https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6741-8280
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Current scholarly literature posits that power-sharing agreements can be an important tool for reducing the chances of repeated civil wars. This study aims to find out what conditions influence the chances of successful power-sharing agreements. I test the effect of amnesty that is accompanied by power-sharing agreements when civil wars end with negotiated settlements. I analyse in particular 64 power-sharing agreements that ended civil wars between 1989 and 2006, using the event history model. The Weibull regression analysis indicates that power-sharing agreements are more likely to decrease the chances of repeated civil wars by relieving security concerns among former warring parties.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank you, Xinyuan Dai, John Vasquez, and Alyssa Prorok, for their valuable comments on the earlier draft of this paper.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. This article is a summary and modified version of Cho, Lasting peace (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign).
2. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 318; and Hartzell and Hoddie, Crafting Peace: Power-sharing Institutions, 19.
3. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 320–21.
4. Quinn et al., “Determinants of Civil War,” 167.
5. Ibid.
6. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 319–31; and Mattes and Savun, ”Civil War Settlements,” 516–21.
7. Walter, “Does Conflict Beget Conflict?” 372–75.
8. Collier and Sambanis, “Understanding Civil War,” 5, 8.
9. Cammett and Malesky, “Implications for Peace,” 985–88; and Jarstad and Nilsson, “Implementation of Powersharing Pacts,” 206–12.
10. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 319–20.
11. Walter, Committing to Peace, 62–64.
12. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 320.
13. Gates et al., “Power-Sharing, Protection, and Peace,” 513–15; and Mattes and Savun, “Civil War Settlements,” 511–17; Mattes and Savun, “Fostering peace,” 739–41.
14. Ibid.
15. Walter, “Civil War Settlement,” 337–40.
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid.
18. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 321.
19. Ibid., 323.
20. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 318; and Mattes and Savun, ”Civil War Settlements,” 520.
21. Fearon, “Rationalist Explanations for War,” 381–82.
22. Mattes and Savun, “Civil War Settlements,” 512–17; and Fearon, “Rationalist Explanations for War,” 381–82.
23. Fearon, “Rationalist Explanations for War,” 381–82.
24. Gates et al., “Power-Sharing, Protection, and Peace,” 513–14.
25. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 320; and Gates et al., “Power-Sharing, Protection, and Peace,” 515–19.
26. Gates et al., “Power-Sharing, Protection, and Peace,” 516.
27. Ibid., 516.
28. Mattes and Savun, “Civil War Settlements,” 512–16.
29. Weisman, “Discussion of Amnesty,” 529.
30. Jeffery, “Peace in Aceh, Indonesia,” 62–67.
31. Igreja, “Amnesty and Political Struggles,” 5.
32. Jeffery, “Peace in Aceh, Indonesia,” 60–62.
33. Sharlach, “Rape as Genocide,” 96–98.
34. Schaal and Elbert, “Ten Years after Genocide,” 96.
35. Ssenyonjo, “Accountability of Non-state Actors,” 407.
36. Ibid., 434.
37. Ibid.
38. Daniels, “Conflict Termination,” 8.
39. Ibid., 8.
40. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 320–21.
41. Ibid.
42. Ibid.
43. Ibid.
44. Ibid., 321.
45. Gent, “Power-Sharing and Peace”; and Clayton, “Relative Rebel Strength.”
46. Weisman, “Discussion of Amnesty.”
47. Daniels, “Conflict Termination,” 6.
48. Ibid., 6.
49. Mutwol, Civil Wars in Africa.
50. Ibid., 188.
51. Ibid.
52. Hayner, “Negotiating Peace in Liberia.”
53. Ibid., 13.
54. Ibid.
55. Accra Peace Agreement, “Accra Peace Agreement,” 23.
56. Hayner, “Negotiating Peace in Liberia,” 13.
57. Ottmann and Vüllers, “Power-Sharing Event Dataset.”
58. Pettersson and Öberg, “Organized Violence.”
59. Hartzell and Hoddie, Crafting Peace: Power-Sharing Institutions.
60. Joshi, Quinn, and Regan, “Intrastate Peace Accords.”
61. Hartzell and Hoddie, Crafting Peace: Power-sharing Institutions.
62. Ibid.
63. Pettersson and Öberg, “Organized Violence.”
64. Ottmann and Vüllers, “Power-Sharing Event Dataset.”
65. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 327–30; Mattes and Savun, “Civil War Settlements,” 520–21; Mattes and Savun, “Fostering peace,” 752–54; and Martin Citation2013, “Coming Together: Power-Sharing,” 342–45.
