Periodic Reporting for period 1 - KW Rebel Integration (The International Rebel Integration Toolkit Revisited: What Approaches Work for the Successful and Sustainable Incorporation of Former Rebel Groups after Civil War?)
Reporting period: 2019-09-01 to 2021-08-31
This research explored the range and content of rebel integration provisions in peace agreements. The project adopted a mixed-methods approach by developing a data base of rebel inclusion provisions as well as conducting several in-depth case studies. The research starts from the observation that rebel integration provisions have become frequently used in peace accords. Yet, their record has been quite mixed and frequently criticized. Against this background, the researcher developed an analytical framework to investigate the content of rebel integration provisions over time and space. The main findings include that rebel integration provisions have to be adequately adapted to the local context. In addition, mediators have to think creatively about designing rebel inclusion mechanisms to create powerful incentives for rebels to demobilize, disarm and reintegrate.
The Arusha Peace Accords for Burundi in 2000. The Algiers Peace Agreement for Mali in 2015. The Revitalized Power-Sharing Agreement for South Sudan in 2020. And the list continues. Internationally-brokered peace agreements increasingly include a range of different provisions related to the integration of rebel groups. The last 30 years have seen the development of a rebel integration ‘toolkit’ designed to address conflict in divided societies. Yet, the prospects of success of these rebel integration arrangements are debated. While many policy-makers emphasise the importance of these measures for the successful conclusion of peace negotiations, researchers and practitioners increasingly point to their long-term adverse effects. Despite having been widely critiqued for rewarding violence and incentivizing further mobilization instead of demobilization, rebel integration provisions continue to prominently feature in peace negotiations and subsequent agreements.
Rebel integration arrangements come in various stripes. Conceptually, we can distinguish between three different approaches to rebel integration, including civilian [as reflected in Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) programs], security [as illustrated in the incorporation of former combatants into security institutions, including most importantly the national army] as well as political integration provisions [as, for example, through the inclusion of rebel groups in the government or interim government or by legalizing rebel-to-party transformations]. These triple features are not exclusive, but indeed have become complementary approaches in international peacebuilding practice.
While some peace agreements include all three types of provisions, others incorporate one or two of these categories in different combinations. This raises important questions around the origins of these provisions, how different combinations have emerged and whether these variations constitute a response to local context. In addition, it begs the question why rebel integration provisions persist in peace agreements despite growing criticism concerning the prospects for their success. When did rebel integration provisions emerge? What decision-making processes determine the content and blend of rebel integration provisions? How has growing criticism towards these mechanisms been integrated into subsequent peace negotiations? This research project aimed to provide a scoping view of how rebel integration arrangements have emerged, evolved and been used in peace agreements across time and space. Unlike the existing literature, this research project did not primarily aim to study the effectiveness of rebel integration provisions but rather if and how conflict parties and international mediators have reacted to their growing criticism and how this has been integrated into subsequent negotiations. Overall, the research project found that the design of rebel integration provisions has lacked deep attention to local context. Instead, template provisions have been used without adapting them to the specific conflict environment. The research concluded with several recommendations for conflict resolution and mediation experts to better integrate context into rebel integration provisions and lessons learnt from past mediation attempts.
The Arusha Peace Accords for Burundi in 2000. The Algiers Peace Agreement for Mali in 2015. The Revitalized Power-Sharing Agreement for South Sudan in 2020. And the list continues. Internationally-brokered peace agreements increasingly include a range of different provisions related to the integration of rebel groups. The last 30 years have seen the development of a rebel integration ‘toolkit’ designed to address conflict in divided societies. Yet, the prospects of success of these rebel integration arrangements are debated. While many policy-makers emphasise the importance of these measures for the successful conclusion of peace negotiations, researchers and practitioners increasingly point to their long-term adverse effects. Despite having been widely critiqued for rewarding violence and incentivizing further mobilization instead of demobilization, rebel integration provisions continue to prominently feature in peace negotiations and subsequent agreements.
