This paper argues that the effects of civil war recurrence can be mitigated if peace agreements include mechanisms that enable the warring parties to continue dialogue throughout peace processes beyond the implementation of a peace agreement. Based on an examination of 147 agreements across ten peace processes that experienced at least one relapse into violence, it identifies three types of mechanisms for dialogues—platforms for engagement, implementation reviews, and dispute resolution provisions—for settling differences that, left unresolved, might lead to a resumption of violence.

About the Authors

Argyro Kartsonaki is a researcher at the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg with expertise in secession and war-to-peace transitions after civil wars. Giuditta Fontana is a political scientist focusing on institutional designs in peace agreements and postconflict settings, with a particular interest in cultural and educational reforms. Stefan Wolff is a political scientist specializing in the prevention and settlement of ethnic conflicts and civil wars, and in postconflict state-building in deeply divided societies. Fontana and Wolff are based in the Department of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom.

This research was funded by USIP’s Grants & Fellowships Program and was supported by the Inclusive Peace Processes and Reconciliation Program in USIP’s Gandhi-King Global Academy. These programs are solely responsible for the accuracy and thoroughness of the content.

Related Publications

Four Priorities for Sudan a Year into the Civil War

Four Priorities for Sudan a Year into the Civil War

Thursday, April 18, 2024

By: Susan Stigant

This week marks a year of war in Sudan. A once promising revolution that led to the overthrow in 2019 of the country’s longtime dictator, Omar al-Bashir, has devolved into a devastating civil war. The fighting started over a dispute on how to incorporate the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) into the country’s military, the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF). A year later as the conflict between the RSF and SAF grinds on, Sudan is experiencing the world’s worst displacement crisis and one of the world’s worst hunger crises in recent history.

Type: Analysis

Global PolicyPeace Processes

USIP Explains: Community Dialogue in Northern Sinjar

USIP Explains: Community Dialogue in Northern Sinjar

Thursday, April 11, 2024

By: Sarhang Hamasaeed

Ten years after ISIS’ genocide against them, the wounds of the Yazidi community in Iraq’s Sinjar district remain fresh as thousands remain displaced and even more await justice for the crimes perpetrated against them. Meanwhile, despite living in peaceful coexistence prior to ISIS’ campaign, the conflict planted seeds of division among Sinjar’s various tribes and communities — resulting in tensions that threatened to tear the district apart even after ISIS’ defeat.

Type: Blog

Mediation, Negotiation & DialoguePeace Processes

Indigenous Pathways to Peace

Indigenous Pathways to Peace

Wednesday, April 3, 2024

By: Binalakshmi Nepram;  Julia Schiwal

Many of the world’s Indigenous peoples live in unstable areas, struggling to survive as conflicts, transnational organized criminal networks and extractive projects upend their lives and livelihoods. Unfortunately, peace processes in these contexts are often negotiated at high political levels without the inclusion of Indigenous peoples. This can undermine the chances for success, as Indigenous peoples are a crucial population in some of the world's longest-running conflicts. But even further, excluding Indigenous people means overlooking how Indigenous traditions, rituals, and religious and political practices can help advance peace and resolve deadly conflict.

Type: Analysis

Peace Processes

What Does the U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution Mean for the Israel-Gaza War?

What Does the U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution Mean for the Israel-Gaza War?

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

By: Robert Barron

On March 25, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 2728, calling for an “immediate” cease-fire in Gaza. The motion’s passage came after weeks of back and forth and posturing among the UNSC’s permanent and rotating members. The exact phrasing of the resolution and its relevance to the situation on the ground, as well as bilateral and multilateral relations — particularly U.S.-Israel ties — have been the subject of heavy public and media attention since Monday, raising questions about the resolution’s subtext, intent and limitations. USIP’s Robert Barron looks at these questions.

Type: Question and Answer

Global PolicyPeace Processes

View All Publications