Post-Conflict State Building

During the past fifty years, the world has witnessed some of the worst human rights violations against innocent people in many countries. In some cases, crimes have been committed by repressive regimes against innocent people whereas in other instances the human right violations have been committed by dominant class against weaker groups. Although some progress has been made over the years to resolve some of the intractable conflicts, violence still remains in many areas. The question facing policymakers and religious experts involved in post-conflict mediation is whether truth-telling, repentance and amnesty help to bring long-lasting peace between warring factions.

Devlet inşa girişimleri uzun yıllardır devam etmektedir. Bu çalışmaların sonucunda alınan dersler ışığında uygulamadan doğan çeşitli gerilim ve çelişkilerden bahsetmek mümkündür. Bu gerilim ve çelişkiler çözülemediği takdirde devlet inşa çabalarını olumsuz etkilemektedir. Yeni ve bağımsız bir ülke inşa ederken bu işlemin dış müdahale ile gerçekleşmesi gerilimin temelini oluşturur. Savaş sonrası ortaya çıkmış yeni lider profili ile ülkeyi gelecekte yönetmesi gereken lider profili arasındaki faklılıktan dolayı devlet inşacılarının sürece göre tercihleri değişmekte bu da inşa çabalarında gerilime neden olmaktadır. Aktarılmak istenen değerler, normlar ve kurumlar batının uygulamarından gelmektedir. Her ülkede bunun yürülüğe girmesini beklemek yanıltıcı olabilir. Bu da süresi inşa edilen devlete bağlı olmak kaydıyla belirli bir sürtünmenin oluşmasına zemin hazırlayacaktır. Devlet inşası eski ile yeninin bir karışımı olacaktır. Bunun dozunun ayarlanması oldukça zor bir işlemdir ve devlet inşasını sekteye uğratabilir ve tüm gayretlerin boşa gitmesine sebep olabilir. Bir de devlet inşacıları için kısa dönem gereklilikler uzun vadeli hedeflerin elde edilmesinde engelleyici olabilir. Bunlar konu üzerinde çalışan uzmanların üzerinde hemfikir oldukları gerilim ve çelişkilerdir.

The revolution in Ukraine, together with the Russian annexation of Crimea and the military conflict that followed, have rekindled enduring anxieties about the salience of law in responding to radical constitutional change and territorial conflict. The joint Center for Constitutional Transitions-Miller Institute-German Law Journal workshop will address the meaning and relevance of the principles of territorial integrity, non-intervention, self-determination, and popular sovereignty that frame much of the debate about the conflict in Ukraine. Scholars of international law, comparative constitutionalism and political theory will discuss whether the crisis in Ukraine is an occasion to renew our foundational commitments to these principles, or whether it ought to encourage a re-imagining of the doctrinal and theoretical tools we use to make sense of revolution, constitution making, and state-building in the context of geopolitical rivalry.

Post-conflict knowledge and practice regarding effective governance reconstitution is still in its infancy; during conflict, it is even more minimal. In conflict-torn states, it is still debatable that state building has become synonymous to re-establishing governance -thus peace; and that civil society has become a protagonist in this process. More consensus, nevertheless, has been reached in literature regarding the yet limited capability to deal with conflict. One of the most alarming conflicts in modern history that requires such improved academic understanding during conflict itself is the Syrian case. Syria’s conflict presents complex governance dynamics and state building interests. Syria is witnessing the rise of both civil societies and extremist groups in the midst of civil wars, proxy wars and popular uprisings against authoritarianism.
This article aims to provide an insight into the yet misunderstood dynamics of governance during conflict, as it focuses on the non-government-controlled parts of Syria. The article pays particular attention to the agency of civil society vis-à-vis other local and international state building interests. It bases its analysis on a theoretical framework centred on the notion of “hybridity”. In two different sections, the article analyses the extent to which governance is a hybrid of, first, old and new governance imbalances and, second, of local and international forces. Governance imbalance is seen in light of the state-market-civil society developmental model. Meanwhile, the governance of local and international forces during conflict is measured following three dimensions: effectiveness, legitimacy and security. A third section is then dedicated to case studies of three non-government-controlled-areas in Syria: Al-Raqqa, Dair Ezzor and Aleppo. With a historical and contextual snapshot of the changing dynamics during conflict in these areas, this section studies the agency of civil society versus other more powerful governance actors on the ground. The cases are supported by data from an intensive qualitative and quantitative field research of over 6 months expanding until May 2014.
The research findings suggest that while the different factors, forces and interests in the Syrian conflict coexist and cooperate, both the old and the new, the grass-roots and the top-down, the civil and the uncivil governance become hybridised. The result, nonetheless, continues to derive unbalanced governance between the key actors in the state, civil society and market spheres. This necessitates a more holistic historical and contextual understanding of the continuously changing nature of governance during conflict. It requires better insight into the relationships and dynamics between the actors at the local and international levels. It also implies the need for better cooperation with local civil societies following an approach tailored more closely to their rights, motives, nature, needs and governance realities on the ground.

