Editing Failed state (section)

=== Autonomous recovery ===
Jeremy Weinstein disagrees that peacekeeping is necessary to rebuild failed states, arguing that it is often better to allow failed states to recover on their own.<ref name="Center For Global Development">{{Cite news|url=https://www.cgdev.org/publication/autonomous-recovery-and-international-intervention-comparative-perspective-working-paper|title=Autonomous Recovery and International Intervention in Comparative Perspective - Working Paper 57|work=Center For Global Development|access-date=2017-05-19|language=en}}</ref> Weinstein fears that international intervention may prevent a state from developing strong internal institutions and capabilities. One of Weinstein's key arguments is that war leads to peace. By this, he means that peace agreements imposed by the international community tend to freeze in place power disparities that do not reflect reality. Weinstein believes that such a situation leaves a state ripe for future war, while if the war were allowed to play out for one side to win decisively, the future war would be much less likely. Weinstein also claims that war leads to the development of strong state institutions. Weinstein borrows from Charles Tilly to make this argument, which states that wars require large expansions in state capabilities, so the states that are more stable and capable will win wars and survive in the international system through a process similar to natural selection. Weinstein uses evidence from Uganda's successful recovery following a guerilla victory in a civil war, Eritrea's forceful secession from Ethiopia, and development in Somaliland and Puntland—autonomous regions of Somalia—to support his claims. Weinstein does note that lack of external intervention can lead to mass killings and other atrocities, but he emphasizes that preventing mass killings has to be weighed against the ensuing loss of long-term [[state capacity]].<ref name="Center For Global Development"/>