PO377 Ethnic Conflict and Political Violence Week 20 Seminar: Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Peacebuilding

Seminar Questions You could see the following as the core question: Under which conditions are peacebuilding efforts most likely to either succeed or fail? Questions feeding into this: Is there a problem with the current liberal international peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction paradigm? Discuss some of the difficulties entailed in post-conflict disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration of armed groups [you can bring in discussion of “spoilers” and continuing violence during peace implementation here].

Group work Split into three groups (representing the IMF, Oxfam, and the UK Department for International Development) and address the following questions with reference to any of our case studies after the war/genocide (bearing in mind the seminar questions and your readings): What should be our primary post-conflict reconstruction goals (and why)? Which are the greatest challenges to peacebuilding that we need to anticipate?

Four pillars of peacebuilding according to OECD DAC (2008)

Concept map of statebuilding and peacebuilding (Barnes 2009: 16)

Arguments in favour of political and economic liberalisation (from last week’s lecture) Democracy empowers the people, increases legitimacy, responsiveness and accountability of the political system (cp. e.g. Rueschemeyer et al. 1992); (consolidated) democracies are less likely to experience ethnic violence (Gurr 2000); economic and political freedoms reinforce each other (Lipset 1959; Moore 1966); free market economies – if accompanied by the “right” social policies – can increase the wealth of a country and reduce socioeconomic inequalities (Williamson 2002); according to modernisation theory, all countries will become free market democracies anyway (Huntington 1971; Rustow 1970).

Arguments against political and economic liberalisation (from last week’s lecture) Political and economic transitions are tumultuous, conflict-ridden and lengthy processes (Huntington 2000); the liberal international peacebuilding paradigm increases the risk of violent conflict by recommending multiple transitions at the same time; war-shattered states are ill-equipped to manage the societal competition induced by political and economic liberalisation (Paris 1997); the institutional and political incoherence of countries undergoing regime change open up opportunities for political leaders to manipulate ethnic identities for their own benefit (Snyder 2000); neoliberal reforms lead to [temporary??] economic deterioration and tend to increase socioeconomic inequalities (Huber and Solt 2004; Przeworski 1991).