Conflict resolution strategies, when applied to post-war reconstruction, reconciliation and peacebuilding, can make significant contributions towards positive outcomes. Ramsbotham et al. (2011), in their chapters on the aforementioned subjects, deal with the importance of conflict resolution in instances of wartime, and how these stages of conflict vary in scope and complexity. While post-war reconstruction is an incredibly tense stage, the implications and reach of the conflict (as well as its importance) are increased in the peacebuilding and reconciliation stages.
Post-war reconstruction is a particularly fragile stage of conflict; war has just ended, but the peace process itself has not yet begun. In many cases, war is ongoing during these reconstruction processes, as with countries like Afghanistan and Iraq. Ramsbotham et al. (2011) denote a particular reconstruction/withdrawal matrix that must occur for a smooth transition to post-war reconstruction, which includes implementing national security through international armed forces, establishing law and order through international control of courts, establishing a government through international supervision of new constitution, and using international humanitarian relief to prop up a new economy.
Finally, the emphasis on international intervention is ideally weaned out to allow local and civilian control of the host country. The primary concern during this stage of conflict resolution is to encourage and facilitate statebuilding; often, significant levels of the host country's infrastructure must be re-established in order to foster political stability and economic normalization. The emphasis during this stage is on international intervention, as countries from outside this conflict are argued to be needed to help rebuild after these devastating conflicts.
The concept of peacebuilding, however, has much wider implications than the building and reconstruction of a nation's infrastructure following a major conflict; the tensions between the conflicting nations must still be addressed. One of the most important factors to consider in this exchange is the importance of establishing 'universal values,' though Ramsbotham et al. (2011) warn to approach this concept with a critical eye: "Genuine peacebuilding means an abandonment of uniform and bureaucratically imposed structures, a far greater sensitivity and nuanced understanding of local conditions, and a readiness to encompass the variety of voices". What may seem to be universal values for one nation may not be for another; greater care must be taken to break vested interests down to their basest connections (e.g. preventing loss of life). Peacebuilding activities are said to include community development, youth empowerment and employment-based initiatives, among others, but the best peacebuilding initiatives connect deeply with changing or addressing the conflicts at hand. These are the methods by which normalization is accomplished, according to the authors; the primary means is through international interventions related to reconstruction, and then eventual withdrawal, making peacebuilding a global concern.
Peacebuilding is also an essential component of reconciliation, as several components have to come together in order to facilitate the restoration of broken relationships and the mending of conflicts. This is the most difficult stage of conflict resolution, as it deals with the underlying conflicts and differences that caused the fighting in the first place; its goals are much more abstract and difficult to quantify. The politics of difference and reconciliation are vital to these initiatives, as minority populations must be recognized and accepted within nations and both sides must be willing to resolve their differences. These all contribute to the eventual "wider process of transforming violent relations into peaceful relations after war". The scope for reconciliation is often just as hard to determine, and the effectiveness of reconciliation initiatives is equally difficult to foresee. In order to accomplish these goals, the reconciliation efforts must be seen as genuine and legitimate, and not an attempt to exact 'transitional justice' on aggressors. To that end, unlike the codified processes of postwar reconstruction, the correct path to peace in the reconciliation stage is much murkier.
In conclusion, Ramsbotham et al. (2011) note postwar reconstruction, peacebuilding and reconciliation as linear steps in a single process, all of which must be performed through international intervention, stabilization and normalization. Postwar reconstruction is a uniquely important phase, as it involves the greatest material commitment in order to restore infrastructure and the bare-bones functioning of a host country. Following that, efforts at peacebuilding contribute to lessening tensions and restoring the presence of stable governments and societies Finally, efforts at reconciliation have the goal of alleviating and solving the tensions between the nations at conflict, with the end result being elimination of the tensions behind the conflict. The authors argue that international intervention is the best way to accomplish these goals, as the nations in conflict often have neither the economic resources nor the objectivity to resolve the conflict.
Works Cited
Ramsbotham, Oliver, Woodhouse, Tom and Hugh Miall. Contemporary Conflict Resolution (Polity, 2011).
