Democratization after Civil Wars – Key Problems and Experiences

Bibliographic Data

ID7280033
AuthorsJochen Hippler (corresponding author)
Year2008
Volume15
Issue3
Pages550-569
Publication date2008-05-19
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueDemocratization (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1351-0347 • E-ISSN: 1743-890X
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/13510340801972270
OpenAlexW1996579266
LanguageEN
Citations received10

Democratization and peace-building in post-civil war situations are closely interlinked. To analyse the difficulties of post-war democratization, and especially democratization as attempted by external and international actors, this article deals with the problem in several stages: first, it will provide a brief overview of the recent discourse on the topic, to place the discussion into the political and academic context. Second, it will focus on the reasons for and the types of civil wars, and the actors involved, because these provide the starting points of any attempt of post-war democratization and will determine the conditions for success and failure. Third, the key structural problems for post-civil war democratization will be explored, including ethnic fragmentation, followed by a brief analysis of the specific role, opportunities and limits of external actors in democratization. Finally, we will try to formulate a few hypotheses and conclusions to help explain the limited success of external democracy building in post-war societies, concentrating on the cases of Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The account concludes that without the necessary preconditions for democratization in post-conflict societies, external attempts will be of little success. Among the key requirements is the need for a strong and organized social base for democratization to build on. On the other hand, contradictions in the policies of intervening powers are a major hindrance. Keywords: civil warinsurgencyguerrillastate-buildingnation-building Notes 1. Lucian W. Pye, 'Armies in the Process of Political Modernization', in John J. Johnson (ed.), The Role of the Military in Underdeveloped Countries (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1962), p. 71. 2. Charles Tilly, The Politics of Collective Violence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p. 44. 3. The White House, The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, DC: Sept. 2002). 4. See, for instance, David S. Yost, 'Enhancing NATO's cooperation with international organizations', NATO Review (Autumn 2007), available at www.nato.int/docu/review/2007/issue3/english/analysis2 html (accessed 20 Dec. 2007), emphases added. 5. Marina Ottaway, 'Iraq: Without Consensus, Democracy Is Not the Answer', Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Policy Brief 36 (March 2005); Qadar Bakhsh Baloch, 'Democratization of the Arab World: Revival Or Reformation?', The Dialogue, Vol. 2, No.1 (2006), pp. 1–26; Alex Danchev and John MacMillan (eds), The Iraq War and Democratic Politics (London: Routledge, 2005). 6. Tobias Debiel and Ulf Terlinden, in collaboration with Tim Dertwirkel, Armin Nolting, and Martha Gutiérrez, Promoting Good Governance in Post-Conflict Societies, (Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, 2005); Jeff Huther and Anwar Shah, 'Applying a Simple Measure of Good Governance to the Debate on Fiscal Decentralization', in Anwar Shah (ed.), Public Service Delivery (Washington, DC: The World Bank, 2005), pp. 1–37. 7. A key contribution to this debate is the report 'International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, the Responsibility to Protect − Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty' (Ottawa: International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, 2001). 8. Jochen Hippler, 'Der Weg in den Krieg – Washingtons Aussenpolitik und der Irak', in Corinna Hauswedell, Christoph Weller, Ulrich Ratsch, Reinhard Mutz, and Bruno Schoch (eds.) Friedensgutachten 2003, for the Institut für Friedenspolitik und Sicherheitspolitik an der Universität Hamburg (ISFH), die Hessische Stiftung Friedens und Konfliktforschung (HSFK), Forschungsstätte der Evangelischen Studiengemeinschaft (FEST), Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC), and Institut für Entwicklung und Frieden (INEF) (Münster: LIT Verlag, 2003), pp. 89–98. 9. President Bush Discusses Top Priorities for the US, Press Conference of President George W. Bush, Office of the Press Secretary, Washington, 30 July 2003, available at www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030730-1.html (accessed 20 Dec. 2007). 10. Jochen Hippler, 'Democratisation of the Third World after the End of the Cold War', in Jochen Hippler (ed.), The Democratisation of Disempowerment − The Problem of Democracy in the Third World (London: Pluto Press, 1995), pp. 1–31. 11. For instance: Margareta Sollenberg and Peter Wallensteen, 'Major Armed Conflicts', in Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), SIPRI Yearbook 1998: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), chapter 1. 12. Other definitions include Hamburger Arbeitsgemeinschaft Kriegsursachenforschung (AKUF), Aktuelle Kriege und bewaffnete Konflikte 2006 (Hamburg: AKUF, 2006), available at www.sozialwiss.uni-hamburg.de/publish/Ipw/Akuf/kriege_aktuell.htm#Def, last (accessed 20 Dec 2007); Heidelberger Institut für Internationale Konfliktforschung, Konfliktbarometer 2006: Krisen – Kriege – Putsche, Verhandlungen – Vermittlungen –Friedensschlüsse. 15. Jährliche Konfliktanalyse, available at www.hiik.de/konfliktbarometer/pdf/Konfliktbarometer_2006.pdf (accessed 20 Dec. 2007). 