Around the world, mediators, diplomats, and conflict resolution experts are toiling tirelessly to reach the agreements that end war. But their task is increasingly difficult.
The most common cause of failure is that the belligerents do not see what they have to gain from negotiations. A rebel group may not want to negotiate with a government that appears to be winning; conversely, the regime may have little incentive to enter talks if it believes it is losing and wants to shore up international credibility by appearing as a reasonable actor.
Another frequent obstacle is that a peace process may be dragged out by issues that cannot be resolved in the short term and need to be addressed over years. For example, a ceasefire might be agreed but the parties will then need to agree on a new constitution, electoral and judicial reforms, power-sharing arrangements, and more. This type of negotiation often takes longer than the conflict itself and can lead to frustration, disappointment, and eventual resumption of violence.
A third reason talks fail is that the belligerents have different priorities for the future. They can be divided into groups with different goals for the country as a whole, such as those who are most concerned about economic development and those who are most interested in national reconciliation. Despite the complexities of this issue, mediators and envoys must insist that the parties include these elements in their talks. Finally, there is the danger of spoilers – individuals or factions who seek to undermine the peace process. Spoilers are motivated by the desire to impose their own agenda on other parties and should be identified and confronted.