Chapter 3 - Preventing and managing violent conflict

Ending violent conflict: peace agreements and conflict transformation

Peace agreements

Peace agreements are formal agreements aimed at ending violent conflict and creating the conditions for durable peace. They include ceasefire agreements, interim or preliminary agreements, comprehensive and framework agreements, and implementation agreements.  The way in which the conflict ends – whether by compromise, or a one-sided victory, for example – typically has implications for the nature of the peace. 

The signing of a peace agreement is often considered to signal the end of the conflict. Much of the literature argues instead that this signals only the beginning of a process toward ending the conflict. Given that relapse into violence is common, full implementation of the peace agreement is seen as another key milestone.

The failure of peace agreements to end violence and armed conflict has been attributed to both national and international actors. Key parties to the conflict may agree to peace agreements for tactical reasons, without being genuinely committed to the peace process. International interveners are also often blamed for pressuring parties to sign agreements that are likely to fail due to insufficient resolution of key issues and root causes, or due to unrealistic time frames for implementation.  In addition, peace agreements often fail to address important regional dimensions of conflict. Overall, the key challenge is to ensure that peace agreements address, and do not avoid, difficult areas such as power-sharing arrangements, composition of the army and transitional justice.

Dealing with ‘spoilers’

Spoilers are defined as “leaders and parties who believe that peace emerging from negotiations threatens their power, worldview, and interests, and use violence to undermine attempts to achieve it” (Stedman 1997: 5).  Peace agreements and peace processes can be sabotaged by adversaries who may take advantage of a settlement, dissatisfied followers who consider peace a betrayal of their key values, and excluded parties who seek to alter the process or destroy it.  It is essential to assess who the potential spoilers are and to develop, coordinate and implement strategies to manage them.

More recent literature expands the definition of potential spoilers to include a range of geographically external actors, such as ethnic or national diaspora groups, political allies and multinational corporations.

The notion of a binary view of spoilers as either for or against conflict settlement and peace has been critiqued in recent research. Peace agreements themselves may be flawed and considered unjust. The liberal peace framework adopted in many peace agreements can exacerbate conflict in certain situations (see the peacebuilding models section of this guide). ‘Spoilers’ in these contexts would not be aiming to destroy the peace, but rather to create a more durable peace.  It is therefore important to analyse who is defining an actor or a group of actors as ‘spoilers’ and to develop a thorough understanding of the issues at stake.

Stedman, S., 1997, ‘Spoiler Problems in Peace Processes’, International Security, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 5-53
How can spoilers of peace processes be managed? This article from the Journal of International Security argues that choosing an appropriate strategy to manage spoilers requires the correct diagnosis of the type of spoiler. To make an accurate diagnosis, an international actor must overcome 'organisational blinders' such as prior commitments to the spoiler. International actors’ success in spoiler management will also depend on factors such as a coordinated strategy and the ability to create an external coalition for peace.
Access full text: available online

Jones, B.D., 2001, 'The Challenges of Strategic Coordination: Containing Opposition and Sustaining Implementation of Peace Agreements in Civil Wars', International Peace Academy and Centre for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, New York
International actors face recurrent challenges coordinating their efforts to implement peace agreements to end civil wars. This paper identifies strategic coordination amongst third-party actors as a critical element of successful peace implementation. Incoherence and inconsistency in strategy can undermine the viability or the effectiveness of implementation efforts. Strategic coordination is a growing policy challenge due to the increasing proliferation of actors with overlapping mandates, competitive relations and minimal accountability.
Access full text: available online

Newman, E. and Richmond, O., 2006, ‘Peacebuilding and Spoilers’, Conflict Security and Development, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 101-110
Why do many ceasefires and peace agreements in civil wars fail? How and why do some groups actively seek to 'spoil' the peace process? This article examines the concept of spoilers as a threat to security. It argues that imposed or ill-conceived peace processes can encourage spoiling. The presence of spoilers, however, does not necessarily indicate that a peace process is doomed to failure.
Access full text: available online 

Power-sharing

Power-sharing refers to political arrangements that bring rival groups into joint governments and guarantee them representation in political and security institutions as well as a stake in the country’s wealth. Power-sharing has increasingly become a component of peace agreements, particularly in conflicts defined as identity conflicts.

There is a key debate between those who assert that power-sharing is a necessary and effective tool for convincing parties to sign a peace agreement, for creating a new shared political order, and for protecting minority rights; and those who argue instead that power-sharing freezes war-time power balances, excludes new entrants, institutionalises identity divisions and prevents long-term societal transformation. A proposed compromise is to make power-sharing a temporary arrangement that evolves over time to include participation at the elite-level beyond parties to the agreement and of society in general. A more critical body of literature has argued that the recent international preference for power-sharing agreements has created perverse incentives for armed groups to continue fighting.

