At War's End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict

by Roland Paris

Exploring the challenge of rehabilitating countries after civil wars, this study finds that attempting to transform war-shattered states into liberal democracies with market economies can backfire badly. Roland Paris contends that the rapid introduction of democracy and capitalism in the absence of effective institutions can increase rather than decrease the danger of renewed fighting. A more effective approach to post-conflict peacebuilding would be to introduce political and economic reform in a gradual and controlled manner.

Genres: Politics, Political Science, International Relations

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Librarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name

Professor of international affairs at the University of Ottawa

Reviews

[Eren Buğlalılar · Rating 2 out of 5]

A blueprint for how to softly neocolonize the war-torn, underdeveloped countries, drawn by the left hand of the bourgeoisie. The author cannot but see the ravages of the so-called "peacebuilding and democratization" of the early 1990s: Economic injustice, social collapse and political turmoil.

Indeed. In El Salvador, Guatemala, Angola, Rwanda, Cambodia, the post-Cold War interventions of the imperialist camp brought nothing but economic plunder, criminal gangs, insecurity and so on. Their shiny NGOs, staffed with economic and legal experts and funded dearly by the IMF, World Bank and the democracy loving governments, remained as mere spectators, watching the neocolonial people cut each other's throat.

But what does Roland Paris recommend? After repeating endlessly his unshakeable faith in capitalism and liberalization, Paris suggests that neocolonization of the conflict-ridden countries should be undertaken slowly and of course "by the international community", a.k.a. imperialism:

i. Elections are harmful, postpone them.
ii. Freedom of association can be dangerous. So, closely regulate the political parties and oppress the radicals.
iii. An early freedom of speech is instabilizing. Restrict and regulate the media.
iv. Train the police, the judges. Secure the state's monopoly of violence.

And after a minimum of 5 years, when it's firmly decided that the radicalism is stifled, the people's minds are completely colonized and a neoliberal democracy palatable for the imperialists is possible.. Then maybe, but only maybe, you can let the third-world govern itself.

It was very interesting and disturbing at the same time, to see how the book evolved from seemingly kind and sympathetic beginnings into a vigorous and ruthless war cry against third-world nations, an attitude I guess typical of the liberal "experts".

If you are looking for a critical take on the issue of so-called democratization and peacebuilding please see:
- Nicolas Guilhot's The Democracy Makers: Human Rights and the Politics of Global Order

[Filip Ejdus · Rating 5 out of 5]

According to the liberal peace thesis, developed in one way or another since the late 18th century, market democracies don't fight each other. Morever, the thesis assumes that democracies also tend to be more peaceful internally in comparison to illiberal regimes. On the basis of this idea, peacebuilding efforts of the international community, especially since the end of the Cold War, have been focusing on rapid transition towards market economy and liberal democracy in post-conflict states. By analysing eleven peacebuilding operations during the 1990s (Angola, Bosnia, Cambodia, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Liberia, Namibia, Nicaragua, Mozambique and Rwanda) Roland Paris argues that this approach is essentially flawed. Paris doesn't dispute the liberal peace thesis itself, but points out that democratization and liberalization when conducted in the absence of a functioning state - may exacerbate societal and ethnic conflicts often leading to the reccurence of violence. As an alternative, he proposes a novel approach that he calls Institutionalization Before Liberalization. The crux of his proposal is that peacebuilders should first build a functioning state and most importantnly its security apparatus and judiciary and wait for the passions of war to cool down, before taking necessary steps towards liberal democracy such as free elections and liberalization of economy.

[Mart · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to read this book for a course on University and I quite liked it (for a mandatory book).

Roland Paris is a young scholar who gave a great introduction in the world of peacebuilding and managing with conflict regions in the world. It is very easy to read, but that is also a downside. Something Paris is a bit too quick with his assumptions, so it is better to quit reading and think about what he says. Especially his chapter about Rwanda is way too bluntly, obviously the economic liberalization pack didn't help the Rwandanese society but it is certainly not a way to understand a genocide. Genocide is a much more complicated situation then he suggested.

Anyway, if you read something about all the UN interventions in the world since 1990, than this book will be a good introduction to begin with.

[SpaceBear · Rating 5 out of 5]

Paris book is defending a more committed form of peacebuilding based on what he terms "institutionalization before liberalization." He argues that both political and economic liberalization in post-conflict settings serves to exasperate existing cleavages in the society, due to the inherently conflictual nature of capitalism and democracy. Instead, he argues that peacebuilding must be committed to establishing strong institutions of governance prior to fill liberalization.

