Search

This article examines how major powers conceive the role of the United Nations (UN) in peacebuilding. We conceptualize the UN's role along the distinction between conflict management and conflict resolution and distinguish between the types of tasks and the approach the UN can adopt. We map states' conceptions of the UN's role in peacebuilding by coding peace-related speeches at the UN Security Council (1991-2020) delivered by China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States as well as Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey as rising regional powers. Our findings show that states' conceptions differ regarding the type of tasks the UN should do. However, the main fault line between the countries lie in the approach the UN should adopt to conduct peacebuilding tasks. We conclude that major powers see a role for the UN beyond mere conflict management as long as it is done with respect for national sovereignty.

In the study of international organizations (IOs), time and space have mostly been approached as contextual, even implicit and unrelated, factors. Instead this special issue considers them as co-constitutive of multilateralism and investigates three main questions: (i) How are IOs influenced by time and space? (ii) How are time and space experienced within IOs? (iii) How do IOs influence time and space around them? This introductory article compiles the contributions’ findings and points to a cyclical process: IOs are influenced by the spatiotemporal conditions of their enactment, leading to a diversity of practices and experiences within these organizations which in turn impact time and space, both in the way they are conceptualized and in their concrete embodiment. The special issue has proven the merit of taking time and space seriously in the study of IOs. This article concludes with a series of (non-exhaustive) research avenues to continue this promising analytical and empirical endeavor, including discussions on the relationship between IO performance and time and space, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The link between bureaucratic representation and the perceived legitimacy of international organizations (IOs) is often cited in the literature. However, we do not know exactly how this works empirically. In this article, I introduce two variables to better understand the bureaucratic representation–IO legitimacy relationship: elite beliefs about geographical representation and self-legitimation practices. The theoretical framework bridges the literature on IO legitimacy in international relations and the literature on representative bureaucracy in public administration. Based on the case of the United Nations Secretariat and semistructured interviews with staff members, human resources experts, and member state representatives, the qualitative analysis points to two conclusions. First, this article presents the various representative bureaucracy–related legitimation practices employed by the bureaucracy at the discursive, institutional, and behavioral levels. Second, bureaucratic representation is perceived as a democratic, fair, and technocratic source of legitimacy by member state representatives. This article adds to the empirical study of IO legitimacy and to recent studies on representative bureaucracy in IOs.