Normative Expansion and Reaction in pko s and Global Governance

The United Nations (UN) has acted as a norm entrepreneur, expanding its own assumed legal competence, but also pushing forward the progressive codification of norms into international law. This normative growth has primarily occurred in terms of human-centring in global governance. UN peacekeeping operations (pko s) are viewed traditionally as forces placed between parties to a conflict with the aim of preventing future breakdowns of peace and security, and for monitoring cease-fire agreements. Since the Cold War, however, discussions of, and operations involving comprehensive peacekeeping and peacebuilding have proliferated. In addition to strictly binding rules under international law, international norms including those related to responsibility to protect (r2p) and protection of civilians (PoC), raise expectations of how and when the UN, member states and peacekeepers should act. International norms have generally become more permissive of an expanded role for peacekeepers, including, but not limited to, the expansion of conditions under which deadly force may be used, the protection of civilians and vulnerable groups in conflict affected societies, human security, and peacebuilding, even state-building activities such as security sector reform (ssr) and post-conflict development. This expansion is also seen in global governance efforts aimed at breaking down the barriers between policy silos and stakeholders. Normative expansion has, however, caused great controversy and experienced significant pushback. This article assesses the growth of human-centring, and progress in breaking down silos in the global governance and pko agendas, but also resistance from state-centric stakeholders, and opponents of universalistic multilateralism. It addresses the unique human-centred challenges posed to the global governance agenda, when the formerly greatest champion of multilateralism turns against it.