Peacebuilding and Ex-Combatants
eBook - ePub

Peacebuilding and Ex-Combatants

Political Reintegration in Liberia

Johanna Söderström

Share book
  1. 204 pages
  2. English
  3. ePUB (mobile friendly)
  4. Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub

Peacebuilding and Ex-Combatants

Political Reintegration in Liberia

Johanna Söderström

Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations

About This Book

The book examines how ex-combatants in post-war and peacebuilding settings engage in politics, as seen in the case of Liberia.

The political mobilization of former combatants after war is often perceived as a threat, ultimately undermining the security and stability of the state. This book questions this simplified view and argues that understanding the political voice of former combatants is imperative. Their post-war role is not black and white; they are not just bad or good citizens, but rather engage in multiple political roles: spoilers, victims, disengaged, beneficiaries, as well as motivated and active citizens.

By looking at the political attitudes and values of former combatants, and their understanding of how politics functions, the book sheds new light on the political reintegration of ex-combatants. It argues that political reintegration needs to be given serious attention at the micro-level, but also needs to be scrutinized in two ways: first, through the level of political involvement, which reflects the extent and width of the ex-combatants' voice. Second, in order to make sense of political reintegration, we also need to uncover what values and norms inform their political involvement. The content of their political voice is captured through a comparison with democratic ideals. Based on interviews with over 100 Liberian ex-combatants, the book highlights that their relationship with politics overall should be characterized as an expression of a 'politics of affection'.

This book will be of much interest to students of peacebuilding, African politics, democratization, political sociology, conflict resolution and IR/Security Studies in general.

Frequently asked questions

How do I cancel my subscription?
Simply head over to the account section in settings and click on “Cancel Subscription” - it’s as simple as that. After you cancel, your membership will stay active for the remainder of the time you’ve paid for. Learn more here.
Can/how do I download books?
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
What is the difference between the pricing plans?
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlego’s features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan you’ll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
What is Perlego?
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, we’ve got you covered! Learn more here.
Do you support text-to-speech?
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Is Peacebuilding and Ex-Combatants an online PDF/ePUB?
Yes, you can access Peacebuilding and Ex-Combatants by Johanna Söderström in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Politics & International Relations & Peace & Global Development. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.

