Chapter 3 - Preventing and managing violent conflict

Ending violent conflict: conflict negotiation

Introduction 

The processes and aims of conflict management and conflict resolution can overlap with those of conflict prevention.  Conflict management refers to measures aimed at limiting, mitigating and/or containing a conflict without necessarily solving it.  Conflict resolution refers to attempts to resolve the underlying incompatibilities of a conflict non-violently, including efforts to get the parties to mutually accept each other’s existence (Swanström and Weissmann 2005). The methods involved in conflict management and resolution may include negotiation, mediation, arbitration, joint problem-solving and search for integrative solutions, and/or customary or traditional methods.

Similar to conflict prevention, conflict management and resolution activities often seek to identify and address the perceived root causes of conflicts, in order to tailor appropriate solutions. The applicability of democratisation and economic development, for example, which are commonly proposed solutions to conflict, may vary depending on the root causes of conflict.  Where the root cause is political marginalisation or the absence of a social contract, democratisation may play a positive role in conflict resolution; whereas if the root cause concerns identity politics, democratisation may not be the appropriate response and in some contexts may exacerbate the risk of conflict.

Other recent research stresses that effective conflict management and resolution requires instead a shift in attention from root causes only to also the dynamics (actors and motivations) and impact of conflict (changes wrought by the war itself); and to the ‘causes of peace’ (political arrangements necessary to settle power struggles and limit the use of violence).  

Swanström, N.L.P. and Weissmann, M. S., 2005, ‘Conflict, Conflict Prevention and Conflict Management and Beyond: A Conceptual Exploration’, Central Asia-Caucasus Institute and Silk Road Studies Programme, Washington and Nacka, Sweden
What are the interpretational differences in conflict, conflict prevention and conflict management? How do we come to terms with the lack of consensus within the academic and policy community? This paper, published by the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute and Silk Road Studies Program, provides an overview of the conceptual terms. Traditional assumptions are challenged with the three concepts viewed as inter-related rather than as separate. An integrated, holistic approach is recommended.
Access full text: available online 

Kriesberg, L., 2007, 'Contemporary Conflict Resolution Applications' in Crocker, C., Hampson, F. O., and All, P. (eds), Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict Management in a Divided World, Washington: United States Institute for Peace, pp. 455-476
What are conflict resolution (CR) strategies and how do they benefit those involved in wars? This chapter looks at the expanding field of CR in recent decades. CR offers many strategies that are relevant for combatants as well as for the intermediaries trying to mitigate destructive conflicts. CR ideas are increasingly influential and new developments are largely a response to the changing international environment. However, they are still insufficiently understood and utilised.
Access full text: via document delivery

Woodward, S.L., 2007, 'Do the Root Causes of Civil War Matter? On Using Knowledge to Improve Peacebuilding Operations', Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 143-170
A focus on “root causes” of civil war would not improve peacebuilding interventions and could even be counterproductive. This paper, published by the Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, disputes the explanation that interventions fail in part because they fail to address root causes of civil war. The most pressing question for peacebuilding missions is not why civil war occurs, but how we intervene and improve on currently inadequate results.
Access full text: available online 

Kotze, D., 2005, ‘Implications of the Democracy-Development Relationship for Conflict Resolution’, African Journal on Conflict Resolution, vol. 5, no. 1, pp.61-90
Can democracy and development constitute a blueprint for conflict resolution? This study from the University of South Africa uses data from African countries to explore the relationship between democracy, economic development and conflict resolution. It finds that economic development is a more important variable than political legacy, and the social impact of growth is more important than growth itself. However, neither democratisation nor economic development, nor a combination of them, can be applied under all circumstances for conflict resolution.
Access full text: available online

Conflict negotiation

The main purpose of negotiations is to reconcile the conflicting positions of the relevant parties. This is a challenging process that needs to take into consideration many variables and factors, including but not limited to: timing and sequencing; leadership preferences; degree of inclusiveness in terms of parties and content; and methods of leverage.

The most difficult part of conflict negotiations is often getting the parties to the table. In the Mozambique peace process, for example, it took ten years from the first peace initiative and dialogue until formal negotiations started. Negotiations also frequently collapse. The existence of alternative channels and different actors that can connect to the conflict parties is therefore required to keep the process going until the parties return to the table and formal negotiations restart.

