The article examines the problems of political institutionalization of conflicts based on the use of illiberal approaches (authoritarian and hybrid). The study is based on the concept of «illiberal peacebuilding», which is actively developed in political science and is currently used to analyze the processes of conflict resolution at the national and subnational levels. The study made it possible to determine the possibilities and limitations of these models, the specifics of the methods used and the achieved results of institutionalization. The author highlights the political and regime characteristics of the political institutionalization of conflicts, which directly depend on the prospects for using a particular model. In particular, it has been established that a set of rules and norms for the interaction of key policy actors is one of the foundations of a political regime. At the same time, conflicts are considered as one of the important factors in their change. The dependence of the direction of political institutionalization of conflicts (using their potential, limiting conflicts, etc.) on the perception of the conflicts themselves in the context of the stability of the political system has been substantiated. The liberal model assumes extensive use of the potential of institutions operating in the field of public policy. The authoritarian model is focused on suppressing open manifestations of conflict, while the hybrid model is focused on combining the norms and practices inherent in the liberal and authoritarian models.
Political institutionalization of conflicts: the possibilities of authoritarian and hybrid models
