No abstract

National Action Plans (NAPs) have been hailed as the preferential mode of implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 at a national level. In recent years, member states, especially post-conflict member states, have been heeding the calls of the United Nations to develop their own National Action Plans. However, there has been limited assessment of whether or not National Action Plans are beneficial to women in post-conflict states. Using evidence from field research in Liberia and Sierra Leone, this article argues that, despite the intent to increase national ownership of 1325 in post-conflict states, National Action Plans are ineffective at creating meaningful local ownership because they are driven by a bureaucratic approach to peacebuilding. Furthermore, implementation of National Action Plans in post-conflict states is hampered by a variety of factors, such as lack of capacity and lack of political will. Finally, we conclude that National Action Plans also do a disservice to the hard work and dedication of local women’s organisations.

Processes for Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) are a fundamental component in peacebuilding. While disarmament can be relatively straightforward, reintegration is more complex and has varying degrees of success. Economic factors tend to be the focus, neglecting social reintegration in its fullest sense. This article draws on two sets of related field research data (collected in 2007, 2010 and 2011) in Liberia to highlight the role of social capital in shaping DDR outcomes. This is an important factor in the reintegration of ex-combatants, in terms of establishing and testing norms, engaging social networks, and building relationships and trust. These components of social capital are directly influenced by the reintegration experience, and in turn have a significant role in translating reintegration into peacebuilding. In addition, building on pre-existing social structures such as family connections, religious or community groups, and trading networks can in fact contribute to successful reintegration. When DDR initiatives fail, these structures are often the only way an ex-combatant has of reintegrating.

This paper considers how the use of 'hybridity' in the peacebuilding literature overlooks the gendered dimensions of hybrid interactions. It does so by examining the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1325 national action plans (NAPs) for Liberia and Sierra Leone. By asking the gendered questions of 'who participates?' and 'how do they participate?' it draws from Mac Ginty's conception of hybridity and traces the compliance and incentivizing power in hybridized peace, as well as the ability of local actors to resist and provide alternatives. However, Mac Ginty's model is found to be inadequate because of its inattention to the gendered nature of power. It is found that with a gendered approach to hybridity, it is easier to trace the processes of hybridization of NAPs in postconflict states where their implementation is limited. In asking the questions of 'who' and 'how', three conclusions about the gendered nature of hybrid peacebuilding are drawn: international intervention relies upon the 'feminization' of local actors; issues framed within the realm of the 'masculine' are more likely to get attention; and the Resolution 1325 agenda in post-conflict states can be subverted by framing it as a 'soft' issue.