PrintStep 6 - Construct a Peace Agreement
Step 6
Construct a Peace Agreement
The sixth and final step in the mediation process is constructing an agreement that is acceptable not only to the parties to the conflict but also to the wider public, and that stands a good chance of being implemented successfully.
Develop a Declaration of Principles
Obtain Agreement on Basic Principles
Prior to the development of final agreements, it is often helpful to have the parties agree to a "declaration of basic principles" or a negotiating framework that provides the overarching structure for a subsequently drafted, detailed peace agreement. This negotiating framework usually includes statements such as:
- The parties seek to live together in peace.
- The rights of states and/or nations and peoples will be protected.
- All parties will be treated with respect.
Craft the Broad Outlines of an Agreement
The framework also usually contains the broad outlines of an agreement: Side X will do A, B, and C, if Side Y does D, E, and F. These agreements are stated in general terms, acceptable both to the parties at the table and to the political leaders and the general public. Determining exactly what these general ideas mean in practice and how they will be achieved is the next, very challenging part of the job.
The Declaration of Principles signed by the SPLM and the Government of Sudan set the framework for the subsequent peace negotiations, which brought an end to the North-South civil war.
Assemble a Peace Agreement
Determine a Drafting Process
Most agreements are drafted in one of two ways. One approach is the "single-text" negotiating process in which the mediator listens to the suggestions of both sides and drafts a proposed agreement that best meets each side's needs and interests. This single text is then edited — either simultaneously or sequentially — by the parties until a draft acceptable to all sides is attained.
The other approach is for each side to simultaneously produce its own draft agreement; the mediator then takes these agreements and, working with the parties, tries to mesh them together into one document that eventually everyone can agree on.
The drafting process can take place as the negotiations proceed, with discrete parts of an agreement being drafted as soon as individual issues have been resolved; alternatively, the entire agreement can be drafted at the end, after all the issues have been negotiated and all the trade-offs between issues have been made. Both approaches have advantages, but if the issues are negotiated separately and the agreement is drafted in sections, it often is necessary to specify at the outset that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed." This prevents negotiators from "cherry picking" — taking the agreements they want and discarding the ones they don't want. It also allows some flexibility for rewriting sections later, should trade-offs between issues become apparent that were not evident before.
Translate Principles into Legally Binding Language
Changing a declaration of principles into an actual agreement is often an arduous task that takes weeks — if not months or even years — of negotiation over the details. Each general statement has to be spelled out in legal terms so that it is clear to both sides exactly what is expected of whom and when each action is to be accomplished.
Feature Box 6-1: Components of a Peace AgreementAlthough the components of a peace agreement will vary greatly from case to case, some provisions are fairly universal. These include:
|
Incorporate Strategies for Implementation and Monitoring
One key to fashioning a successful agreement is to write into that agreement strategies for implementation and for monitoring and (if possible) enforcing compliance with the terms of the agreement. It needs to be clear who is to do what by when, how performance is to be measured and by whom, and what will happen if targets are not reached. When these specifics are left vague, one or both sides can too easily procrastinate or evade their responsibilities. (Further approaches to implementation are discussed below.)
Plan for Implementation
Peace settlements have to be implementable. Overly ambitious agreements that do not attract the resources, skills, and commitment to enforce them do damage by disillusioning the parties and encouraging the view that violence is the only feasible route to the decisive achievement of their goals.
Peace is made by people, not by settlements. Thus, the parties to the conflict, affected societies, and external partners must be mobilized to undertake implementation, from planning and managing to monitoring and enforcing. Implementation plans should anticipate both the immediate transitions out of violence and long-term post-conflict peacebuilding.
Make the Local Population Stakeholders and Guarantors of the Agreement
Peace settlements should include local community members as planners, agents, managers, and monitors of implementation. Tapping into local knowledge, networks, and leadership increases the resources available for implementation, builds social capital, and solidifies local ownership, increasing civil society's stake in the implementation.
While implementation tasks should not go beyond the technical, managerial, and personnel capacities of the local community, full participation in the process can expand such skills and capacities. Implementation frameworks should therefore include local input in planning and design, optimize use of local resources in implementation, and incorporate means to provide progress reports and evaluations to the community.
A successful and durable peace will be more likely if society is fully mobilized to implement the settlement benchmarks. The local business community can be directly involved in the economic reintegration of combatants; traditional justice mechanisms or religious practices can be adapted to enable reconciliation; local materials and labor can be utilized in reconstruction; local human rights monitors can help safeguard returning refugees; local stewards can keep watch to prevent corruption and waste; and local media can keep the community informed about all these practices. Societal actors should be involved in ways that make them stakeholders and guarantors of the agreement instead of passive onlookers.
Use Metrics to Gauge Progress
|
Metrics — or measurable indicators of progress — can assist in formulating and implementing a peace agreement. More particularly, metrics help ensure the mediator and parties establish realistic goals, bring adequate resources and authorities to bear, focus their efforts strategically, and enhance prospects for attaining an enduring resolution of the conflict. It is important during the peace process to collect baseline data to aid in diagnosing potential obstacles prior to a settlement. During implementation, it is equally important to track progress from the point of the settlement through to sustained peace. The most valuable metrics must measure outcomes essential to implementation of the agreement — that is, they measure results and impact rather than level of effort.
In Northern Ireland, measuring progress in the "decommissioning" (i.e., the effective destruction) of weapons in the IRA's arsenal has been critical to achieving peace. In Kosovo, the UN mission developed a set of metrics to assess progress toward meeting standards in eight core areas of governance and human rights that had to be met before the international community would initiate a diplomatic process aimed at resolving the issue of Kosovo's political status.
Design Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
During the period of transition out of conflict, settlements are bound to falter. Implementation designs should include mechanisms to review progress and handle problems. Roundtables, implementation councils, or joint committees should be available to hear grievances, mediate disputes, and make adjustments in implementation. The establishment of a monitoring and conflict resolution mechanism by the parties to the accord may be sufficient.
Use External Parties to Support Implementation
|
External partners provide assurance, resources, expertise, and experience in support of the implementation of peace settlements. But they also have their own interests that may conflict with the mediator's goals.
Third parties, such as allies or neighboring states, can help to ensure that promises will be kept, timetables will be respected, and matching commitments will be fulfilled. Third-party tasks may include overseeing and monitoring cease-fires, weapons stockpiles, prisoner releases, and the return of refugees. Having such guarantors in place as part of an implementation plan enhances confidence in the settlement and encourages parties to take the risks that progress toward peace entails.
A network of donors, including governments, aid organizations, and reconstruction agencies, can help pay the bills of implementation. Funds will be needed both for immediate tasks such as cantoning soldiers and transporting refugees and for lengthy reconstruction efforts. Peace will not take root if funding is prematurely terminated. Donors' willingness to coordinate their activities and determination to stay the course are essential to success.
External experts can offer counsel through working groups, commissions, and advisory positions on many aspects of the implementation of a peace accord. They might, for instance, provide guidance on writing a constitution, choosing transitional justice mechanisms, drafting election rules, vetting and training civilian police, conducting a census, and managing natural resources and arranging revenue sharing.
Other communities that have successfully emerged from conflict can share their experiences by participating in formal events and by hosting delegations from (or by dispatching their own delegations to) societies currently struggling to build peace.
|