While the promotion of good governance has long been at the heart of EU’s assistance to peacebuilding, stability, and security, it has gained yet more prominence among the set of EU values upheld in the post-Lisbon EU (common) foreign... more
While the promotion of good governance has long been at the heart of EU’s assistance to peacebuilding, stability, and security, it has gained yet more prominence among the set of EU values upheld in the post-Lisbon EU (common) foreign policy agenda, closely associated – and sometimes used interchangeably – with related values such as human rights, democratisation, and the rule of law. The linkages between good governance and peacebuilding have been foremost explored through the lense of malfunctioning and poor governance as a root cause of conflict.
However, there is no solid evidence for what type of support to governance reform is most likely to lead to effective, inclusive, and sustainable peacebuilding. This scoping study will touch on this debate through the prism of EU foreign policy, by identifying the inherent dilemmas and tensions related to EU governance reform support. It will do so by analysing the different EU approaches and actors, their stated aims and methods.
However, there is no solid evidence for what type of support to governance reform is most likely to lead to effective, inclusive, and sustainable peacebuilding. This scoping study will touch on this debate through the prism of EU foreign policy, by identifying the inherent dilemmas and tensions related to EU governance reform support. It will do so by analysing the different EU approaches and actors, their stated aims and methods.
Research Interests:
This scoping report defines multi-track diplomacy (MTD) as a specific approach to EU foreign policy, alongside other intervention strategies such as security sector intervention, political reform support or socio-economic assistance. It... more
This scoping report defines multi-track diplomacy (MTD) as a specific approach to EU foreign policy, alongside other intervention strategies such as security sector intervention, political reform support or socio-economic assistance. It places a primary emphasis on diplomatic
initiatives aimed at supporting conflict prevention and peacebuilding, especially during the various (formal and informal) stages of peace processes.
The purpose of the report is four-fold. Firstly, it reviews the main scholarly and policy trends regarding the use and effectiveness of MTD in contexts of intra-state conflicts. It defines the concept of MTD by anchoring it within the contemporary academic and policy literature on mediation and dialogue support, with specific emphasis on the role of EU
institutions. By examining the rationale, dimensions and timing of MTD, it describes the recent policy shift from a sole reliance on traditional state diplomacy and Track I muscled mediation towards multi-track engagement in conflict constellations by mediation/dialogue support teams involving multiple stakeholders, and diversified methods of ‘soft power’ diplomacy, according to the various stages of conflict and peacebuilding, as well as the degree of power asymmetry between the primary contenders.
Secondly, it reviews and classifies past or ongoing examples of EU MTD intervention – with a primary emphasis on the four country cases at stake in the WOSCAP project (Ukraine, Georgia, Mali and Yemen) – along the three Tracks of engagement in the given contexts, and according to their primary strategy of intervention (power-based, deal brokering diplomacy; interest-based, problem-solving diplomacy; and transformative, long-term diplomacy).
Thirdly, it discusses four clusters of challenges pertaining to the implementation of EU MTD in conflict-affected countries, with a particular emphasis on areas of overlap or tension with other capability clusters and cross-cutting themes covered by the WOSCAP project. The insights are drawn from scholarly assessments of the factors that facilitate or hinder the effectiveness of international mediation or dialogue support efforts, and assessments by EU policy experts on key priority areas for improving the internal coherence and external coordination of EU MTD.
Finally, it concludes by offering concrete recommendations to the field researchers with regards to key areas of investigation and methodological considerations.
initiatives aimed at supporting conflict prevention and peacebuilding, especially during the various (formal and informal) stages of peace processes.
The purpose of the report is four-fold. Firstly, it reviews the main scholarly and policy trends regarding the use and effectiveness of MTD in contexts of intra-state conflicts. It defines the concept of MTD by anchoring it within the contemporary academic and policy literature on mediation and dialogue support, with specific emphasis on the role of EU
institutions. By examining the rationale, dimensions and timing of MTD, it describes the recent policy shift from a sole reliance on traditional state diplomacy and Track I muscled mediation towards multi-track engagement in conflict constellations by mediation/dialogue support teams involving multiple stakeholders, and diversified methods of ‘soft power’ diplomacy, according to the various stages of conflict and peacebuilding, as well as the degree of power asymmetry between the primary contenders.
Secondly, it reviews and classifies past or ongoing examples of EU MTD intervention – with a primary emphasis on the four country cases at stake in the WOSCAP project (Ukraine, Georgia, Mali and Yemen) – along the three Tracks of engagement in the given contexts, and according to their primary strategy of intervention (power-based, deal brokering diplomacy; interest-based, problem-solving diplomacy; and transformative, long-term diplomacy).