Papagianni, K., 2008, ‘Power-sharing, Transitional Governments and the Role of Mediation’, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva
Power-sharing transitional governments are common components of peacemaking and peacebuilding efforts. They guarantee the participation of representatives of significant groups in political decision-making and reduce the danger that one group will become dominant. Power sharing among former enemies is difficult to manage and potentially conflict provoking. This paper argues that the international community therefore has an important role to play in assisting power-sharing governments to manage their country’s political transition. It draws on examples from Burundi, Iraq, Cambodia, Nepal and Liberia.
Access full text: available online

Papagianni, K., 2007, ‘Power-sharing: A Conflict Resolution Tool?’, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva
Access full text: available online

Mehler, A., 2008, ‘Not Always in the People's Interest: Power-Sharing Arrangements in African Peace Agreements’, GIGA Research Programme: Violence, Power and Security, Working Paper, no. 83, German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg
Peace agreements that place a heavy emphasis on power-sharing often preclude people’s interests and can impede sustainable peace. This paper analyses the impact of power-sharing arrangements in recent African peace agreements. Many peace agreement failures are caused in part by the international community’s support of power-sharing that benefits armed rebel movements to the detriment of long-term conflict solutions.
Access full text: available online

Tull, D. M. and Mehler, A., 2005, 'The Hidden Costs of Power-Sharing: Reproducing Insurgent Violence in Africa', African Affairs, vol. 104, no. 416, pp. 375-398
This article argues that inconsistencies in Western political engagement, as well as a shift in international attitudes towards insurgent groups, have affected domestic power struggles across Africa. In particular, Western efforts to resolve conflicts through power-sharing agreements (providing rebels with a share of state power) have created incentives for politically ambitious leaders to start insurgency warfare. Power-sharing agreements may therefore contribute to the cycle of insurgent violence and undermine conflict prevention.
Access full text: available online

Miklian, Jason, 2009. 'Post-Conflict Power Sharing: The Nepal Case', South Asia Briefing Paper, no. 2, PRIO, Oslo
Access full text: available online

For more discussion and resources on power-sharing in conflict contexts, see the elections in post-conflict or fragile environments section of the GSDRC’s Political Systems guide

Decentralisation

The effectiveness of decentralisation in securing the peace has also been debated. In some situations, decentralisation may contribute to peace processes by resolving grievances, for example identity grievances. Decentralisation can allow for the expression of diversity and attention to local needs, such as language protection and local development. In other contexts, however, the creation of sub-districts that coincide with identity politics can reinforce and legitimise ethno-religious identities and create tensions. The establishment of local conflict-management mechanisms are essential in these cases.

Brancati, D., 2006, ‘Decentralisation: Fueling the Fire or Dampening the Flames of Ethnic Conflict and Secessionism?’ International Organisation, vol. 60, pp. 651–685
Does political decentralisation reduce ethnic conflict and secessionism? Or does it actually increase these threats to stability? This article explores why decentralisation is more successful in reducing conflict and secessionism in some countries than in others. While decentralisation may increase opportunities for participation in government, it can also indirectly increase ethnic conflict and secessionism by encouraging the growth of regional parties. The overall effect of decentralisation on ethnic conflict and secessionism therefore depends on the strength of regional parties.
Access full text: available online 

Siegle, J. and O’Mahony, P., n.d., ‘Assessing the Merits of Decentralisation as a Conflict Mitigation Strategy’, Paper prepared for USAID’s Office of Democracy and Governance
Access full text: available online

Diprose, R. and Ukiwo, U., 2008, 'Decentralisation and Conflict Management in Indonesia and Nigeria', CRISE Working Paper no. 49, Centre for Research on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity (CRISE), University of Oxford, Oxford
How does decentralisation affect local-level conflict dynamics? Decentralisation can be a useful conflict-mitigating mechanism, but can also generate new tensions in communal, ethnic and religious relations. This paper examines grievances, demands, and identity in the context of decentralisation in Nigeria and Indonesia Decentralisation processes need to address inequalities between groups and have in-built conflict management mechanisms if they are to improve rather than worsen conflict situations, or to avoid triggering new tensions in previously stable communities.
Access full text: available online

Diprose, R., 2007, 'Passing on the Challenges or Prescribing Better Management of Diversity? Decentralisation, Power Sharing and Conflict Dynamics in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia', CRISE Working Paper, no. 38, University of Oxford
How has decentralisation affected conflict dynamics in Indonesia? This paper examines the history of grievances, demands and identity politics since independence and explores the relationship between structural change and conflict management in Central Sulawesi. Decentralisation has had both positive and negative indirect impacts on conflict. Whilst it has brought changes that interact with and potentially stimulate local tensions, effective interventions and strategies can channel these tensions into productive outcomes.
Access full text: available online

Sector-specific provisions

Peace agreements act as blueprints for recovery and peacebuilding processes. As such, it is important to ensure that sectors that are vital to securing the peace and transforming societies, such as justice and education, receive proper treatment and consideration – and give due attention to different groups in society including men and women, children and youth and minorities. Recovery in these sectors also signals a renewal of the social contract.

