Bridging the Chasm between Domestic and International Approaches to Peacebuilding: Conceptual and Institutional Tools*

Abstract

*This paper focuses on the chasm between domestic and international understandings and approaches to peacebuilding and the mixed outcomes that characterize contemporary efforts to assist war-torn countries. It argues that post-Cold War peacebuilding relies on a wide array of international actors with diverse interests and mandates which are not necessarily aligned with local realities or needs. Building on the rich literature on the role of external actors in conflict zones, the paper examines the interface between domestic and international actors through the concept of hybridity. It then reviews two mechanisms that aim to level the playing field between war-affected countries and international actors: the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission and the New Deal for Engagement with Fragile States.

The Effectiveness of Peace Building Strategies Used in the Management of Electoral Conflict in Trans-Nzoia County, Kenya

“…Prevention efforts and early warning systems are crucial components of peace-building programs that aim to avert electoral conflicts, violence, and property destruction. By promoting peace and strengthening the capacity of political organizations, ethnic groups, and individuals across racial lines, these tactics hope to create long-term solutions to disputes that arise during elections (Tschirgi, 2015). Managing conflicts, resolving them, transforming them, and then reuniting afterward are all part of peace-building initiatives.…”

Living through war: An oral history of civilians in Sudan

“…This research project is situated within the burgeoning literature on localism in Sudan and South Sudan. In general, localism affirms bottom‐up approaches to peace and peace‐making that center on the granular studies of interactions among stakeholders seeking peace through formal and non‐formal channels (Autesserre, 2014; Bräuchler & Naucke, 2017; Bruursema, 2015; Tschirgi, 2015). According to many advocates of localism, the failures of top‐down peace initiatives by international bodies are explained in part by neglect of such initiatives to address the power imbalance that pervades many social‐political sectors of society (Jarstad et al, 2019, p. 5; Mac Ginty, 2010; Mac Ginty, 2015; Paffenholz, 2015, p. 858).…”