Document Library

The Limits of Peacebuilding: International Regulation and Civil Society Development in Bosnia

Author: D Chandler
Date: 1999
Size: 16 pages

Access full text: via document delivery

Summary

Since the Cold War the role of international peacekeeping missions has evolved from one of military presence to overseer of peace settlements. This development has coincided with the identification of some conflicts as ‘complex political emergencies’ that many commentators claim require long term international intervention. These solutions usually involve democratisation and/ or the mobilisation of civil society in order to facilitate pluralism.

This article argues against this external intervention. It looks at the case of Bosnia to investigate how top-down international regulation and bottom-up civil society building may have conflicting, rather than complementary, impacts. It argues that long-term interventions can obstruct a self-governing democracy, instead institutionalising divisions and providing unaccountable solutions.

The main findings of this paper are:

• In the case of Bosnia it was argued that without civil society development, economic reconstruction would have little impact on political and social divisions and aid flows would divert responsibility from local authorities. On the other hand, bottom-up empowerment of civil society would be able to facilitate peace and stability. Thus, international peacekeepers were given the role of promoting democratisation and civil society.
• Therefore, Bosnia has been through a process of externally-imposed peace agreements. However, peace-building programmes often ignore the impact of a long-term programme or how it denies local capacities to deal with their own ‘complex political emergencies’. Existing frameworks for peace are overlooked.
• Supposedly transitional international peacekeeping operations became open-ended, removing authority from newly-elected governments and the opportunity of self-government. This became top-down peace-building, with Bosnian representatives having little choice but to agree with externally-imposed policies formulated by unaccountable policy-makers. Thus, elected representatives, let alone the general public, had little say in policy matters, excluding all but the political elites.
• Local NGOs were established which gained international recognition and influence but did not have the involvement of the Bosnian people. They comprised educated elites who did not relate well to ‘ordinary people’.

The main policy implications of this paper are:

• International peace-building can further divide communities, as external regulation means that neither side has the security of self-government.
• The extended peace-building approach fails to build support for political alternatives and provides a carte blanche for international intervention to override internal democracy. It removes processes of democracy, legitimacy and accountability.
• Obstacles to democratisation were attributed to the Bosnian people, who were held incapable of handling democracy or independent judgement. The focus became building the capacity of individuals for peace-building, overlooking the presence of political regulation. This ignored the role of the international peace-building organisation or the potential of self-government

Access full text: via document delivery

Source: Chandler, D. 1999, ‘The Limits of Peacebuilding: International Regulation and Civil Society Development in Bosnia,’ International Peacekeeping, vol. 6, no. 1, pp109-125.
Author: International Social Policy Research Unit, Leeds Metropolitan University, http://www.leedsmet.ac.uk/lbs/pri/