Civil war peace agreement implementation and state capacity

Bibliographic Data

ID4871950
AuthorsKarl Derouen (Department of Political Science, The University of Alabama,), Mark J Ferguson (Department of Political Science, The University of Alabama), Mark Ferguson (0000-0002-1982-9471, University of Alabama), Samuel Norton (Department of Political Science, The University of Alabama), Sam Norton (0000-0003-1714-9963, University of Alabama), Young Hwan Park (0000-0001-9802-8017, University of Alabama), Young Hwan Park Young Hwan Park (Department of Political Science, The University of Alabama), Jenna Lea (Department of Political Science, The University of Alabama), Ashley Streat-Bartlett (Department of Political Science, The University of Alabama)
Year2010
Volume47
Issue3
Pages333-346
Publication date2010-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Peace Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0022-3433 • E-ISSN: 1460-3578
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0022343310362169
OpenAlexW2167032082
LanguageEN
Citations received64
References cited30

Negotiated civil war terminations differ from their interstate war counterparts in that one side must disarm and cease to exist as a fighting entity. While termination through military victory provides a relatively more enduring peace, many civil wars end with peace agreements signed after negotiations. However, research has shown that the implementation of civil war peace agreements is difficult and prone to collapse. Often these failures are followed by recurrence of the conflict. In some cases, the agreements break down before key provisions are implemented. This article adds to this topic by focusing on the role of state capacity in peace agreement success. We argue that peace agreements and state capacity are necessary but not sufficient conditions for sustainable peace. The article employs a case study approach to explore the importance of state capacity in implementing civil war peace agreements. The role of third-party interventions is also considered. The cases (United Kingdom-Northern Ireland, Indonesia-Aceh, Burundi, Mali, and Somalia) include 14 peace agreements that vary by war type (secessionist or control over government), type of agreement (comprehensive or partial), levels of state capacity (high or low), and peace success (success, partial or failure), and each experienced third-party involvement in the peace process

Civil society · Government (linguistics) · Negotiation · Peace and conflict studies · Peace economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Spanish Civil War · State (computer science) · Sustainable development · Victory · Computer Science · Law · Peacebuilding and International Security · Political Conflict and Governance · Religion, Society, and Development

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub