PERSPECTIVE Peace Operations in a Changing World Order Unpacking Core Challenges XENIA AVEZOV, JAÏR VAN DER LIJN and MARIUS MÜLLER-HENNIG November 2014 n Contrary to the popular assumption that increasing multipolarity is detrimental to cooperation and consensus on peace operations, emerging powers have for the most part expressed a positive sentiment towards peace operations. Traditional and emerg­ing powers have common interests in conflict management in many key regions. n In the past few years, debates about peace operations have been riddled with mis­conceptions that have often led to a counter-productive and poisoned exchange in policy circles. By focusing attention on the exceptional cases, the discussions become unnecessarily polarized. In the long run this may lead to the baby being thrown out with the bathwater. n Many of the current operations require risk-taking, while only a limited number of contingents are able and willing to take these necessary risks. Acknowledging and dealing more openly with the risks that peace operations entail is vital. n There is an unbalanced approach to burden sharing in peace operations and an oversimplification of what constitutes an equitable division of labor in the eyes of Troop Contributing Countries(TCCs). The peace operations architecture would be healthier if the imbalance between Financial Contributing Countries(FCCs) and TCCs were decreased. n Regionalization will not be sufficient to meet the future challenges facing peace operations. There are few ›regional solutions to regional problems‹. While more in­vestment, respect and ownership for regional organizations are needed, one should not expect these organizations to solve regional issues on their own.