There are three key variables which influence post-conflict politics: Should elections be held as early as possible after the fighting ceases, or should they be postponed until peaceful politics is already the norm? What form should these elections take, and what mechanisms employed? What is the role of political parties in this process? This article from a special edition of International Peacekeeping investigates whether holding democratic elections as an early part of post-conflict peacebuilding really is the best way of reconstructing equal, fair and peaceful societies, as the international community often insists. It also asks why so many such elections fail to secure the peace for which they were held. It investigates these variables and concludes that elections should be held early in the process: That local elections should be held at least along with and, perhaps before, national elections; and that the electoral system should be designed to promote co-operation and power-sharing.
Supporting the transformation of a war-ravaged country to peaceful democracy requires more than just a few hundred international officials and a commitment of a couple of years. Substantial time and money must be invested in an open-ended process of social and political development, and if this is not forthcoming it is better to delay elections while encouraging basic elements of a pluralistic society, from which democracy will grow. In addition:
- Over the past decade, the UN has developed a virtual standard operating procedure whereby a minimum level of peace was obtained, basic infrastructure put in place and then parliamentary elections held. After this the UN quickly handed over power and departed
- Electoral mechanisms can be divided between the electoral system and electoral administration. The latter has been much neglected by analysts
- Modelling electoral systems too closely on donor models (e.g. by staffing election commissions with political nominees, or employing expensive technology) can be counterproductive. The aim must be to create a sustainable electoral administration.
There is widespread agreement among scholars that power-sharing between all significant groups is essential if democracy is to develop, in particular through multi-ethnic coalitions. Whilst proportional representation is a popular method of ensuring that all groups are represented, it can merely reinforce the tyranny of the majority. Transferable vote systems, which encourage inter-party co-operation, reduce the degree to which elections become a zero-sum game. Other conclusions include:
- More mature and responsible party politics will result from involving local actors in the process and if necessary delaying national elections
- Policy makers increasingly recognise the importance of fostering broad-based, programme-focused political parties and overcoming narrow, personalised, sectarian parties. This is particularly important in societies split along ethnic lines
- The impact of external interventions on the process of democratisation is largely limited to the design and construction of hardy institutions, provision of security and infrastructure, and a small amount of norm-building in the first election. Beyond that, democracy must be worked out in the domestic arena
- The most important contribution that the international community can make is in fostering strong democratic institutions, whilst avoiding social engineering. Norms must ultimately develop domestically, but donors can provide a positive environment in which they can grow.