Ripeness

The concept of ‘ripeness’ refers to the belief that parties to a conflict will be open to negotiation processes when they arrive at ‘mutually hurting stalemates’ (MHS).  Mutually hurting stalemates are situations in which parties find themselves locked in a mutually costly conflict that neither party can win.  These situations have in the past provided the occasion for successful conflict resolution interventions.  In many conflicts, however – particularly internal conflicts, there are no clear ripe moments, and external actors may need to create opportunities and entry points.

Zartman, I. W, 2001, 'The Timing of Peace Initiatives: Hurting Stalemates and Ripe Moments', The Global Review of Ethnopolitics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 8-18
How can the timing of peace initiatives help to resolve conflicts? This Global Review of Ethnopolitics article argues that parties resolve their conflicts only when they are ready to do so – when alternative, usually unilateral means of achieving a satisfactory result are blocked. Practitioners need to take advantage of this ‘ripe moment’ when it exists, or help produce it, or stand ready to act on it when it does not exist.
Access full text: available online

Pruitt, D. G., 2005, ‘Whither Ripeness Theory?’ Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
How can ripeness theory be improved to further understanding of conflict resolution processes? This paper from George Mason University recasts ripeness theory to create a new variant, ‘readiness theory’. The recast theory argues that an actor’s readiness for conflict resolution is a function of both motivation to end the conflict and optimism about the success of negotiation. The model defines ripeness as the breadth of the 'central coalition' of ready individuals and of subgroups, a coalition that spans both sides of the conflict divide.
Access full text: available online

Process

The process that leads to a peace settlement is likely to play an important role in determining its success. A comprehensive approach to peace negotiations, where key issues are frontloaded may be preferable to an incremental approach, which presents opportunities for trust to break down.

Bose, S., 2010, ‘Contested Lands: Israel-Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia, Cyprus, and Sri Lanka’, Harvard University Press
How can peace be made between warring groups with seemingly incompatible aims? The concluding chapter of this publication examines five case studies of recent peace processes. It argues that in order to resolve ethno-national conflicts, peace processes should address border issues directly, use third parties and adopt a fast-track approach to peacemaking.
Access full text: via document delivery

Aspinall, E., H. Crouch, 2003, ‘The Aceh Peace Process: Why It Failed’, Policy Studies 1, East-West Center, Washington, D.C.
Access full text: available online

Negotiating with non-state armed groups

Non-state armed groups have become key actors in violent internal and regional conflicts.  They refer to non-conventional combatants (insurgents, partisans, rebel groups, terrorists, guerrillas, freedom fighters, the mujahedeen, separatists, national liberation movements and de facto governing authorities).  While still considered controversial in some contexts, the need to negotiate with non-state armed groups for purposes of securing the peace and implementing development activities has been increasingly recognised in conflict and development literature. 

The agreement of non-state armed actors for development activities to take place on territory under their control is essential. The exclusion of non-state armed groups from negotiations and peace processes can also result in continued resort to violence by those left out.  Recent research argues that the engagement, and in turn legitimation, of insurgent or ‘terrorist’ groups through talks may be a means to transform a conflict away from violence.  Engagement by international actors with warlords and divisive local leaders, and the targeted use of incentives and sanctions, can also influence changes in behaviour to more peaceful methods of leadership.     

When engaging with non-state armed groups, it is important to conduct assessments to understand the group’s structure, command and control, and the capacity of its leadership to influence the behaviour of its members. It is also important to examine the group’s relationship to the state, as the state / non-state distinction is often not clear-cut.

Stott, N., 2007, 'Negotiating in Practice what is Non-Negotiable in Principle: Development Policy and Armed Non-State Actors', Discussion Paper, no. 8/2007, German Development Institute (DIE), Bonn
Should Armed Non-State Actors be engaged in development dialogue? Would this be tantamount to negotiating with terrorists? Armed Non-State Actors are now an important feature of violent conflict within and between states. This paper identifies opportunities and challenges for engaging Armed Non-State Actors from a development perspective. It refutes the idea that this engagement legitimises violence and suggests there is widespread support for such work.
Access full text: available online