66. Martin Citation2013, “Coming Together: Power-Sharing,” 352.
67. Box-Steffensmeier and Jones, Event History Modelling, 25.
68. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 327–30.
69. Owing to the primary focus on duration in this analysis, I think using an event history model is an appropriate choice for empirical testing; however, this model reduced cases. Of the 65 peace agreements in this paper, five cases experience recurred civil wars within months of signing the power-sharing agreements. As noted, the dependent variable of this analysis is the duration in months until renewed civil wars. As such, the five cases are not at risk and automatically excluded from the analysis using STATA. For the robustness check, I created a binary dependent variable, which is coded as 1 if there are renewed intrastate conflicts within five years after signing the power-sharing agreements and coded as 0 if renewed intrastate conflicts did not occur within five years after signing the power-sharing agreements. After that, I tested logit and probit analysis and, my findings using COX proportional hazard model and Weibull regression analysis are both found to be consistent with the logit and probit analysis.
70. Högbladh, “UCDP Peace Agreement,” 7; and Of the 65 cases, I could merge all 64 cases of amnesty variable from the PSED dataset using the UCDP Peace agreement Dataset except for the case of Kosovo Peace Plan. As I used the amnesty variable coded by the UCDP peace agreement dataset version 19.1, and to maintain the consistency of the coding rather than coding the variable myself, I excluded the one case from the analysis.
71. Ottmann and Vüllers, “Power-Sharing Event Dataset,” 343, 345.
72. Hartzell and Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing,” 328.
73. Gleditsch, “Armed Conflict.”
74. Mattes and Savun, “Civil War Settlements,” 520.
75. Hartzell and Hoddie, Crafting Peace: Power-Sharing Institutions.
76. Gleditsch, “Armed Conflict.”
77. Ottmann and Vüllers, “Power-Sharing Event Dataset,” 343.
78. Högbladh, “UCDP Peace Agreement”; UCDP Peace Agreement Dataset 19.1 coded the incompatibility variable as 3 if the civil war is regarding both territory and government, but this paper’s sample has no civil wars coded as 3.
79. Martin Citation2013, “Coming Together: Power-Sharing,” 342.
80. Hartzell and Hoddie, Crafting Peace: Power-Sharing Institutions, 72.
81. Polity, “The Polity Project.”
82. There was one missing variable for Serbia because the state did not exist between 1991 and 1999. Thus, for that particular year, I used the polity score of Yugoslavia since Serbia and Montenegro were considered as part of Yugoslavia during that time before their independence.
83. Hartzell and Hoddie, Crafting Peace: Power-Sharing Institutions.
84. Bank, “World Development Indicators”; There are only two missing values for the life expectancy at birth data of World Bank, which are Bosnia (1995) and Serbia (1999). In the two cases, I used the life expectancy at birth data of a year before or a year after the specified date.
85. Ottmann and Vüllers, “Power-Sharing Event Dataset,” 343.
86. Fortna, “Peacekeeping and Peace,” 288.
87. Högbladh, “UCDP Peace Agreement,” 7.
88. Krause and Bränfors, “Women’s Participation,” 989–92; and Hudson, “Peacebuilding Through a Gender,” 291–95.
89. Krause and Bränfors, “Women’s Participation,” 994–95.
90. Högbladh, “UCDP Peace Agreement,” 7.
91. United Nations, “UN Peacemaker.”
92. Mutwol, Civil Wars in Africa, 188.
93. Mattes and Savun, “Fostering peace,” 739, 743, 751.
94. Mutwol, Civil Wars in Africa, 188.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Jaeseok Cho
Jaeseok Cho is a Visiting Assistant Teaching Professor of Government at William and Mary. He is interested in civil wars, international conflicts, and international institutions, with a focus on factors related to civil war recurrence.