Mediating Peace Agreements: The Capacity of the EU as a Multi-track Mediator

Project homepage

Project Host

Centre for International Studies, School of Law and Government, Dublin City University

Project Summary

This project analyses the capacity of the EU to function as a mediator in armed conflict situations. It focuses on how the EU interacts with other actors, such as NGOs and States, in mediation processes, and how it uses its resources to bring peace to end armed crises. It focuses on three case studies areas, Aceh, Georgia and Cyprus.

Project Aims

The project has a number of aims:

to analyse the literature on the history and effectiveness of mediation as a conflict resolution technique and on the role of the EU as a mediator
to investigate the nature and effectiveness of Track I, Track II and multi-track mediation
to undertake empirical research on how the EU has acted as a multi-track mediator in conflicts in Georgia, Aceh, and Cyprus, by undertaking semi-structured interviews with key personnel (40 people in total) from international mediation centres, namely the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (CHD) and the Crisis Management Initiative (CMI), civil service personnel within the EU institutions involved in EU mediation efforts and personnel involved in mediation efforts in case study areas
to analyse how the EU has harnessed and co-ordinated the resources and capabilities of other mediation actors in conflict resolution efforts
to analyse the factors which influence the level of role the EU takes in specific mediation contexts
to assess how the EU can optimise its potential as a mediator

Project Description

The EU is one of the most powerful economic, political and legal institutions in the world, with a presence in 118 states worldwide. It is therefore uniquely positioned to positively impact on armed conflict situations, and indeed actively promotes the principles of conflict prevention and resolution. However, there currently exists a dearth of both theoretical and empirical research on the place of the EU as an actor in conflict mediation efforts.

This project addresses the existing lacunae by firstly undertaking a stock-taking review of the extant literature and policy documentation on the EU as a mediator, and secondly undertaking semi-structured interviews with key personnel involved in EU, State and NGO mediation efforts. The project will also produce in-depth analyses of mediation efforts involving the EU in three case studies, namely Aceh, Cyprus and Georgia.

The project examines the capacity of the EU to function as a multi-track mediator in armed conflict resolution. It analyses the unique nature and characteristics of the EU- its power, leverage, resources, perceived neutrality / bias etc. - and considers its past mediation activities, where it has worked with other Track I actors, i.e. states and other regional actors such as ASEAN and Track II actors, e.g. Non-governmental Organisations, such as the Crisis Management Initiative and the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue. It focuses on how the EU has harnessed and co-ordinated the resources and capabilities of states, NGOs and other organisations in mediation contexts.

The case studies chosen are Georgia, Aceh, and Cyprus:

Georgia has been chosen as a case study as conflict in the South Caucasus is a threat to the peace and security of the EU. Geographic location, transnational crime and natural resources require that the EU take the issue of conflict resolution seriously (International Crisis Group, 2006). The EU has been a security actor in the region since 2003 and has been actively and prominently involved as a mediator in Georgia, especially since the South Ossetia conflict in 2008 (International Crisis Group, 2006).
Aceh has been chosen as a case study because the EU took a back-seat role in the mediation efforts in the region which led to the Memorandum of Understanding of 2005, ending 25 years of conflict between the GAM and Indonesia. The EU acted in a supporting role in the mediation processes, first undertaken by Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (CHD) and then Crisis Management Initiative (CMI). However, its involvement in the peace process, through the deployment of the Aceh Monitoring Mission to oversee the peace plan, as well as the promise of funding, were vital in the brokering of the peace deal.
Cyprus has been chosen as a case study because the mediation here was unique, as it took place in an EU member state. The type of political leverage the EU asserted in this case differed from other cases (Gentz, 2007).

The findings of this project will contribute to an emerging area of research on the EU as an actor in conflict mediation. (Herrberg et al, 2009). Given that many different types of actors are engaged in conflict mediation, this project will explore both Track I and Track II mediation efforts, as well as multi-track mediation approaches. These findings will help inform an analysis of the particular role of the EU within Track I, Track II and multi-track mediation processes. Findings will allow the researchers to determine how the EU can be most effectively engaged in conflict mediation in the future.

Empirical research will allow the researchers to gain an informed knowledge of the role taken by the EU in mediation processes. This innovative analysis will contribute to the emerging discourse on optimising the potential of the EU within the conflict mediation context.

Project Method

This project will draw on conceptual models of mediation, namely the facilitative, evaluative and transformative approaches (Beardsley et al, 2006) to analyse how the EU has acted in mediation processes in a number of conflicts, in order to assess its success at harnessing the capabilities and resources of other mediation actors and to analyse if it has the capacity to successfully act as a multi-track mediator in armed conflict situations. The project analyses the approach to mediation taken in each of the case studies by the EU highlighting issues such as leverage, impartiality, resources, interaction with other actors engaged in the mediation process.

Funding

This project is funded by a Conflict Resolution Unit Department of Foreign Affairs / IRCHSS grant from December 2009 – December 2010