McCartney, C., 2005, ‘Engaging Armed Groups in Peace Processes: Reflections for Practice and Policy from Colombia and the Philippines’, Accord, no. 16, Conciliation Resources, London
How do we understand the nature of armed groups? What is the importance of perceptions in regards to motivation and goals? This paper reflects on the questions of ideology, power and representation; examining the implications for conflict resolution strategies. It is found that the conflict resolution community tends to ignore certain issues that do not fit into current conceptualisations, while a deeper understanding of how to build relationships is required.
Access full text: available online

Nilsson, D., 2008, ‘Partial Peace Rebel Groups Inside and Outside Civil War Settlements’, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Access full text: available online

Toros, H., 2008, ‘“We Don't Negotiate with Terrorists!”: Legitimacy and Complexity in Terrorist Conflicts’, Security Dialogue, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 407-426, International Peace Research Institute, Oslo 
Does negotiating with terrorist groups legitimise them? How can policymakers engage with multifaceted, horizontal organisations such as Al-Qaeda? This article argues that legitimacy and complexity can contribute to non-violent resolution of conflicts involving terrorist violence. It also argues that naming groups as ‘terrorist’ makes non-violent responses to terrorism less possible.
Access full text: available online

Peake, G., Gormley-Heenan, M. and Fitzduff, M., 2005, ‘From Warlords to Peacelords: Local Leadership Capacity in Peace Processes’, Initiative on Conflict Resolution and Ethnicity (INCORE), University of Ulster
What is the role of local political leaders in conflict and peacebuilding?  This study explores the roles played by local leaders in starting, perpetuating and ending conflict in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Sierra Leone.  While local leaders play a key role in starting and perpetuating conflict, it is the pressure from, and involvement of, the international community which has been the pivotal force for change in these countries.
Access full text: available online

Inclusive peace negotiations – women, minority groups, and civil society

Inclusiveness in negotiations and peace processes relates not only to non-state armed groups, but also to other non-state actors. The activities of various non-state actors have often helped to create the conditions for formal peace negotiations to take place. In order for negotiations to have a greater likelihood of securing and sustaining the peace, they need to incorporate the active participation, perspectives and needs of women, minority groups, community groups, civil society more generally, and other non-state actors. This is important not only because these actors have important perspectives to contribute, but also because their participation early on in peace processes can help to guarantee their subsequent participation in new decision-making institutions that are often designed during negotiations.

The difficulty with inclusiveness is its feasibility.  Mediators often argue that the inclusion of too many people at the negotiation table makes an already difficult task almost impossible. Thinking about a variety of ways to link otherwise excluded groups to a negotiation process is thus an important part of the negotiation set-up. In Guatemala, for example, a civil society assembly was held parallel to the official negotiation process and produced proposals that were often taken into consideration by the official negotiating parties.

Banaszak, K. et al (ed), 2005, 'Securing the Peace: Guiding the International Community towards Women’s Effective Participation throughout Peace Processes,' United Nations Development Fund for Women
How and why should women be involved in peace processes? This paper highlights the importance of involving women at every stage of peace negotiations and gives recommendations for how this might be achieved in practice. It argues that when approaching the task of ending war, the stakes are too high to neglect the resources that women have to offer.
Access full text: available online 

Baldwin, C., Chapman, C., and Gray, Z., 2007, ‘Minority Rights: The Key to Conflict Prevention’, Minority Rights Group International, London
Minority issues lie at the heart of many of the world’s conflicts. Yet minority rights are often marginalised in peace processes and conflict prevention programmes. This study looks at Chechnya, Darfur, Kashmir, Kosovo and Sri Lanka. Understanding the warning signs provided by minority rights violations could prevent conflicts. Groups should not be separated along ethnic, religious or linguistic lines as a way of creating peace, as such divisions can entrench old hatreds and wounds in the long term.
Access full text: available online

Paffenholz, T., Kew, D., and Wanis-St. John, D., 2006, ‘Civil Society and Peace Negotiations: Why, Whether and How They Could Be Involved’, Paper presented at the International Studies Association Conference, March, San Diego
Access full text: available online

Paffenholz, T., 2009, ‘Civil Society and Peacebuilding’, Working Paper, no. 4, The Centre on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding, The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva
How can civil society most effectively work for peacebuilding? This paper presents the findings of a comparative research project which analysed the performance of civil society in regards to protection, monitoring, advocacy, socialisation, social cohesion, facilitation, and service delivery in situations of war and armed conflict. It concludes civil society can play an important supportive role, but the effectiveness of its activities varied substantially. Contextual factors may limit or strengthen its ability to contribute to peacebuilding.
Access full text: available online

Gorman, D., and Kivimäki, T., 2008, ‘Non-Governmental Actors in Peace Processes - The Case of Aceh’, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva
Access full text: available online

For more discussion and resources on women’s participation in peace processes, see women in conflict-affected areas in this guide.

