A conflict-sensitivity dilemma: how conflict denialism constrains spaces for conflict-sensitive actions for peacebuilding

ABSTRACT

Despite a rapid proliferation of conflict-sensitivity approaches and tools over more than two decades, a key question is largely unanswered: Why does conflict sensitivity remain a resisted concept in post-conflict peacebuilding? Regardless of socio-political contexts of armed-conflict termination, authorities in post-conflict countries, such as Nepal and Sri Lanka, often deny the existence of conflict, despite situations in which social division and polarisation continue to threaten peace and stability. This conflict denialism at the political level often engenders a type of conflict-sensitivity dilemma. This article highlights two types of conflict-sensitivity dilemma: operational dilemma and thematic dilemma. It argues that implementing conflict sensitivity requires peacebuilding and development actors to overcome these dilemmas and enhance their engagement with political elites, with consideration of the political settlement framework that shapes peacebuilding and the dynamics of conflict denialism.

KEYWORDS:

• Conflict sensitivity
• post-conflict
• peacebuilding
• conflict denialism
• political settlement

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Since the CPA in 2006, the CPNM has joined the mainstream political party and has been in government intermittently. Nonetheless, it has also split off into several factions representing different streams of communist ideologies.

2 First author’s interview with country director of an INGO in early March 2022, Kathmandu Nepal.

3 First author’s interview with civil society representative in early March 2022, Kathmandu, Nepal.

4 First author’s interview with peace worker in March 2022, Kathmandu, Nepal.

5 Ibid.

6 Second author’s interview with a civil society leader in Colombo, October 2018.

7 Ibid.

8 First author’s interview with project implementing partner in late March 2020 in Kapilvastu district of Nepal.

9 First author’s interview with local political elites in Jhapa and Kailali district of Nepal in mid-March 2022.

10 First author’s interview with country director of international peacebuilding organisation in September 2022.

11 Ibid.

12 A government body which is established under the Social Welfare Act 1992, where all the leading positions – chairperson, vice-chairperson, treasurer – are political appointments. It regulates the NGOs in Nepal.

13 Second author’s interview with conflict sensitivity practitioner in an INGO based in Colombo.

14 First author’s interview with advisors from various Kathmandu based INGOs in Nepal early 2022.

15 Interview with international development practitioners from various INGOs in Kathmandu and Colombo by two lead authors.

16 Both examples are discussed and supported by empirical evidence in earlier section.

17 First two lead authors' interviews with local political elites in various districts, Jhapa, Kailali, Syanja during late March 2022 in Nepal.

18 First author's interview with international development practitioners from Kathmandu-based INGOS in different months of 2022.

19 Second author’s interview with civil society actors in Colombo, October 2018.

20 First and second authors’ interview with conflict sensitivity advisors in Kathmandu and Colombo.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend (RTPS): [Grant Number UTS S20].

Notes on contributors

Prakash Paudel

Prakash Paudel is a PhD researcher and a research assistant at the Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney. His research explores the need for an Integrated Conflict Sensitivity in Development Assistance. He has a decade-long experience in teaching and research activities in the areas of positive peace, transitional justice, criminal justice, political economy, and research governance.

D. B. Subedi

D. B. Subedi is a Lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies in the School of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Queensland, Australia. His research interests include conflict transformation and peacebuilding, religion, power and politics, countering violent extremism, politics of development and populism and nationalism. He is the author of Combatants to Civilians (Palgrave, 2018) and co-editor of The Routledge Handbook of Populism in the Asia Pacific (Routledge, 2023).

Keren Winterford

Dr. Keren Winterford is currently a Research Director at the Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney. Over the last 25 years she has worked in over 20 countries in Africa, Asia, the Pacific Islands, South America, former Soviet countries and Indigenous Australia within the NGO, research, and consultancy sectors. Her areas of expertise include community development, participation, local level advocacy, citizen participation, training and facilitation, design, monitoring and evaluation, and a strengths-based approach for international development. Keren has completed PhD research on practice and outcomes of a strengths-based approach.