Local Ownership and the Settlement of Civil Wars: External Intervention in Internal Armed Conflicts—Arguments for a Conceptual Framework of ‘Political Ownership’

Abstract

Local ownership as currently pursued by external actors may facilitate early recovery and reconstruction in the aftermath of war, but it has little relevance for the durable settlement of civil war. Ownership assumes a different quality and substance when the objective is to achieve a lasting political settlement of civil war, ownership should therefore be operationalized as part of the political process of conflict transformation, and it should be approached as political ownership. Political ownership determines not only the quality of the relationship between the conflict parties; it also governs external relations, in particular with those external forces playing a direct role in the peace process. This applies in particular when sovereignty is challenged through externally driven policies, such as the protection of civilians from internal threats or the objection to non-democratic regime change. An externally supported peace process takes place in the context of a tripartite asymmetric relationship. This leads to a very distinct and also uneven division of roles and responsibilities. However, it is argued that a framework conceptualizing political ownership and the lasting settlement of civil war must be part of a comprehensive model to explain the failure of political processes to end civil war.