five years
after the conflict ends.42 Similarly, at the ten-43 and
twenty-44year mark, countries that received peacekeeping operations are no more democratic than those
countries that did not receive peacekeeping operations.45 Madhav Joshi finds a positive and statistically
significant relationship between peacekeeping and democratization and his measure of democracy is different—relying on a three-point shift in subcomponents
of an index on institutional openness to represent a
democratic transition.46 The balance of the evidence,
however, suggests that there is no clear relationship
between peacekeeping and democratization.
16