Information

Publisher
Routledge
Year
2014
ISBN
9781317649380

1
Political reintegration after war

The politics of former combatants can crucially shape democracy and peacebuilding in war-torn societies. Questions about the political role and position of former combatants at the end of war have long been the concern of researchers and politicians alike. Apprehensions about returning soldiers from World War I and World War II, to the reception of veterans from the Vietnam War, to questions about how to design current reintegration projects in the aftermath of civil wars are indicative of this preoccupation. The political mobilization of former combatants after war is often perceived as a threat, believed to undermine the security and stability of the state. This book questions this simplified view of the political role of former combatants, as former combatants and veterans have played various political roles after war, some integral to the development of democracy and others deeply problematic for democracy. This book is about the political role and agency of ex-combatants in post-war Liberia.
The fear of returning soldiers is an ageless phenomenon. For instance, toward the end of World War II, the American Secretary of War Henry Stimson expressed a deep concern about the returning veterans and their reconciliation with the democratic system: “when those troops come back to us again at the close of the war […] it may have an effect upon the future unity of our nation which is disturbing to contemplate” (cited in Waller 1944, p. 90). His concern was in particular motivated by the experiences after World War I and veterans’ association with fascism across Europe, as well as protests related to veteran benefits in the United States after the war. Similarly, Sir William Beveridge expressed concerns about idle veterans in 1944 at the end of the famous Beveridge report detailing employment policies for Britain,1 noting that the conditions of demobilization was an urgent problem but not one that his report was able to deal with: “unless plans are made now and are known to be made for the maintenance of employment after the transition from war to peace there can be no hope of a smooth transition” (Beveridge 1944, p. 253). In the end, the experience of British veterans returning home after WWII lacked any concerted effort to hone in their engagement and promote social mobility, and has been described as a “lost opportunity” (Allport 2009, p. 157). This fear of returning soldiers has been noted in even earlier cases as well, for example in the aftermath of the Napoleonic wars (see Allport 2009, p. 185), and, as convincingly demonstrated by McMullin, former combatants and veterans have been a political and societal concern since antiquity (McMullin 2013a, pp. 45–77; see also Englander and Osborne 1978, p. 620).
The concern about returning soldiers has motivated a research interest in the military as an institution in general, but also to what extent military service changes the values and behaviors of those who serve, especially in the political sphere. Research on the political socialization of the military is far from conclusive (for a discussion of this, see Krebs 2004). Research on American veterans indicate that the military experience during some wars (WWII, Korea and post-Vietnam) increases political participation, whereas the Vietnam experience itself seems to have decreased their political participation (Teigen 2006). Experiences of African veterans from the world wars have indicated that the political consequences may not be that extensive and, if anything, may have led to more conservative orientations (Greenstein 1978). Different types of involvement by ex-combatants in post-war politics have also been noted in Sierra Leone, where the ex-combatants had a fairly sinister and cynical view of politics (Christensen and Utas 2008), and Uganda, where the experience with violence seems to have led to more extensive participation (Blattman 2009).
More recently, these concerns about former combatants have also led to an extensive interrogation into the impact of the peacebuilding measures specifically targeted at former combatants, such as Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Programs (DDR) (see note for detailed references).2 DDR programs are large endeavors that have become increasingly integral to the United Nations’ (UN) practices in post-war societies. Roughly 1.4 million combatants were involved in 24 programs around the globe between 2005 and 2008, most of which were in Africa.3 While the total costs of such programs are difficult to estimate, during 2007 the bill came in around USD 1,599 billion, most of which was spent on the reintegration component (Caramés et al. 2006; Caramés et al. 2007; Caramés and Sanz 2009, 2008, pp. 3–5; UNDP 2005). More specifically, the field of research related to DDR has focused on the reintegration of former combatants along several different dimensions, such as economic, social and political reintegration. While much of this literature is trying to decipher whether reintegration programs matter for the reintegration of ex-combatants, this research deals more generally as well with reintegration challenges in contemporary ex-combatant communities around the world.
Placing the current peacebuilding literature in a historical context and perspective adds depth and nuances to the research on the reintegration of ex-combatants. McMullin has demonstrated the striking differences in depiction and policy response between ex-combatants and veterans, despite the many commonalities between these categories. Similar problems and questions have been noted both in antiquity, modern history and in current day peacebuilding practices about these categories. What is striking is the lack of nuances of how the ex-combatant in contrast with the veteran is understood in these different settings, as well as the limited reintegration package ex-combatants are targeted with in contrast with the relatively extensive support veterans have received (McMullin 2013a, pp. 4–5, 38, 45–77, 218; see also Schafer 2007, pp. 1–15). This book attempts to bridge this divide, lending voice and adding nuance to the understanding of ex-combatants in contemporary Liberian politics. Understanding the political voice of former combatants today is imperative for gaining a deeper sense of what role ex-combatants actually play for peacebuilding.

The ex-combatant – villain or victim?

