By Chandra Lekha Sriram (auth.)
Read or Download Peace as Governance: Power-Sharing, Armed Groups and Contemporary Peace Negotiations PDF
Best war & peace books
During this publication, Andrzej Sitkowski confronts easy peacekeeping myths. First, the idea that peacekeeping is cut loose peace enforcement blurs this distinction and undermines the viability of peacekeeping operations. Secondly, it truly is extensively believed that the peacekeepers are allowed to use strength basically in self-defense and absence the authorization to take advantage of it in protecting UN safety Councils mandates.
Does women's participation in nation-building make a distinction to the post-conflict trajectories of very unstable societies? girls and Nation-Building offers compelling findings for policymakers, practitioners, and students considering either the educational and pragmatic implementation of an engendered method of nation-building.
- Towards Sustainable Security: Alternatives to the War on Terror
- Chechens: Culture and Society
- War and Peace in Islam: A Critique of Islamic/ist Political Discourses
- The Ethiopian Campaign and French Political Thought
Additional info for Peace as Governance: Power-Sharing, Armed Groups and Contemporary Peace Negotiations
58 And herein may lie a key problem. Although power-sharing arrangements may offer the type of incentives that appeal to groups concerned with security, are the created institutional arrangements strong enough to survive the departure (or complete absence) of a third-party guarantor, of the often destabilizing effects of democratization, or of the frequently high levels of postsettlement violence, whether politically motivated or not? 59 They may thus be unable to prevent a power grab by a 56 Walter, Committing to Peace, p.
85–120, proposes that neotrusteeship arrangements or sovereignty sharing may be necessary in some instances, although Krasner’s focus is ostensibly not on countries concluding peace agreements, but failing and failed states. 74 The dominant critique of this paradigm does not question its virtues in a general fashion, but rather suggests that it is a particularly poor model for states emerging from armed conflict, and that, paradoxically, given that this paradigm is meant to be a tool of peacebuilding, it is more likely to promote destabilization.
Naturally, it is for this very reason that groups will be wary of engaging in this step. 27 Thus the fear and insecurity that may be generated by disarmament and demobilization must be addressed, often through power-sharing in the security forces. 28 This form of power-sharing may be accomplished through several methods, and some agreements, such as the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in Sudan, utilize more than one. 29 Thus in El Salvador, equal percentages of former national police and rebels from the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación National [FMLN]) rebels were included in a new national civilian police force; while in Sudan, the CPA created joint integrated units comprising state and rebel fighters from the Sudanese People’s Liberation 27 Hoddie and Hartzell, ‘Civil War Settlements’, p.