Description
Many international organizations (IOs) provide assistance to governments through country offices or peacekeeping operations. Sometimes, despite paying lip service to the principles that IOs seek to promote, national counterparts violate international norms. IO officials must then choose between confrontational and conciliatory responses. These responses are located on a spectrum from robust norm enforcement to silence and downplaying. How do IO officials make those decisions? Based on 200 interviews with UN peacekeeping officials, we argue that the factors that shape IO officials’ decision-making are found across three categories: individual, unit-level, and positional. In terms of individual characteristics, previous experience, career security, and the length of service at the duty station matter. Regarding unit-level factors, the politicization of the IO section’s work, its professional composition, and the type of national interlocutors predispose units to be host government’s supporters or critics. In terms of positional considerations, the place of a post or unit in the IO hierarchy, the relations with other IO entities, and the distance from the field play a role. Understanding IO officials’ predispositions can help IO senior leaders and member states shape the composition of the international bureaucracy in a way that increases the likelihood of outcomes they deem desirable.