Ex-combatants provide an interesting nexus between democratization and conflict termination processes at the micro-level; they are the target group of DDR programs and politically they represent a critical group in the transition. However, the understanding of this particular group in past research has been overly simplified. At times they are seen as agents, other times as victims of structural forces. Their motivation is often described as restricted to either grievances or greed (see e.g. Collier 1994, 2000).4 Similar to Utas (2003, pp. 25–34), the argument put forward here is that such simple categorization of those fighting in war needs to be questioned (see also McMullin 2013b; Humphreys and Weinstein 2008). Ex-combatants are not only (or necessarily) a threat, nor are they simply victims. Ex-combatants represent a diversified group, which potentially contain a multitude of voices. Yet they are often reduced to a threat, by practitioners and researchers alike (McMullin 2013b, 2013a, pp. 214, 220). Current DDR policies also assume that ex-combatants do not embrace democratic norms: “Training can also help break down military attitudes and behaviour, and develop values and norms based on peace and democracy” (UN DDR Resource Centre 2006, p. 28).
Ex-combatants are a politically relevant group in society, and the object of a lot of policy in post-war contexts. They are politically relevant for many different reasons, but only partly because they can return to arms. While their involvement in the war may not always have been promoted for political reasons, the nature of the violence itself and the conflict itself adds an element of the political in their role as combatants (Nilsson 2008, p. 168f). Sometimes they constitute a political problem post-war, they can be a potential security threat (sometimes only in the form of petty crime), but they have also experienced an ordeal as such, which may entitle them to additional support in the post-war context, they may also be a source of additional pressure on politicians who also need to negotiate their post-war politics with other segments of society. In addition, the roles as victim/survivor and perpetrator are often more mixed than is recognized, as the same individual is often both a perpetrator and target of violence, especially in civil war contexts (see e.g. Pouligny 2004, p. 7; Fujii 2010). In the particular case of Liberia (which this book deals with), several have noted how this distinction becomes blurred, partly because of shifting roles over time, but also because of the nature of their involvement during the war (Utas 2005b, p. 412; Ellis 2007, p. 133f; Moran 2006, p. 46; Munive and Jakobsen 2012 also note a blurred distinction between ex-combatants and non-combatants during DDR programs).
The ex-combatants’ military experience gives them capacities and access to networks, and often weapons, that make them well-positioned to undermine post-war politics if they should so desire, and because they can be particularly targeted for easy mobilization (see e.g. Nilsson 2008, p. 192; Darby and Mac Ginty 2003, p. 268; Toure 2002, p. 26). Many note therefore that they represent a particular challenge in the post-war context, especially if reintegration attempts fail (Toure 2002, p. 26; Arnson and Azpuru 2003, p. 201; Nilsson 2008, p. 174; Zahar 2006, p. 45; Knight and Özerdem 2004, pp. 502, 506). For instance, it has been suggested that political marginalization may lead to a return to violence (Walter 2004; Nilsson 2008, p. 185; see also Humphreys and Weinstein 2008, p. 447). Many have also criticized this view of ex-combatants as a threat to security, noting that it often presents an overly simplistic view of how societies return to war, and that this understanding of ex-combatants has been instrumental for motivating current DDR programs (Bolten 2012; McMullin 2013b; Hardgrove 2012, pp. 81, 205; McMullin 2013a, p. 218; the idea of the veteran as deviant, violent and neglected was also used to extend reintegration support after the Vietnam war in the United States, see Dean 1992). Similarly, the predilection for political violence among veterans after World War I has also often been exaggerated (Englander 1994, p. 319).
The war experience itself is considered by many as formative for individuals’ identities and their ensuing political behavior. Indeed, it may create veterans who have huge difficulties coping in the new social system which develops in the post-war society (Laufer 1987, p. 379; Siegel 1989; Laufer 1989, pp. 421–3). In comparison, recent work from Uganda suggests instead that both perpetrators and victims of violence have a heightened degree of political participation, contrary to policy makers’ expectations (Blattman 2009, p. 237). Based on research on ex-combatants in Liberia after the end of the conflict, Bøås and Hatløy have indicated that, while the ex-combatants were a fairly diverse group pre-war, “[t]heir wartime experience may have changed them, their mindset and their behavior” (Bøås and Hatløy 2008, p. 42). We also know, from social movement research, that even participation in more limited activities at low levels of commitment can have important and long-lasting consequences for the individuals concerned (see e.g. Giugni 2004, p. 496).
The combatant experience has also been noted to have changed gender roles, sometimes propelling female combatants into forms of social and economic empowerment previously unknown (see e.g. Utas 2005b; Moran 2010; Ellis 2007, p. 303; West 2000; McKay 2004; Schafer 1998; Coulter 2006; see also Fuest 2008, p. 214). It is also the case that the ex-combatant identity and associated network often continue to be relevant for the individual ex-combatant in the post-war context (see for instance Christensen and Utas 2008, p. 525; Nilsson 2008, p. 186). In part, of course, this is also emphasized by the DDR experience itself, as the ex-combatants are again thrown together quite intimately through attendance in the reintegration programs. As social networks are important for the formation of attitudes, especially when they remain intact (see e.g. Krebs 2004, pp. 110–11; Fine and Harrington 2004), the ex-combatant community is likely to play an important role here.
The social networks of ex-combatants are often seen as a threat to peace. In some communities in Liberia, the ex-combatants are clearly continuing to influence security structures, especially in Lofa where in particular former commanders of Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) are taking on key roles in local collective security solutions. These networks do, however, seem to include ex-combatants across previously warring factions (Bøås 2010, p. 270; Kantor and Persson 2010, p. 26). In response to what was perceived to be local security threats, the UN conducted so called Hotspot assessments; these assessments revealed that the role of ex-combatants in these sites varied – ex-combatants were in some sites instrumental for conflict resolution and taking on roles of political responsibility, whereas other groups were more damaging to security (McMullin 2013a, pp. 209, 222). Whether or not the ex-combatant community (communities) are contributing to peace or undermining it in the long run is another question. The same argument can be made for democracy. Ex-combatants can do both.
Ex-combatants can take on varying roles in the post-war context, beyond avoiding or resorting to violence. They make up a significant part of the citizens of the post-war regime, and their political engagement will also determine the quality of that political regime. Thus it appears warranted to enhance our understanding of the politics of ex-combatants, thereby contributing to the call for more research on attitudes and beliefs in conflict and post-war contexts (Hadjipavlou 2007, p. 363f), and the need for more ...

Table of contents