In their new edited volume, Power Sharing and Power Relations After Civil War, Caroline A Hartzell and Andreas Mehler argue that scholars of power-sharing must not only study the impact of such institutional designs on 'peace', usually defined as the non-recurrence of violent conflict, but should also consider their impact on power relations between and within different organisations and groups. While the existing narrow focus on 'peace' is understandable given the human suffering caused by violence, it has meant that previous studies have not sufficiently considered the effect of power-sharing on power dynamics, though it is logical to expect that this effect would be considerable. The book's argument is compelling, especially in light of the inability of studies which focus on peace as the independent variable or outcome to reach a consensus, often, as Hartzell and Mehler highlight, due to differing understandings and operationalisation of both power-sharing and peace. Their argument is further strengthened by their reference to the fact that the use of power-sharing as a conflict resolution mechanism is logically based on an expectation that it will alter power dynamics, and hopefully correct exclusionary power structures that were part of the causes of the conflict. Their argument goes beyond ideas of power-sharing as a 'credible commitment' and instead asks whether 'power-sharing institutions of a peace agreement provide incentives for the conflict parties to transform their power relations' and whether 'government-rebel power relations thus can change from violence to nonviolence and politically exclusive to inclusive' (p. 21).
展开▼
