CHALLENGES TO UN MEDIATION IN INTRASTATE CONFLICTS : Analysing Political and Structural Constraints through Case Studies of Yemen and Myanmar

Sammanfattning

This thesis examines how political and structural constraints shape the United Nations’ capacity to exercise its mediation mandate in complex intrastate conflicts. Although the UN holds formal authority and high normative legitimacy, its practical mediation capacity varies considerably across contexts. The study develops an analytical framework drawing on institutional theory, principal-agent theory, and mediation theory, conceptualising mediation capacity through three dimensions: convening capacity, process sustainability, and influence over negotiation frameworks. It employs a qualitative comparative case study of UN mediation in Yemen (2015-present) and Myanmar (2021-present). The findings show that mediation capacity is not determined by mandate alone but emerges from the interaction between political constraints, particularly Security Council divisions and inconsistent member state support, and structural constraints, including actor fragmentation, conflict internationalisation, and limited consent. In Yemen, internationalised conflict dynamics and politicised engagement undermine neutrality and flexibility, while in Myanmar, Security Council deadlock and restricted access severely constrain mediation efforts. The thesis argues that UN mediation capacity is fundamentally contingent on political context, where institutional authority is systematically mediated and constrained by external power relations and conflict structures. This challenges the assumptions that a formal mandate and normative legitimacy translate into effective mediation influence.