Stabilization And Stability

Stabilization is an emergent epiphenomenon of a paradigm shift emanated from problematizing instability and insecurity. Stability, as an outcome, represents ‘structural stability’ built on the consent of the population, is resilient and flexible in the face of shocks and can evolve over time as the context hags (UK Government, 2012). It is described stabilization as political systems, which are representative and legitimate, capable of managing conflict and change peacefully, and societies in which human rights and rule of law are respected basic needs are met, security established and opportunities for social and economic development are open to all. The nexus between insecurity and underdevelopment bases on the assumptions of state fragility

If top-down security is not complemented by bottom-up stability, the new government remains narrowly based and susceptible to authoritarianism. In contrast, the post-liberal paradigm advocated by Richmond, Mac Ginty and Chandler favors the ‘primacy of the context over imported values’ or securitization of ‘social space’ that promotes ‘context first’. Richmond’s version of post-liberal peace rests on local, often hidden agency while Chandler’s post-liberal denies all agencies apart from the hegemonic actors (problematizes sovereignty and autonomy of the locals). Hence, post-liberal involves the deeper contextualization of peace as it is formed ton the everyday, local-local level, and which the internationals can adapt to-rather than the other way round. The notion of ‘stabilization’ is ‘control’ rather than the notion that promote emancipation and autonomy (Mac Ginty, 2012). Stabilization presuppses the weakness of the state to consolidate control itss teritory and autonomy. Stabilization shiuld be viewed from the ‘everyday’ incorporating a more nuanced understanding of the local agencies, authonmy, and resistance. Post liberal paradigm acknowledges local-liberal hybridity (Richmond,