![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
Why do elections held in the shadow of civil wars sometimes generate more violence in already war-torn societies, while in other circumstances they do not? This article develops a conceptual framework based on three clusters of factors to analyse the conflict-generating aspects of elections in war-torn societies: the key actors in the electoral processes; the institutions of elections; and the stakes of the elections. Two types of war-related elections are distinguished: elections held during an ongoing civil war, and elections held in the post-war period when peace is to be implemented. While different in many respects, the two contexts share critical characteristics through their association with the legacy of warfare. Several important implications emerge from the analysis. First, relating to militant and violent actors, incentive structures need to be altered by addressing both the opportunities and means of violence. Second, to prevent inducements for violent behaviour, institutional arrangements – including electoral commissions – have to be crafted with consideration given to local conflict dynamics and the history of violent conflict. Finally, the stakes of elections in war-shattered societies can be reduced through, for instance, constitutional pact-making and the oversight of external actors in electoral processes.
Acknowledgements
The authors have contributed equally to this article. They gratefully acknowledge the funding provided by the Swedish Research Council, and the comments provided by the participants of the Seminar Multidisciplinary Research on Democracy arranged by the Swedish Research Council, on 14 November 2007.
Notes
A new data collection, Post-Accord Elections, demonstrates that most peace agreements stipulate the holding of democratic elections. Fifty-five out of the total 82 peace accords struck during the post-Cold War period included provisions for national elections. See Jarstad, ‘Post-Accord Elections’.
Reilly, ‘Democratic Validation’, 175.
Galtung, ‘Conflict as a Way of Life’, 486–91.
See, for instance, Burnell, Globalising Democracy; Linz and Stephan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation; Huntington, The Third Wave; Reynolds, Architecture of Democracy; Sorensen, Democracy and Democratization; Whitehead, Democratization.
Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies.
Lijphart, Power-Sharing in South Africa, 13.
Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict.
Reilly, Democracy in Divided Societies; Reilly and Reynolds, Electoral Systems; Sisk, Democratization in South Africa; Sisk, Power Sharing and International Mediation.
Reynolds, Electoral Systems and Democratization.
Lindberg, Democracy and Elections in Africa.
Wilkinson, Votes and Violence.
Laakso, ‘Insights into Electoral Violence’.
Rapoport and Weinberg, The Democratic Experience.
Hegre, Ellingson, Gates, and Gleditsch, ‘Toward a Democratic Civil Peace?’; Mansfield and Snyder, Electing to Fight. On elections and security more specifically, see, for example, Fischer, ‘Electoral Conflict and Violence’; Soudriette and Pilon, Every Vote Counts.
Snyder, From Voting to Violence.
Mann, The Dark Side of Democracy.
See, for example, Jarstad and Sisk, From War to Democracy; Kumar and de Zeeuw, Promoting Democracy; Paris and Sisk, The Dilemmas of Statebuilding.
Kumar, Postconflict Elections; Lyons, Voting for Peace; Reilly, ‘Post-Conflict Elections’.
Paris, At War's End; Carothes, Critical Mission.
Lyons, Demilitarizing Politics; Manning, ‘Competition and Accommodation’; Manning, ‘Party-building on the Heels of War’; de Zeeuw, From Soldiers to Politicians. See also Söderberg Kovacs, ‘From Rebellion to Politics’.
Lindberg, Democracy and Elections. In many definitions of democracy, elections are the one most important defining characteristic. See, for example, Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 269.
Migdal, Strong Societies and Weak States; Reno, ‘Patronage Politics’.
Dahl, Polyarchy; Rustow, ‘Transitions to Democracy’.
Paris, At War's End; Steenkamp, ‘The Legacy of War’; Waldmann, ‘Is There a Culture?’.
Reilly, ‘Post-War Elections’, 164.
Kumar, Postconflict Elections, 6–7. Sometimes referenda are held to legitimate peace agreements, as was the case in Guatemala in 1999, in Northern Ireland in 1998, and in Cyprus in 2004.
Laakso, ‘Insights into Electoral Violence’.
van Biezen, Political Parties in New Democracies, 1.
Diamond, Developing Democracy, 96–8; Panebianco, Political Parties.
Randall and Svåsand, ‘Political Parties’.
Byrne, El Salvador's Revolution, 94; Montgomery, Revolution in El Salvador, 164–8.
Pruitt and Kim, Social Conflict, 117–18; Whitehead, Democratization, 181.
Harbom, Högbladh, and Wallensteen, ‘Armed Conflict and Peace Agreements’.
Söderberg Kovacs, ‘When Rebels Change Their Stripes’.
Manning, ‘Party-building on the Heels of War’; Snyder, From Voting to Violence; Söderberg Kovacs, ‘From Rebellion to Politics’.
Peou, Conflict Neutralization.
Stedman, ‘Spoiler Problems in Peace Processes’.
Harris, ‘Liberia 2005’.
Lyons, Demilitarizing Politics. On problems related to DDR, see, for instance, Spear, ‘Disarmament and Demobilization’.
For a useful overview of electoral systems designs and the arguments for and against the integrative or consociationalist approach, see Reilly and Reynolds, Electoral Systems and Conflict. See also Wilkinson, Votes and Violence, on political competition and incentives for violence.
Lijphart, Power-Sharing in South Africa, 102.
The electoral system was reformed under the 1978 constitution, which based the parliamentary system on proportional representation in multi-member constituencies. In addition, a president was to be elected through preferential voting.
Shastri, ‘Channelling Ethnicity’.
Reilly, ‘Post-War Elections’, 173.
Erben and Goldsmith, ‘What Constitutes a Successful Election?’, 52. In 2007, a controversial law was passed, granting amnesty to perpetrators of war crimes in Afghanistan.
Friedman and Stack, ‘The Magic Moment’.
Elklit and Svensson, ‘The Rise of Election Monitoring’; Lean, ‘Democracy Assistance’.
Manning, ‘Competition and Accommodation’.
On the role of Security Sector Reforms in democratic transitions, see Cawthra and Luckham, Governing Insecurity.
Walter, Committing to Peace.
Fisher, ‘Elections and International Civilian Policing’, 21.
Nilsson and Söderberg Kovacs, ‘Breaking the Cycle of Violence?’.
van Cranenburg, ‘International Policies’, 76.
Diamond, ‘The Rule of Law’; Prempeh, ‘Presidents Untamed’; Barkan, ‘Legislatures on the Rise?’.
Abraham, ‘Elusive Quest for Peace’, 203–4.
Hirsch, Diamonds, 89; Hammer and Urs, ‘The Elusive Face’, 42–9.
Nilsson and Söderberg Kovacs, ‘Breaking the Cycle of Violence?’.
Reilly, ‘Post-War Elections’, 160.
Walter, ‘Building Reputation’.
O'Donnell and Schmitter, Transitions from Authoritarian Rule, 37.
Jarstad and Nilsson, ‘From Words to Deeds’; Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies; Lijphart, Power-Sharing in South Africa; Reilly, Democracy in Divided Societies; Sisk, Democratization in South Africa.
Information based on the Post-Accord Elections data set. Jarstad, ‘Post-Accord Elections’.
Peou, Conflict Neutralization.
Galtung, ‘Conflict as a Way of Life’. The dynamic perspective on conflict has since been further developed by a number of scholars. See for instance, Mitchell, Structure of International Conflict; Wiberg, Konfliktteori och fredsforskning.