13. Heidelberger Institut für Internationale Konfliktforschung, Konfliktbarometer 2006: Krisen – Kriege – Putsche, Verhandlungen – Vermittlungen –Friedensschlüsse. 15. Jährliche Konfliktanalyse, www.hiik.de/konfliktbarometer/pdf/Konfliktbarometer_2006.pdf (accessed 20 Dec. 2007). 14. These terms are all borrowed from US military discourse, as far as it applies to insurgencies, counterinsurgency, and related forms of non-conventional civil wars. For an overview see Jochen Hippler, Counterinsurgency and Political Control – US Military Strategies Regarding Regional Conflict, INEF-Report No. 81/2006 (Duisburg-Essen: Institute for Development and Peace [INEF], University of Duisburg-Essen, 2006). 15. Ann Hironaka, Never-ending Wars − The International Community, Weak States, and the Perpetuation of Civil War (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005), p. 77. 16. Daniel Biró, 'The (Un)bearable Lightness of ... Violence − Warlordism as an Alternative Form of Governance in the "Westphalian Periphery"?', in Tobias Debiel and Daniel Lambach (eds), State Failure Revisited II: Actors of Violence and Alternative Forms of Governance, INEF Report 89/2007 (Duisburg-Essen: Institute for Development and Peace [INEF], University of Duisburg-Essen, 2007), pp. 7–49. 17. It is interesting to note that in several countries these kinds of limited or discriminatory democracies exist or have existed, like in Turkey (restriction of rights for some minorities, such as Christians and Kurds), Israel (Arabs), formerly South Africa (all non-white groups), Iran (exclusion of all secular groups and politicians), and several countries that discriminated or still discriminate against the indigenous population. Historically, many settler colonies (Australia, USA) combined forms of democratic self-rule for settlers with genocidal violence against indigenous populations. In several cases it might be possible to trace the origins of these cases back to various forms of violence. But to generally use the term 'civil war' might overstretch the term. Clear-cut civil wars rarely seem to produce these kinds of set-up. They tend to lead either to authoritarian or to (though often imperfect) democratic rule. There may be exceptions (like the difficult role of Serbs in the democratic set-up of Kosovo), which demonstrate that this possibility – that is, discrimination under democratic rule – exists, but it obviously is neither the norm nor very likely. We should also keep in mind that discrimination can be based in law or can happen despite the law. 18. Charles T. Call and Elizabeth M. Cousens, Ending Wars and Building Peace, International Peace Academy, Coping with Crisis Working Paper Series (New York: International Peace Academy, March 2007), p. 3. 19. Edelberto Torres-Rivas, 'Democracy and the Peasants', in Kees Biekart and Martin Jelsma (eds), Peasants Beyond Protest in Latin America (Amsterdam: Transnational Institute, 1994) p. 54. 20. In 2001, the US and its allies seemed to succeed over the Taliban, which supposedly ended the civil war between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance. 21. Jochen Hippler, 'Nation-Building by Occupation? – The Case of Iraq', in Jochen Hippler (ed.), Nation-Building – A Key Concept for Peaceful Conflict Transformation? (London: Pluto Press, 2005), pp. 81–97. 22. The World Bank and Carter Center, From Civil War to Civil Society − The Transition from War to Peace in Guatemala and Liberia (Washington, DC: The World Bank and Carter Center, 1997), p. 8. 23. Paul Collier, Breaking the Conflict Trap − Civil War and Development Policy (A World Bank Policy Research Report) (Oxford: Oxford University Press and the World Bank, 2003), p. 163. 24. Call and Cousens (note 18), p. 9. 25. See both Wolfgang Merkel and Lars-Erik Cederman et al. in this collection. 26. Roland Paris, At War's End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), p. 187. 27. Ibid, p. 206. 28. Larry Diamond, 'Promoting Democracy in Post-Conflict and Failed States − Lessons and Challenges', Taiwan Journal of Democracy, Vol. 2, No. 2 (2006), p. 94. 29. Jochen Hippler, 'Violent Conflicts, Conflict Prevention and Nation-Building − Terminology and Political Concepts', in Jochen Hippler (note 21), pp. 7 − 9. 30. Joanna Pfaff-Czarnecka, 'Democratisation and Nation-Building in "Divided Societies"', in Jochen Hippler (ed.) (note 21), p. 32. 31. For a somewhat more optimistic view see Arend Lijphart, 'The Wave of Power-Sharing Democracy', in Andrew Reynolds (ed.), The Architecture of Democracy. Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 37–54. 32. Diamond (note 28), p. 97. 33. Sarah Chayes, The Punishment of Virtue − Inside Afghanistan after the Taliban (New York: The Penguin Press, 2006), p. 192 f. 34. See also Jochen Hippler, 'Bedingungen, Kriterien und Grenzen militärischer Interventionen', in Bruno Schoch, Andreas Heinemann-Grüder, Jochen Hippler, Markus Weingardt, and Reinhard Mutz (eds), Friedensgutachten 2007, for the Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik an der Universität Hamburg (IFSH), Hessische Stiftung Friedens und Konfliktforschung (HSFK), Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC), Institut für Entwicklung und Frieden (INEF) et al. (Münster: LIT Verlag, June 2007), pp. 110–21. Additional informationNotes on contributorsJochen Hippler Dr Jochen Hippler is Adj. Professor and Senior Fellow at the Institute for Development and Peace (Institut für Entwicklung und Frieden, INEF) of the University of Duisburg-Essen

Civil society · Computer security · Democracy · Democratization · Key (lock · Law and economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Computer Science · Law · Religion and Society Interactions · Vietnamese History and Culture Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub