Global Facilitation Network for Security Sector Reform (GFN-SSR)

Security Sector Reform in Post-conflict Peacebuilding

 Printable version

Post-conflict environments can attract huge numbers of external actors that create management and coordination problems and often apply short-term approaches that can lead to resumption of conflict. This paper, published by the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, provides an overview of security sector reform (SSR) in post-conflict environments. SSR success can be assessed by measuring the reduction of violence, economic growth, improved security professionalism and the degree of local ownership.

Post-conflict generally describes the period after intra- or interstate hostilities have ceased, although violence may continue. It usually follows a ceasefire or the signing of a formal peace agreement.

Post-conflict challenges include a continuing unstable security situation, a strong military component that may prioritise security capacity-building over security governance, weak state institutions and precarious socio-economic conditions. Post-conflict environments can attract huge numbers of external actors that create management and coordination problems and also may apply short-term approaches to challenges, which, in turn, can lead to resumption of conflict.

The following features constitute the organisation of post-conflict peacebuilding environments:

• Post-conflict activities include SSR, disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration, mine action, weapons reduction and transitional justice programmes, lustration (vetting) of war criminals and gender mainstreaming.
• Integration of SSR in peace agreements help mark the end of hostilities, establish compromise in areas of dispute and provide a workable political framework for transition to lasting peace. Peace agreement frameworks often include principles and procedures for SSR implementation, provisions for establishment of a transitional government and the drafting of a new constitution.
• SSR actors often constitute a complex and dynamic mix of personnel, policies and agendas. They usually include national state and non-state/transnational actors, intergovernmental and regional organisations, a lead donor nation, bilateral donors and private military security companies.
• There are generally three leadership models of SSR implementation. The United Nations or a regional organisation such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization acts as lead agency or a state such as the United Kingdom acts as lead nation.
• Local factors can materially affect SSR success. They include capable local leadership, vested interest of a major power, supportive neighbouring states, few or not easily “lootable” natural resources and a small number of warring parties.

Measurement of SSR success is an inexact science; however the answers to the following questions may provide key success indicators:

• To what extent have levels of violence been reduced?
• Has there economic growth and how much?
• Is there improved professionalism on the part of security forces?
• Have local forces assumed control of the national security sector; has local ownership been secured?
• Is there greater public confidence in the security forces?

Access full text