[Jared Donis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Paris repeats himself in almost every chapter of this book. Although the reading experience is somehow diminished by this act, the plus side is that it makes the lessons unforgettable.

I’m always a fan of clarity of thought, simplicity of presentation, and engaging style. Paris fulfills that and I enjoyed reading him. Thank you, sir.

[Nick Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

Paris is too wedded to the idea that rapid introduction of democracy and free markets causes destabilization, when all he really manages to do is show that they are not the panacea that many in the international community have assumed.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This volume is one that advances preconditions for successful democratic nation building, based upon a series of recent case studies (such as Angola, Rwanda, Cambodia, Liberia, Bosnia, Croatia, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Namibia, and Mozambique). This is one of a series of works (such as The RAND volume, America's Role in Nation-Building;Fukuyama's State-Building; etc.) that address what it takes to create new democratic states that will ensure.

Roland Paris addresses an issue that initially seems far afield--peacebuilding. However, his analysis ends up very much on the mark for better understanding democratic nation building. For Paris, peacebuilding represents ". . .postconflict missions". . .with ". . .the goal of preventing a recurrence of violence" (Paris, 2004: 2). What does this have to do with nation building? As he explains (2004: 5):

Peacebuilding missions in the 1990s were guided by a
generally unstated but widely accepted theory of conflict
management: the notion that promoting "liberalization" in
countries that had recently experienced civil war would
help to create the conditions for a stable and lasting
peace. In the political realm, liberalization means
democratization, or the promotion of periodic and genuine
elections, constitutional limitations on the exercise of
government power, and respect for basic civil
liberties. . . .

On the economic side, liberalization refers, according to Paris, to the movement toward a market economy model. His study of a series of postconflict situations finds this liberal economic democracy model a common end goal of peacebuilders. In effect, what he terms peacebuilding looks very much like what others call democratic nation building.

Paris argues that the most promising strategy is IBL---Institutionalization Before Liberalization, that is, that peacebuilders should not immediately move toward economic and political liberalization. Rather, they should first (re)build institutions so that there is a stable base. Among the steps in this process are:

1. Wait until conditions are conducive for elections to
take place.
2. Design electoral systems to reward moderate parties
and candidates.
3. Work to develop a stable civil society.
4. Head off the emergence of "hate" speech.
5. Develop conflict-reducing economic policies.
6. In short, rebuild effective state institutions.

For Paris, there needs to be a two-step process: first, build institutions as a foundation; second, construct liberal structures on that foundation.

This means time and hard work. For successful democratic nation-building, patience is needed--and understanding thast the process must be carefully managed with uncertain outcomes. In short, this is a must read on the subject of what it takes to produce successful nation-building.

[Gill · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book can be summarize in his idea "Institutionalization Before Liberalization". Unfortunately that lacks the gusto and flash of "Disaster Capitalism", so his more thorough analysis of the ways in which political and economic liberalization function practically and are flawed theoretically in post-conflict environments will never receive as much attention as Naomi Klein's bombastic journalism.

Basically, (p.208) “promoting democratization and marketization in institutionally weak, conflict-prone environments is an unreliable and potentially counterproductive approach to peacebuilding. Democratic politics and capitalist economics are not self-organizing; they depend on public institutions to uphold basic rules, to maintain order, to resolve disputes impartially, and to regulate behavior incompatible with the preservation of marker democracy itself.” I would add to manage risk.

Excellent book to introduce peacebuilding in the 1990s. Some flaws in the ways that he designs his case studies and arrives at conclusions, especially in the case of Rwanda and Angola. I dislike the fact that he falls back on the Hobbesian state of nature for his work, since we have proof that connecting practices on the ground to building institutions is the only way to build institutions. However, an interesting book.

[Carmen von Rohr · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent book that thoroughly analyzes the failures of postconflict peacebuilding in the immediate post-Cold War era. Paris offers excellent arguments and potential solutions to the pathologies of liberalization, but of course these solutions are, as ever, politically untenable. Ultimately, for me, Paris does not go far enough, for though he devastatingly documents the failures of rapid democratization and marketization in postconflict societies, he does not question the underlying viability of democratization and marketization themselves. But this book was published in 2004, so perhaps he's had time for a rethink....

[Ellie McGowan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Pretty useless for me.