Post-conflict knowledge and practice regarding effective governance reconstitution is still in its infancy; during conflict, it is even more minimal. In conflict-torn states, it is still debatable that state building has become synonymous to re-establishing governance -thus peace; and that civil society has become a protagonist in this process. More consensus, nevertheless, has been reached in literature regarding the yet limited capability to deal with conflict. One of the most alarming conflicts in modern history that requires such improved academic understanding during conflict itself is the Syrian case. Syria’s conflict presents complex governance dynamics and state building interests. Syria is witnessing the rise of both civil societies and extremist groups in the midst of civil wars, proxy wars and popular uprisings against authoritarianism.

This article aims to provide an insight into the yet misunderstood dynamics of governance during conflict, as it focuses on the non-government-controlled parts of Syria. The article pays particular attention to the agency of civil society vis-à-vis other local and international state building interests. It bases its analysis on a theoretical framework centred on the notion of “hybridity”. In two different sections, the article analyses the extent to which governance is a hybrid of, first, old and new governance imbalances and, second, of local and international forces. Governance imbalance is seen in light of the state-market-civil society developmental model. Meanwhile, the governance of local and international forces during conflict is measured following three dimensions: effectiveness, legitimacy and security. A third section is then dedicated to case studies of three non-government-controlled-areas in Syria: Al-Raqqa, Dair Ezzor and Aleppo. With a historical and contextual snapshot of the changing dynamics during conflict in these areas, this section studies the agency of civil society versus other more powerful governance actors on the ground. The cases are supported by data from an intensive qualitative and quantitative field research of over 6 months expanding until May 2014.

The research findings suggest that while the different factors, forces and interests in the Syrian conflict coexist and cooperate, both the old and the new, the grass-roots and the top-down, the civil and the uncivil governance become hybridised. The result, nonetheless, continues to derive unbalanced governance between the key actors in the state, civil society and market spheres. This necessitates a more holistic historical and contextual understanding of the continuously changing nature of governance during conflict. It requires better insight into the relationships and dynamics between the actors at the local and international levels. It also implies the need for better cooperation with local civil societies following an approach tailored more closely to their rights, motives, nature, needs and governance realities on the ground.

This paper focuses on the sense of community in a small, landlocked district of Timor Leste, Aileu. Timor Leste’s turbulent history over the past 30 years since the decolonisation of Portugal (1974) and the occupation by Indonesia (1975-1999) has left various psychosocial traumas. To consider how to overcome these, and build a more socially cohesive society after Independence (2002), this paper discusses the traditional cultural system in Aileu, the Mambai culture. The uma lissan (‘sacred house’), fetosaun umane (‘wife-giver/wife-taker’) and nahe biti (‘spreading the mat’), this paper claims, provide a capacity in traditional Mambai culture for social cohesion, unity and a broad sense of community. From a peacebuilding perspective, these practices are explored as benchmarks for attaining sustained peace, and indeed may explain why Aileu, where these practices are still being used, on the whole remains quite peaceful.

Throughout the second half of the twentieth century, foreign aid has been held as the prescription drug for "fixing" the "diseases" of the developing world. Managing foreign aid revenues in a post-conflict environment presents an exponential cadre of challenges, including: high transaction costs associated with rebuilding financial, political and legal institutions, infrastructure renovations, rent-seeking and corruption, and government credibility issues. This article analyzes foreign aid methodology in post-conflict states. The author details the major factors which can propagate sustainable economic development and growth in a developing world inundated with foreign aid. (See pp. 131-149).

The overarching objective of this book is to analyse the manner in which statebuilding-oriented research has and can influence policies in fragile, post-conflict environments. Large-scale, externally-assisted statebuilding is a relatively new and distinct foreign policy domain having risen to the forefront of the international agenda as the negative consequences of state weakness have been repeatedly revealed in the form of entrenched poverty, regional instability and serious threats to international security. Despite the increasing volume of research on statebuilding, the use and uptake of findings by those involved in policymaking remains largely under-examined. As such, the main themes running through the book relate to issues of research influence, use and uptake into policy. It grapples with problems associated with decision-making dynamics, knowledge management and the policy process and draws on concepts and analytical models developed within the public policy and research utilisation literature. This book will be of great interest to researchers, knowledge managers and policymakers working in the fields of post-war reconstruction, statebuilding, fragile states, stabilisation, conflict and development.