Thirdly, it discusses four clusters of challenges pertaining to the implementation of EU MTD in conflict-affected countries, with a particular emphasis on areas of overlap or tension with other capability clusters and cross-cutting themes covered by the WOSCAP project. The insights are drawn from scholarly assessments of the factors that facilitate or hinder the effectiveness of international mediation or dialogue support efforts, and assessments by EU policy experts on key priority areas for improving the internal coherence and external coordination of EU MTD.
Finally, it concludes by offering concrete recommendations to the field researchers with regards to key areas of investigation and methodological considerations.
In some countries, more civilians are being killed by armed gangs and criminal organisations than in traditional combat. Still, these pockets of armed social violence – "undeclared wars" marked, among other things, by criminal, gang... more
In some countries, more civilians are being killed by armed gangs and criminal organisations than in traditional combat. Still, these pockets of armed social violence – "undeclared wars" marked, among other things, by criminal, gang and/or urban violence as well as extremist violence – have long received much less attention than politically motivated forms of armed conflicts. As their effects — social-political destabilisation, in some cases coinciding with high numbers of victims — are becoming more pressing, national and international actors have begun addressing the phenomenon.
In this 12th Berghof Handbook Dialogue, the authors of the lead article, Bernardo Arévalo de León and Ana Glenda Tager, argue that the inclusive and participatory methodologies offered by peacebuilding provide an operational strategy that would allow the international community to engage successfully with issues of armed social violence.Five sets of respondents explore the actors, factors and dynamics of violence in different settings (among them Colombia, the UK, Nigeria, Mexico, Myanmar and Guinea-Bissau). They debate issues as diverse as the inter-connectedness of political, social and private violence, the need to work closely with government agencies, civil society and agents of violence, as well as the merits of specific participatory methodologies. They discuss what peacebuilding and other initiatives have achieved, and where they have fallen short. The Dialoge is rounded out by an introduction by the editors and a "response to the respondents by the lead authors".
The Dialogue Series is an offshoot of the Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation. Each topic in the series is chosen because it is particularly relevant to societies in conflict and the practice of conflict transformation, and because it raises important issues at the present time. In each Dialogue, practitioners and scholars critically engage and debate in light of their experience. Typically, a Dialogue includes one lead article from key experts, and several commentaries from practitioners and others. Rather than presenting a single analysis, these practitioner-scholar encounters stimulate debate, integrating different perspectives, challenging prevailing views and comparing research findings with experiences and insights on the ground.
Importantly, Dialogues, as works of broad relevance, are distributed in print version (to order a hardcopy, visit http://www.berghof-foundation.org/shop/) as well as online. We invite readers to respond to the papers (as to all articles). Interesting and original contributions can be added to the web version of the Dialogue. Please contact us at handbook@berghof-foundation.org.
In this 12th Berghof Handbook Dialogue, the authors of the lead article, Bernardo Arévalo de León and Ana Glenda Tager, argue that the inclusive and participatory methodologies offered by peacebuilding provide an operational strategy that would allow the international community to engage successfully with issues of armed social violence.Five sets of respondents explore the actors, factors and dynamics of violence in different settings (among them Colombia, the UK, Nigeria, Mexico, Myanmar and Guinea-Bissau). They debate issues as diverse as the inter-connectedness of political, social and private violence, the need to work closely with government agencies, civil society and agents of violence, as well as the merits of specific participatory methodologies. They discuss what peacebuilding and other initiatives have achieved, and where they have fallen short. The Dialoge is rounded out by an introduction by the editors and a "response to the respondents by the lead authors".
The Dialogue Series is an offshoot of the Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation. Each topic in the series is chosen because it is particularly relevant to societies in conflict and the practice of conflict transformation, and because it raises important issues at the present time. In each Dialogue, practitioners and scholars critically engage and debate in light of their experience. Typically, a Dialogue includes one lead article from key experts, and several commentaries from practitioners and others. Rather than presenting a single analysis, these practitioner-scholar encounters stimulate debate, integrating different perspectives, challenging prevailing views and comparing research findings with experiences and insights on the ground.
Importantly, Dialogues, as works of broad relevance, are distributed in print version (to order a hardcopy, visit http://www.berghof-foundation.org/shop/) as well as online. We invite readers to respond to the papers (as to all articles). Interesting and original contributions can be added to the web version of the Dialogue. Please contact us at handbook@berghof-foundation.org.