FRUSTRATING PEACEBUILDING: THE IMPACT OF REGIONAL PLAYERS ON POST-CONFLICT PEACE PROCESSES

Abstract

Multilateral peacebuilding has been lauded as a highly legitimate approach to conflict resolution in the post-Cold War era due to its neutrality and commitment to working with local groups to tackle the root causes hindering the establishment of sustainable peace. Despite the tremendous amounts of effort and resources pumped into these missions by the international community and great powers, a majority of these missions ended in failure and was unable to prevent relapses into violent conflict. This paper aims to address the question of why some peacebuilding missions succeed while others fail. It puts forth a regional theory for peacebuilding that builds on the foundations of Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver’s regional security complex theory (RSCT). In analysing the peacebuilding efforts in Somalia and Sierra Leone, this paper finds that peacebuilding missions are more likely to succeed when regional players support the peace process, and are more likely to fail when regional players work to sabotage peace by acting as spoilers. This paper thus calls for a peacebuilding process that is more sensitive to regional dynamics and seeks to transform potential spoilers into stakeholders of peace.