Peace talks involve an intricate dance among leaders to gradually swap war for peace. But these processes often fail to produce lasting, durable results because of a variety of barriers.
Whether the issue is the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians or the many separatist struggles plaguing Africa, it is clear that a range of obstacles keep warring parties from reaching a peace deal. The most important obstacle is the lack of a clear incentive to engage in negotiations. A lack of incentives to negotiate is particularly serious when the conflict is fought over identity and the positions that define it are irreconcilable.
The next barrier is the difficulty of building the trust needed for negotiations. Peace talks are most likely to succeed when they take place between negotiators with equal decision-making power. But literature shows that even when a negotiating environment is hospitable and the relationships friendly, peace deals can be undermined by outside political pressures or third party influence.
Finally, there is the problem of identifying a “ripe” moment for peace. A number of factors can help predict a conflict’s ripeness for peace, but in practice this condition is often sensed intuitively by those closest to the situation. More systematic assessments of a range of variables might yield better predictions about when the logic and passion for war will be less likely to override prospects of peace.
Finally, there are lessons from past peace processes about the way they are structured. The lesson of South Africa is that, while secret, elite pacts may make sense early in the process, broad participation in the search for peace might be more conducive to long-term success.