IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gig/afjour/v44y2009i3p11-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Perils of Power-Sharing: Africa and Beyond

Author

Listed:
  • Chandra Sriram
  • Marie-Joëlle Zahar

Abstract

The purpose of international conflict-resolution efforts is, in the short term, to bring an end to violent armed conflict, and, in the medium to longer term, to prevent the revival of conflict. However, at least one of the mechanisms often utilised in conflict resolution and peace agreements, power-sharing, may not only prove problematic in early negotiation and implementation, but may potentially be at odds with the longer-term goal of preventing resurgence of conflict. Why might this be the case? Longer-term peacebuilding seeks to prevent conflict in part by building strong and sustainable states. Such states should be able to avoid reverting to armed conflict because they would be more responsive to grievances and more effective in dealing with violent dissent. However, power-sharing arrangements may undermine such efforts by placing in power individuals and groups not fully committed to, or unable to take part in, governance for the benefit of the entire populace; in part because it necessarily places in power those who have engaged in significant violence to achieve their ends. This is likely to create less democratic states, although we do not insist that democracy is or should be the only goal of peacebuilders. Rather, we suggest that powersharing arrangements may tend not only towards undemocratic states, but towards states which are not responsive to the needs of the citizenry for security in ways which may undermine human security and state legitimacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Chandra Sriram & Marie-Joëlle Zahar, 2009. "The Perils of Power-Sharing: Africa and Beyond," Africa Spectrum, Institute of African Affairs, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 44(3), pages 11-39.
    • Handle: RePEc:gig:afjour:v:44:y:2009:i:3:p:11-39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hup.sub.uni-hamburg.de/giga/afsp/article/view/190
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrich Schneckener, 2002. "Making Power-sharing Work: Lessons from Successes and Failures in Ethnic Conflict Regulation," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 39(2), pages 203-228, March.
    2. Caroline A. Hartzell, 1999. "Explaining the Stability of Negotiated Settlements to Intrastate Wars," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(1), pages 3-22, February.
    3. Djankov, Simeon & Reynal-Querol, Marta, 2007. "The causes of civil war," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4254, The World Bank.
    4. Walter, Barbara F., 1997. "The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(3), pages 335-364, July.
    5. Hartzell, Caroline & Hoddie, Matthew & Rothchild, Donald, 2001. "Stabilizing the Peace After Civil War: An Investigation of Some Key Variables," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(1), pages 183-208, January.
    6. Mehler, Andreas, 2008. "Not Always in the People's Interest: Power-sharing Arrangements in African Peace Agreements," GIGA Working Papers 83, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    7. Matthew Hoddie & Caroline Hartzell, 2003. "Civil War Settlements and the Implementation of Military Power-Sharing Arrangements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 40(3), pages 303-320, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wakako Maekawa & Barış Arı & Theodora-Ismene Gizelis, 2019. "UN involvement and civil war peace agreement implementation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 397-416, March.
    2. Jiwon Lee, 2016. "Settlements in the Civil Wars of Myanmar and Sri Lanka: The Success, Failure and Deception of the Peace Process," Millennial Asia, , vol. 7(1), pages 63-76, April.
    3. Matthew Fuhrmann & Jaroslav Tir, 2009. "Territorial Dimensions of Enduring Internal Rivalries," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(4), pages 307-329, September.
    4. Moyersoen Johan, 2004. "Psychology's Prospect Theory: Relevance for Identifying Positions of Local Satiation as Robust Reference Points of Joint Actions in Peace Agreements," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Paul F. Diehl, 2006. "Just a Phase?: Integrating Conflict Dynamics Over Time," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 23(3), pages 199-210, July.
    6. Kathrin Heitz, 2009. "Power-Sharing in the Local Arena: Man . a Rebel-Held Town in Western Côte d.Ivoire," Africa Spectrum, Institute of African Affairs, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 44(3), pages 109-131.
    7. Fiedler, Charlotte, 2015. "Towers of strength in turbulent times? Assessing the effectiveness of international support to peace and democracy in Kenya and Kyrgyzstan in the aftermath of interethnic violence," IDOS Discussion Papers 6/2015, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    8. Karl Derouen JR & Jenna Lea & Peter Wallensteen, 2009. "The Duration of Civil War Peace Agreements," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(4), pages 367-387, September.
    9. David Quinn & Jonathan Wilkenfeld & Pelin Eralp & Victor Asal & Theodore Mclauchlin, 2013. "Crisis managers but not conflict resolvers: Mediating ethnic intrastate conflict in Africa," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(4), pages 387-406, September.
    10. Strasheim, Julia, 2017. "The Politics of Institutional Reform and Post-Conflict Violence in Nepal," GIGA Working Papers 296, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    11. Srobana Bhattacharya & Courtney Burns, 2019. "What’s War Got to Do with It? Post-conflict Effects on Gender Equality in South and Southeast Asia, 1975–2006," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 6(1), pages 55-81, April.
    12. Wong P-H., 2014. "How can political trust be built after civil wars? : lessons from post-conflict Sierra Leone," MERIT Working Papers 2014-083, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    13. Abu-Bader, Suleiman & Ianchovichina, Elena, 2019. "Polarization, foreign military intervention, and civil conflict," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    14. Desha M. Girod, 2015. "Reducing postconflict coup risk: The low windfall coup-proofing hypothesis," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(2), pages 153-174, April.
    15. Thomas Edward Flores & Irfan Nooruddin, 2009. "Democracy under the Gun Understanding Postconflict Economic Recovery," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(1), pages 3-29, February.
    16. Thomas Edward Flores & Irfan Nooruddin, 2011. "Credible Commitment in Post-Conflict Recovery," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 23, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Nilsson, Desiree, 2008. "Partial peace rebel groups inside and outside civil war settlements," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4572, The World Bank.
    18. Julia Strasheim, 2018. "The Politics of Institutional Reform and Post-Conflict Violence in Nepal," Working Papers id:12397, eSocialSciences.
    19. Lutmar Carmela & Terris Lesley, 2016. "Leadership Changes and Civil War Agreements: Exploring Preliminary Links," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 22(4), pages 439-448, December.
    20. Adedokun, Ayokunu, 2017. "Post-conflict peacebuilding: A critical survey of the literature and avenues for future research," MERIT Working Papers 2017-016, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gig:afjour:v:44:y:2009:i:3:p:11-39. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Andreas Mehler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dueiide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.