This article examines the UN mission in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI) by applying the framework set out by Paul Diehl and Dan Druckman. It does so in two main parts. The first describes the course and direction of UNOCI until the end of 2011. The second applies elements of the Diehl-Druckman framework to evaluate UNOCI. It argues that two particular issues stand out from the UNOCI case, and are reflected in the title of this essay. First, that in considering the evaluation of peacekeeping missions, the mandate itself needs to be front and centre and more thought needs to be given to the attribution of responsibility when the mandate calls for peacekeepers to ‘assist’ others. Second, peace processes involve multiple foreign actors and UN peace operations are only one part of the puzzle. Overlapping mandates and complex partnerships are becoming a more common feature of UN peace operations. Accounting for these in the evaluation of missions is one of the key challenges for the future.
Ruth Marshall-Fratani‘The War of “Who is Who”: Autochthony, Nationalism and Citizenship in the Ivoirian Crisis’African Studies Reviewvol. 49 no. 2 2006 pp. 9-43; Daniel Chirot ‘The Debacle in Côte d’Ivoire’ Journal of Democracy vol. 17 no. 2 2006 pp. 63-77.
See Maja Bovcon‘France’s Conflict Resolution Strategy in Cote d’Ivoire and its Ethical Implications’African Studies Quarterlyvol. 11 no. 1 2009 p. 7; Moya Collett ‘Foreign Intervention in Cote d’Ivoire: The Question of Legitimacy’ in Tony Coady and Michael O’Keefe (eds.) Righteous Violence (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press 2005) pp. 160-182.