Slow responses and blocked decision-making of international organizations provide opportunities for ad hoc coalitions to fill functional and political gaps. Compared to UN peace operations, ad hoc coalitions avoid gridlock and high transaction costs, they are fast to set up, can be task and time specific, flexible and easily dissolved. However, they also have much lighter human rights and financial accountability frameworks, a patchy record of longer-term impact and can contribute to a more fragmented response to armed conflicts and threats to international peace and security. Is liberal internationalism worth saving? Ad hoc coalitions and their consequences for international security John Karlsrud, Stephanie Hofmann, Yf Reykers Going forward, policymakers should: - Use the right instrument at the right time, matching tools with facts on the ground and political objectives. - Complement financial support to ad hoc coalitions with stronger demands of human rights and financial accountability. - In transitions, consider the longer-term impacts on the effectiveness and legitimacy on the international peace and security architecture.