Ending Civil Wars

- Victory v. negotiated settlement

o Victory is more common

- Difficult to achieve stable settlement without third-party guarantor (Walter, 1997)

o Hard to find able and willing guarantor

§ 1958 Lebanon settlement had 14,000 US troops present briefly (peace lasts until 1975)

§ 1989 Nicaraguan settlement had 260 OAS observers and 800 Venezuelan paratroopers

§ 1979 Zimbabwe agreement had 1200 Commonwealth troops

o Guarantor must be willing to use force

§ But El Salvador UN missions 1991-95 succeeded w/out much force available (368 observers; 315 police)

What peace agreements last? (Hartzell, et al 2001)

- prior regime was democratic

- long war at low intensity

- territorial autonomy for threatened groups

- third-party guarantee

Should partition be favored over settlement? (Sambanis, 2000)

- Pro-partition view

o enables postwar democratization

o Prevents renewed war (v. ineffective settlement)

o Reduces residual ethnic violence

- Anti-partition view

o Partition in one state may encourage violent secession elsewhere

o Successor states are not homogenous

o Ethnic diffusion will reinforce cooperation

- Debate over partition as agreement v. secession as unilateral action of seceding state

- Statistical study

o Partition is more likely after costly ‘identity wars,’ after rebel victory or truce, and in countries with above-average socio-economic conditions

o Partitioned states are as democratic or more so than non-partitioned ones

o War recurrence is no more or less likely in partition than not

§ Longer war makes peace more likely, but costlier war makes it less likely

§ Treaties produce more stable agreements than truces

o Negligible effect under most conditions, but helpful under some conditions