Why Peace Talks Fail

peace talks

Peace talks are often seen as a way to resolve conflict. But they’re not always easy, and there are many reasons why the outcome of a peace process is often uncertain.

Often, one of the main reasons for failure is that the parties to a conflict do not see that they will benefit from participating in negotiations. For example, as in the case of Syria and Libya, warring sides often have their own vested interests and see a peaceful resolution of the conflict as a threat to their power.

In these cases, it is essential to create a situation in which the conflicting players understand that they can negotiate their own terms. This can be done through a proliferation of opportunities, or “tracks,” in which top and mid-level leaders discover trust and engage in facilitated discussions. For example, a key element of South Africa’s successful transition from war to peace was the creation of multiple arenas for facilitated negotiation.

However, it is important to keep in mind that these arenas should not be too open or visible to the wider public. Sometimes, it is crucial to be able to negotiate in secret so that the nature and extent of risky concessions can be weighed without the threat of counterreaction. The Oslo Middle East agreement of 1993 and the Dayton Accord that ended the war in Bosnia both followed this model.