What is the most effective way of tackling violence and weapons issues in peace processes? This Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue report consists of four articles which put forward recommendations on how to deal with such issues when negotiating a peace agreement. The importance of understanding the local context, ensuring sustainable reintegration and dealing with arms in civilian hands is stressed in several articles.
The first article is a review of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) and weapons control efforts during recent peace processes. It finds that such issues should be given prominence from the outset of the process otherwise subsequent agreements may be significantly weakened. This article is written by Camilla Waszink.
The second article draws lessons from the El Salvador peace process for the 1980-1992 conflict. Disarmament was a key issue in the El Salvador conflict, however the reintegration of ex-combatants was not successful and the issue of guns in civilian hands was not addressed with a resulting explosion of violence in the post-accord period, and to this day. This article is written by a former FLMN member, Joaquin Chavez..
The third article draws on the experience of the Crisis Management Initiative in mediating the Aceh peace process in 2004 and 2005. Transparency was an important factor in achieving success in Aceh. The most problematic component was demobilisation, with ongoing suspicions that the military chain of command had not been severed. The article is written by two CMI officials who were intimately involved in the process.
The fourth article provides the perspective of the Swiss mediator, Julian Hottinger, with some 15 years experience working on many different peace processes. He argues that peace cannot be acquired without attention to the tools of armed violence and consideration of those whose livelihoods and identities are linked to them.
Each of these issues needs to be addressed in a different way:
- Political will is the key determinant of the success of security and weapons control measures. As a result, such measures must be in step with political realities on the ground. A step-by-step approach which links surrender of weapons to the achievement of other political objectives can be effective. In addition, it is vital to obtain reliable information about the parties’ armaments before negotiations start in order to reduce opportunities for deception and to encourage transparency.
- In the case of El Salvador, neglecting reintegration and longer-term weapons reduction efforts had grave implications for human security. Reintegration in El Salvador might have been more successful if a long-term approach had been taken and sufficient services had been provided to mitigate the psycho-social impacts of war.
- The Aceh peace process highlighted the importance of understanding the local context and the importance of reintegration in building a sustainable peace. In addition, the Aceh process showed that formal demobilisation can be politically and psychologically important. Chains of command, if left intact, can develop into criminal or terrorist networks.
- An incremental approach is highly important in dissarmament.Pushing too hard too early on weapons issues may derail the entire negotiations process. Furthermore, each peace process is distinct. While awareness of good practice is important, attention should primarily be focussed on the details and dynamics of the specific warring parties involved.
Author: Cate Buchanan
Source: Buchanan C., 2008, ‘Negotiating Disarmament: Strategies for Tackling Weapons and Violence in Peace Process’, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Viewpoints, Volume 1, March 2008, Geneva, Switzerland
Size: 38 pages (1.3 MB)
