Power Sharing and Democracy in Post-Civil War States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline A. Hartzell ◽  
Matthew Hoddie
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Power Sharing

scholarly journals The Prevalence of Power-Sharing: Exploring the Patterns of Post-Election Peace

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 41-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna K. Jarstad
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Political Competition ◽  
Peace Process ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Good News ◽  
Electoral Outcomes ◽  
Peace Agreements ◽  
Negative Effect

Why are some elections followed by armed conflict, while others are not? This article begins to explore this question by mapping the prevalence of power-sharing agreements and patterns of post-election peace in states shattered by civil war. While democracy builds on the notion of free political competition and uncertain electoral outcomes, power-sharing reduces the uncertainty by ensuring political power for certain groups. Nevertheless, new data presented in this article – the Post-Accord Elections (PAE) data collection – shows that the issues of peace, power-sharing and democracy have become intertwined as the vast majority of contemporary peace agreements provide for both power-sharing and elections. First, in contrast to previous research which has suggested that power-sharing is a tool for ending violence, this study shows that conflict often continues after an agreement has been signed, even if it includes provisions for power-sharing. Second, this investigation shows no evidence of power-sharing facilitating the holding of elections. On the contrary, it is more common that elections are held following a peace process without power-sharing. Third, a period of power-sharing ahead of the elections does not seem to provide for postelection peace. Rather, such elections are similarly dangerous as post-accord elections held without a period of power-sharing. The good news is that power-sharing does not seem to have a negative effect on post-election peace.

South Sudan peace talks may fail to bridge reality gap

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Local Level ◽  
South Sudan ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Framework Agreement ◽  
Content Type

Significance A ‘framework agreement’ reached between President Salva Kiir and opposition leader Riek Machar in Khartoum on June 27 had been billed as a breakthrough in efforts to end South Sudan’s four-and-a-half-year civil war, but progress since then has been mired by infighting, especially around power-sharing formulas. Impacts Sudan and Uganda’s involvement as ‘guarantors’ could constrain would-be spoilers but will be deeply divisive. The several dozen other armed factions will fight to secure their place at the table. Already-dire humanitarian conditions will worsen without local-level security improvements.

The Consequences of Negotiated Settlements in Civil Wars, 1945–1993

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (3) ◽  
pp. 681-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy Licklider
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Negotiated Settlements

We know very little about how civil wars end. Harrison Wagner has argued that negotiated settlements of civil wars are likely to break down because segments of power-sharing governments retain the capacity for resorting to civil war while victory destroys the losers' organization, making it very difficult to resume the war. An analysis of a data set of 91 post-1945 civil wars generally supports this hypothesis but only in wars over identity issues. Moreover, while military victories may be less likely to break down than negotiated settlements of identity civil wars, they are also more likely to be followed by acts of genocide. Outsiders concerned with minimizing violence thus face a dilemma.

scholarly journals Using Power-Sharing to Win a War: The Implementation of the Lomé Agreement in Sierra Leone

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 87-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helga Malmin Binningsbø ◽  
Kendra Dupuy
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Sierra Leone ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Peace Agreement ◽  
United Front ◽  
The Government

To end the civil war in Sierra Leone the government and the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) signed a peace agreement guaranteeing power-sharing in July 1999. Such power-sharing is a widely used, often recommended political arrangement to overcome deep divisions between groups. However, scholars disagree on whether power-sharing causes peace, or, on the contrary, causes continuing violence. One reason for this is the literature's tendency to neglect how power-sharing is actually put into place. But post-agreement implementation is essential if we are to judge the performance of power-sharing. Therefore, we investigate the role played by power-sharing in terminating the civil war in Sierra Leone. We argue that the government was able to use the peace agreement to pursue its goal of ending the war through marginalising the RUF.

Power-Sharing after Civil War

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Nagle ◽  
Mary-Alice Clancy
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Power Sharing
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document