March 19: Carrying Out Agreements

Hampson: Nurturing Peace. Ch 1. "What makes peace settlements stick?"

In this chapter, Hampson talks about the problems that can arise in the post-negotiation phase of conflict resolution. The author gives 5 different examples of cases in which settlements have failed or succeeded. Along with a brief analysis of these cases, the author brings up the question of what success or failure means. Due to the long-term nature of post-negotiation work, it is difficult to analyze when a peace settlement has worked and when it has failed. It is also hard to have strict criteria for judging these factors even if a time period is decided on. Hampson gives us a list by Hoisti of the "prerequisites for peace" that we can use to judge peace settlements by:

1. the provision of a system of governance that embodies certain norms of what constitutes acceptable behavior;
2. legitimacy, based on shared principles of justice that are incorporated into the peace settlement;
3. assimilation, which demonstrates 'that the gains of living within the system ... outweigh the potential advantages of seeking to destroy or dominate it';
4. a deterrent system powerful enough to prevent defections;
5. conflict-resolving procedures and institutions that "include procedures and institutions for identifying, monitoring, managing, and resolving major conflicts between members of the system," including the capacity 'to impose settlement terms where continuation of a conflict poses a threat to the system as a whole';
6. consensus on war, that is, the recognition that war is a fundamental problem so that the design of new orders develops and fosters explicit norms against the use of force;
7. procedures for peaceful change, including 'methods and procedures for reviewing settlement terms, for raising grievances, in general for adjusting commitments and responsibilities to new social, economic, demographic, and diplomatic conditions'; and
8. anticipation of future issues, that is, a system for anticipating issues that are potential sources of new conflict and for monitoring and handling them before they erupt into violence

Hampson also argues that it is important to keep in mind the environment in which a conflict takes place (i.e. other countries) when negotiating an agreement. Even if the peace agreement works for the parties involved, if outside parties do not agree or are affected negatively, the agreement may not be successful.
I thought this chapter was a good introduction to understanding the post-negotiation phase of conflict resolution. I like the list that Hampson gave for analyzing peace settlements because it is seems like it could be extremely helpful in trying to figure out why settlements don't work. I also found Hampson's warning to keep in mind other nations in negotiations to be eye-opening. It seems like it would be obvious that third parties need to think about how outside parties are affected by settlements, but it might be hard for them to do this in a lot of cases. In negotiations where coming to an agreement between two parties is nearly impossible, it would be difficult to add even more parties into consideration. However, I think this is vital, especially in the modern world, for making successful settlements. After reading this chapter, I realized how deep third parties must delve into the issues in order to find a working settlement. There is so much research that could be done to help make negotiation more successful in the world; it's exciting to think of how much opportunity there is for making conflict a less violent process and for expanding the use of negotiation in conflicts that are violent.