Rebel integration arrangements come in various stripes. Conceptually, we can distinguish between three different approaches to rebel integration, including civilian [as reflected in Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) programs], security [as illustrated in the incorporation of former combatants into security institutions, including most importantly the national army] as well as political integration provisions [as, for example, through the inclusion of rebel groups in the government or interim government or by legalizing rebel-to-party transformations]. These triple features are not exclusive, but indeed have become complementary approaches in international peacebuilding practice.
While some peace agreements include all three types of provisions, others incorporate one or two of these categories in different combinations. This raises important questions around the origins of these provisions, how different combinations have emerged and whether these variations constitute a response to local context. In addition, it begs the question why rebel integration provisions persist in peace agreements despite growing criticism concerning the prospects for their success. When did rebel integration provisions emerge? What decision-making processes determine the content and blend of rebel integration provisions? How has growing criticism towards these mechanisms been integrated into subsequent peace negotiations? This research project aimed to provide a scoping view of how rebel integration arrangements have emerged, evolved and been used in peace agreements across time and space. Unlike the existing literature, this research project did not primarily aim to study the effectiveness of rebel integration provisions but rather if and how conflict parties and international mediators have reacted to their growing criticism and how this has been integrated into subsequent negotiations. Overall, the research project found that the design of rebel integration provisions has lacked deep attention to local context. Instead, template provisions have been used without adapting them to the specific conflict environment. The research concluded with several recommendations for conflict resolution and mediation experts to better integrate context into rebel integration provisions and lessons learnt from past mediation attempts.
The research project was conducted in several phases. In the first phase, the project developed a definition of rebel integration provisions, defined as “formal clauses in peace agreements that assist members of rebel groups to reintegrate into civilian life and that promote their participation in political and security institutions”. Second, I undertook a comprehensive literature review, studying the civilian integration aspect through the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration literature, the military integration through the Security Sector Reform literature as well as the political integration through notably the rebel-to-party transformation literature. Third, I traced the genealogy of rebel integration arrangements and their development over time and space. This genealogy revealed that the challenge of reintegrating former combatants into societies emerging from conflict is as old as the concept of warfare itself and has been debated for thousands of years: from ancient Egypt to the reign of Alexander the Great, from the Napoleonic Wars to today. Despite a closer look at the long durée, most attention was paid to the period following the Cold War, when rebel integration provisions became increasingly used in peace accords. Fourth, I provided an overview of existing databases that collect the texts of peace agreements and that code their provisions (quantitatively and qualitatively) according to a range of issue areas identified as key to establishing sustainable peace. To date, the major databases include the Peace Agreement Dataset, collected by the Uppsala Conflict Dataset Program (UCDP-PAD), the Peace Agreement Database, collected by the University of Edinburgh (Edinburgh-PA-X), the Peace Accords Matrix, collected by the Kroc Institute at the University of Notre Dame (Kroc-PAM) and the United Nations’ Peacemaker Database. The analysis of the data sets offered the opportunity to study rebel inclusion provisions over time and across different spaces to make historical and current comparisons. Fifth, I undertook different qualitative case studies, including Burundi, Mali and South Sudan. Last but not least, I aimed to develop recommendations for future academic research as well as for policy in this field.
The research started with the observation that rebel integration provisions have become frequently used in peace accords. Yet, their record has been quite mixed and frequently criticised. Against this background, the researcher developed an analytical framework to investigate the content of rebel integration provisions over time and space. The main findings include that rebel integration provisions have to be adequately adopted to local context. In addition, mediators have to think creatively about designing rebel inclusion mechanisms as to create powerful incentives for rebels to demobilize, disarm and reintegrate (i.e. advance the DDR process, as stipulated by the Peace Accords).
Expected results include the contribution to debates in mediation and conflict resolution to help academics and practitioners to better make sense of rebel integration provisions and their advantages and disadvantages of including them into peace accord.
Expected results include the contribution to debates in mediation and conflict resolution to help academics and practitioners to better make sense of rebel integration provisions and their advantages and disadvantages of including them into peace accord.