What is the relationship between liberalisation, institution building and peace in countries that are just emerging from civil conflict? Roland Paris’ book examines postconflict operations between 1989 and 1999. This introductory chapter outlines the author’s argument that while peacebuilders should preserve the broad goal of converting war-shattered states into liberal market democracies, peacebuilding strategies need to build effective institutions before liberalisation takes place.
The idea of peacebuilding, which emerged at the end of the 1980s, is based on the belief that promoting liberalisation in countries that have experienced civil war creates the conditions for a lasting peace. Democratisation is expected to shift societal conflicts away from the battlefield into electoral politics. Between 1989 and 1990, fourteen major peacebuilding operations were deployed. They all sought to build liberal market democracies as quickly as possible. In all but three cases, (Angola, Rwanda and Liberia), large scale conflict has not resumed. However, the strategy of political and economic liberalisation seems to have increased the likelihood of renewed violence in several of these states.
While there is evidence that well-established market democracies are less subject to internal violence than other types of states, it appears that the transition from civil conflict to a well-established market democracy makes a state particularly prone to violence. Promoting democratisation and marketisation has the potential to stimulate higher levels of societal competition at a time when states are least equipped to contain such tensions within peaceful bounds.
What is needed is a new type of peacebuilding strategy that begins from the premise that democratisation and marketisation are inherently tumultuous transformations that have the potential to undermine a fragile peace. The new strategy would minimise the destabilising effects of liberalisation in several ways. Peacebuilders would:
- Not immediately unleash political and economic competition
- Not organise quick elections or economic ‘shock therapy’
- Manage the democratisation and marketisation process as a series of incremental and deliberate steps
- Delay the introduction of democratic and market reforms until a basic network of domestic institutions had been established
- Immediately start building governmental institutions to manage the political and economic reforms.
This strategy may appear costly, time-consuming and anti-democratic. However:
- The higher expense and longer duration must be weighed against the costs in human lives and material resources that would follow a recurrence of large-scale violence
- If the strategy appears to delay the liberalisation of political and economic life, it will achieve more durable peace in the long term
- Implementing liberalisation too quickly, in the absence of effective institutions, can counteract efforts to consolidate peace.
For more information on the book’s main arguments see the author interview at: http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~rparis/interview.pdf
