Getting To Lasting Peace Does Mediation Suffice To Settle Civil Wars Successfully

Essay from the year 2003 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Peace and Conflict Studies, Security, grade: 2 (B), University of Kent (Brussls School of International Studies), course: Negotiation and Mediation, 16 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: Since the end of the Cold War the nature and perception of international conflict has changed significantly. Instead of inter-state war, intra-state conflicts now constitute the majority of current conflicts. "Global nuclear warfare is no longer the primary international security concern. It has been displaced by [...] excessively violent and destructive intra-state or internal conflicts." And these conflicts, which would have been regarded as purely internal matters during the Cold War, are now seen as being of international concern. Civil wars which are normally regionalised, are often nevertheless deemed to be a threat to international peace and security. As a result, the international community has become more and more involved in the resolution of civil wars, often by mediating peace negotiations between the parties involved. However, the resolution of civil war is one the most challenging tasks in Conflict Resolution. Only a minority of negotiations result in a lasting peace and only under exceptional circumstances is this achieved without a third party mediating the negotiations. Although many of the attempts to settle civil wars by mediation have failed, it is clear that the involvement of international mediators makes civil war negotiations more likely to succeed and in some cases indeed helps to find long-term solutions to the conflict.

Why do some civil wars end in successfully implemented peace settlements while others are fought to the finish? Numerous competing theories address this question. Yet not until now has a study combined the historical sweep, empirical richness, and conceptual rigor necessary to put them thoroughly to the test and draw lessons invaluable to students, scholars, and policymakers. Using data on every civil war fought between 1940 and 1992, Barbara Walter details the conditions that lead combatants to partake in what she defines as a three-step process--the decision on whether to initiate negotiations, to compromise, and, finally, to implement any resulting terms. Her key finding: rarely are such conflicts resolved without active third-party intervention. Walter argues that for negotiations to succeed it is not enough for the opposing sides to resolve the underlying issues behind a civil war. Instead the combatants must clear the much higher hurdle of designing credible guarantees on the terms of agreement--something that is difficult without outside assistance. Examining conflicts from Greece to Laos, China to Columbia, Bosnia to Rwanda, Walter confirms just how crucial the prospect of third-party security guarantees and effective power-sharing pacts can be--and that adversaries do, in fact, consider such factors in deciding whether to negotiate or fight. While taking many other variables into account and acknowledging that third parties must also weigh the costs and benefits of involvement in civil war resolution, this study reveals not only how peace is possible, but probable.

Essay from the year 2003 in the subject Politics - Topic: Peace and Conflict, Security, grade: 2 (B), University of Kent (Brussls School of International Studies), course: Negotiation and Mediation, language: English, abstract: Since the end of the Cold War the nature and perception of international conflict has changed significantly. Instead of inter-state war, intra-state conflicts now constitute the majority of current conflicts. “Global nuclear warfare is no longer the primary international security concern. It has been displaced by [...] excessively violent and destructive intra-state or internal conflicts.” And these conflicts, which would have been regarded as purely internal matters during the Cold War, are now seen as being of international concern. Civil wars which are normally regionalised, are often nevertheless deemed to be a threat to international peace and security. As a result, the international community has become more and more involved in the resolution of civil wars, often by mediating peace negotiations between the parties involved. However, the resolution of civil war is one the most challenging tasks in Conflict Resolution. Only a minority of negotiations result in a lasting peace and only under exceptional circumstances is this achieved without a third party mediating the negotiations. Although many of the attempts to settle civil wars by mediation have failed, it is clear that the involvement of international mediators makes civil war negotiations more likely to succeed and in some cases indeed helps to find long-term solutions to the conflict.

The recent efforts to reach a settlement of the enduring and tragic conflict in Darfur demonstrate how important it is to understand what factors contribute most to the success of such efforts. In this book, Caroline Hartzell and Matthew Hoddie review data from all negotiated civil war settlements between 1945 and 1999 in order to identify these factors. What they find is that settlements are more likely to produce an enduring peace if they involve construction of a diversity of power-sharing and power-dividing arrangements between former adversaries. The strongest negotiated settlements prove to be those in which former rivals agree to share or divide state power across its economic, military, political, and territorial dimensions. This finding is a significant addition to the existing literature, which tends to focus more on the role that third parties play in mediating and enforcing agreements. Beyond the quantitative analyses, the authors include a chapter comparing contrasting cases of successful and unsuccessful settlements in the Philippines and Angola, respectively.

The end of the Cold War has changed the shape of organized violence in the world and the ways in which governments and others try to set its limits. Even the concept of international conflict is broadening to include ethnic conflicts and other kinds of violence within national borders that may affect international peace and security. What is not yet clear is whether or how these changes alter the way actors on the world scene should deal with conflict: Do the old methods still work? Are there new tools that could work better? How do old and new methods relate to each other? International Conflict Resolution After the Cold War critically examines evidence on the effectiveness of a dozen approaches to managing or resolving conflict in the world to develop insights for conflict resolution practitioners. It considers recent applications of familiar conflict management strategies, such as the use of threats of force, economic sanctions, and negotiation. It presents the first systematic assessments of the usefulness of some less familiar approaches to conflict resolution, including truth commissions, "engineered" electoral systems, autonomy arrangements, and regional organizations. It also opens up analysis of emerging issues, such as the dilemmas facing humanitarian organizations in complex emergencies. This book offers numerous practical insights and raises key questions for research on conflict resolution in a transforming world system.

"A project of the International Peace Academy and CISAC, The Center for International Security and Cooperation"--P. ii.

The recent efforts to reach a settlement of the enduring and tragic conflict in Darfur demonstrate how important it is to understand what factors contribute most to the success of such efforts. In this book, Caroline Hartzell and Matthew Hoddie review data from all negotiated civil war settlements between 1945 and 1999 in order to identify these factors. What they find is that settlements are more likely to produce an enduring peace if they involve construction of a diversity of power-sharing and power-dividing arrangements between former adversaries. The strongest negotiated settlements prove to be those in which former rivals agree to share or divide state power across its economic, military, political, and territorial dimensions. This finding is a significant addition to the existing literature, which tends to focus more on the role that third parties play in mediating and enforcing agreements. Beyond the quantitative analyses, the authors include a chapter comparing contrasting cases of successful and unsuccessful settlements in the Philippines and Angola, respectively.

Just peace has been much talked about in everyday life, but it is less well researched by academics. The rationale of this book is therefore to probe what constitutes a just peace, both conceptually within the field of peacebuilding and empirically in the context of the EU as a peacebuilder in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The EU has used the term just peace in many of its most important declarations on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict throughout the years. Defining a just peace is about these declaratory efforts by the EU to articulate a common formula of a just peace in the conflict. Securing and building a just peace are about the EU’s role in implementing this formula for a just peace in the conflict through the creation of a Palestinian state. As the EU enters its fifth decade of involvement in the conflict, there can be little doubt that in common with the rest of the international community it has failed in its efforts to establish a just peace between Israelis and Palestinians. While this is an inescapable overall conclusion from four decades of EC/EU peacebuilding in the conflict, it is, at the same time, possible to draw a number of other conclusions from this book. Most importantly, it argues that the EU is a major legitimizing power in the conflict and that it has kept the prospects of a two-state solution alive through its support for the Palestinian statebuilding process.