Peace Conditionality

Peace conditionality can be defined as “the use of aid as a lever to persuade conflicting parties to make peace, to implement a proposed peace accord, and to consolidate peace” (Frerks 2006: 16). There are differing positions within the donor and academic community with regard to the desirability and feasibility of such conditionalities. While some believe that aid can be an effective incentive to negotiate and to reduce social tensions, particularly when tied to specific steps to build peace; others assert that aid alone cannot affect conflict dynamics or transform conflict. The effectiveness of aid as an incentive in a peace process also depends on the level of aid dependency of the country in question.

Frerks, G., 2006, ‘The Use of Peace Conditionalities in Conflict and Post-conflict Settings: A Conceptual Framework and a Checklist’, Conflict Research Unit Working Paper, Clingendael Institute, The Hague
How can peace operations be made more effective? Can the application of so-called ‘peace conditionalities’ be helpful towards increasing the effectiveness of conflict-related activities? This study looks at the lessons-learned on peace conditionalities in post-conflict reconstruction. It shows that issue itself is contested on political and moral grounds, as is the question of whether it actually works. However, despite the limitations regarding the effectiveness of conditionality, there are a number of best practices that can be followed.
Access full text: available online 

Goodhand, J., 2006, ‘Conditioning Peace? The Scope and Limitations of Peace Conditionalities in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka’, Clingendael Institute, The Hague
Access full text: available online

Boyce, J. K., 2003, ‘Aid, Conditionality and War Economies’, Working Paper Series, no. 70, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Access full text: available online

Case studies and guidance

Barnes, C., 2007, ‘Bridging the Gap: Improving UK Support for Peace Processes’, Working Paper, Conciliation Resources, London
Is the United Kingdom (UK) government’s response to violent conflict appropriate? Is it effective in helping warring parties create lasting peace agreements? This study suggests that there are conceptual, policy, institutional and practice gaps in the UK’s responses to violent conflict. The government should direct more of its diplomatic, political and economic resources to the resolution and prevention of conflict through increasing and improving support for peace processes.
Access full text: available online 

Daley, P., 2007, ‘The Burundi Peace Negotiations: An African Experience of Peace-making’, Review of African Political Economy, vol. 34, no. 112, pp. 333 – 352
What do the Burundi peace negotiations reveal about the neo-liberal conception of peace that informs conflict resolution in Africa? Using the Burundi peace negotiations as an example, this article examines neo-liberal conflict resolution in Africa. Peace negotiations should be seen as political struggles, beyond that between the belligerents, due to the involvement of supporting actors promoting vested interests. Resulting peace agreements are not necessarily consensual or compromises for the sake of peace, but rather temporary stalemates between international, regional and local actors.
Access full text: via document delivery

Hayner, P., 2009, ‘Negotiating Justice: Guidance for Mediators’, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva
What are the options for securing justice in peace negotiations? What role can mediators play in ensuring that peace agreements effectively address issues of justice? This report provides guidance on the parameters and policy options for justice in peace negotiations. It argues that recent practice shows that there are ways to secure both justice and peace. While much depends on negotiating parties, mediators can better equip themselves to offer advice to ensure stronger attention to justice issues in peace agreements.
Access full text: available online

Vinjamuri, L. and Boesenecker, A., 2007, 'Accountability and Peace Agreements: Mapping Trends from 1980 to 2006', Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva
To what extent have peace agreements incorporated mechanisms for dealing with justice issues? This study analyses 77 verified peace processes from around the world between 1980 and 2006. Negotiating justice is a complex and difficult process, especially within a peace agreement involving a whole range of additional issues.
Access full text: available online

New additions