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

Dupuy, K., 2009,'Education in Peace Agreements, 1989-2005', Conflict Resolution Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 149–166
How has education been addressed in peace agreements? This paper aims to fill a gap in research by providing a systematic overview of the way education has been included in peace agreements and its role as a peacemaking strategy. The way in which education is addressed varies significantly in terms of what it entails, how it will be provided and to whom. Education should be considered an important element both of peace agreements and peace-building processes.
Access full text: available online

For discussion and resources on justice mechanisms in peace agreements, and the debate concerning peace versus justice, see the transitional justice section of the GSDRC’s justice guide.

Ownership and civil society participation

The degree of ownership of peace agreements and the establishment of realistic timelines can determine whether agreements succeed. The 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA), for example, is considered to have failed in large part because the international community did not allow sufficient time for parties to overcome their mutual distrust, to tackle critical issues and to consult with their supporters in Darfur. The final content of the DPA was therefore not a product of locally negotiated compromises and agreement.

The extent to which peace agreements include provisions for civil society and IDPs can also impact upon the durability of agreements and the promotion of peace. Provisions have ranged from their involvement in humanitarian relief to their participation in transitional governance. It is commonly assumed that the more extensive the role of civil society, the greater the likelihood of achieving broad-based peace.  New research cautions, however, that civil society organisations are not neutral and uniform in their advocacy for peace agreements; some organisations are identity-based, with particular agendas and some have actively opposed peace agreements. This opposition may stem though from an effort to improve upon agreements (see dealing with ‘spoilers’ section above).

Nathan, L., 2006, 'No Ownership, No Peace: The Darfur Peace Agreement', Working Paper, Crisis States Research Centre, London
How did the manner in which the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) was negotiated contribute to its failure to establish peace? This article examines the process of negotiations that took place between November 2005 and May 2006 in Abuja, Nigeria, leading to the signing of the DPA. It argues that the deadlines imposed by officials and the intransigence of the parties at the talks prevented effective mediation and contributed to the failure of the DPA to achieve peace. Ending civil wars requires patience and peace agreements have to be shaped and owned by the parties, not forced upon them.
Access full text: available online 

Brickhill, J., 2007, 'Protecting Civilians Through Peace Agreements - Challenges and Lessons of the Darfur Peace Agreement', ISS Paper 138, Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria
Why did the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) fail to create conditions for civilian protection? This paper argues that this was largely a result of the failure to secure effective ceasefire arrangements, a prerequisite for the achievement of a political settlement. A potential ceasefire was lost to short-term political expediency that imposed a premature ‘comprehensive’ peace agreement on the parties. Peace agreements require coherent, effective and specific security provisions and transition strategies that link short-term stabilisation with longer-term security sector transformation.
Access full text: available online

Bell, C., 2007, ‘The People's Peace? Peace Agreements, Civil Society, and Participatory Democracy’, International Political Science Review, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 293-324
To what extent do peace agreements support participatory democracy? This article analyses the provision made by post-1990 peace agreements for civil society. It demonstrates the importance of peace processes to theories of civil society. It does not, however, draw conclusions about the relationship between provision for civil society and the success of peace agreements. Further research is needed to evaluate the role of civil society organisations in transitions towards peace.
Access full text: available online

Mikhelidze, N. and  Pirozzi, N., 2008, ‘Civil Society and Conflict Transformation in Abkhazia, Israel/Palestine, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria and Western Sahara’, Policy Working Paper, no. 3, MICROCON: A Micro Level Analysis of Violent Conflict, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton
How do civil society organisations (CSOs) impact upon conflict dynamics and conflict resolution efforts? This paper provides critical assessments of local CSO contributions in five conflict cases. It finds civil society facing similar problems across these five intractable conflicts. CSOs could develop this sector further through a number of measures, including actively promoting the values of democracy to be learnt and experienced on the ground.
Access full text: available online

McHugh, G., 2010, ‘Integrating Internal Displacement in Peace Processes and Agreements’, Endowment of the United States Institute of Peace and Brookings Institution
Access full text: available online

Conflict transformation

Conflict transformation refers to “approaches that seek to encourage wider social change through transforming the antagonistic relationship between parties to the conflict” (Buckley-Zistel 2008: 21).  It is process and structure-oriented with an emphasis on social change. Conflict scholars and practitioners, such as Burton, Galtung, Lederach and Mitchell, have emphasised that peace agreements and peace processes will produce only a fragile peace in the absence of fundamental social change and transformation. Change and transformation require confronting myths, perceptions and stereotypes of the ‘other’; and developing and entrenching tolerance and respect for the ‘other’.

Dialogue across fault-lines is considered essential for changes in attitudes and conflict transformation, in particular, empathetic, respectful dialogue that explores the conflict (The Transcend Method). Finding entry points for communication, based on shared problems; and a focus on mutual responsibilities as opposed to the apportioning of blame are important elements of fostering such dialogue.

Culture is also seen as a critical resource, as opposed to an obstacle. The transformation of societies is said to require culturally appropriate models of conflict mediation and resolution aimed at empowerment and recognition. Furthermore, the recognition of cultural diversity as a positive and enriching factor can over time contribute to the de-politicisation of identity and the promotion of coexistence.

Galtung, J., 2000, 'Conflict Transformation by Peaceful Means (The Transcend Method)', participants' and trainers' manual, United Nations Disaster Management Training Programme, Geneva
The Transcend Method is based on the central thesis that to prevent violence and develop the creative potential of a conflict, there has to be transformation. At the root of the method is the understanding of conflict as incompatible goals, meaning a problem to be solved; not as incompatible parties (persons, countries etc.), meaning one or more parties to be controlled (usually not oneself).This training manual from the United Nations Disaster Management Training Programme (DMTP) gives an overview of the approach and explains how to put it into practice. Transforming a conflict requires transcending the goals of conflicting parties, defining other goals, disembedding the conflict from its original situation and embedding it in a more promising place. This is achieved through dialogue based on empathy, non-violence and joint creativity. Failure to transform conflicts leads to violence.
Access full text: available online

Mitchell, C.R., 2005, 'Conflict, Social Change and Conflict Resolution. An Enquiry', Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation, Berlin
What is the relationship between conflict and change? How can an understanding of this relationship help resolve conflicts? This paper sets out a framework for thinking systematically about conflict and change. This distinguishes between change that: produces conflict, exacerbates conflict, reduces conflict or resolves conflict. While protracted conflict imposes numerous constraints, one universal factor can lead to change: the fact that human beings learn and, through learning, change.
Access full text: available online

Buckley-Zistel, S., 2008, ‘Violent Conflicts and their Termination’, Chapter 1 in Conflict Transformation and Social Change in Uganda: Remembering after Violence, Palgrave/Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 12-29
How can the termination of a conflict lead to a more sustainable peace? This chapter examines how different methods of violent conflict termination relate to prospects for long-term social change. Settlement, resolution and transformation differ significantly with regard to their understanding of the causes and nature of violent conflict. At the same time, the three different methods each involve assumptions about external conflict resolution, the effect on participants and wider impacts. Transformative methods – particularly traditional conflict resolution mechanisms – seem the most promising but are likely to require adaptation if they are to deal with violent intra-state conflict.
Access full text: available online

Saunders, H. H., 2009, ‘Dialogue as a Process for Transforming Relationships’, in The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Resolution, eds., J. Bercovitch, V. Kremenyuk, and I. W. Zartman, SAGE, London, pp. 376-390
Dialogue is the essence of relationship; its goal is to create new human and political capacities for problem-solving. This chapter focuses on the definition and practice of dialogue. How does one craft a space for dialogue to unfold? Can it shift attitudes from power politics to relationship building? Sustained dialogue affords new opportunities in conflict resolution, but its achievements are limited in a short-term time frame.
Access full text: via document delivery

Hagg, G. and Kagwanja, P., 2007, ‘Identity and Peace: Reconfiguring Conflict Resolution in Africa’, African Journal on Conflict Resolution, Special Issue on Identity and Cultural Diversity in Conflict Resolution in Africa, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 9-36
What kind of conflict resolution approaches can effectively address intra-state wars based on identity? Liberal peace models were designed to deal with inter-state conflicts, and when applied to inter-ethnic conflicts bring limited success and often disastrous results. This article argues that identities should be seen as key assets in building sustainable peace, justice and reconciliation. Regional peace and security mechanisms and traditional justice approaches should be used and international justice mechanisms approached with caution.
Access full text: available online 

For further discussion and resources on conflict transformation and relationship building, see the non-violence and local conflict management and the reconciliation, social renewal and inclusiveness sections of this guide.

New additions