Search

Begin New Search Author Veronique Dudouet

1. Financing Armed Groups During Ceasefires

Author:
Veronique Dudouet and Janel B. Galvanek
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Centre for Conflict Resolution
Abstract:
While the financing sources of non-state armed groups (NSAGs) both during active hostilities and after peace agreements has received much attention in the academic and peace-practitioner fields, information about the funding of NSAGs during the time between active fighting and the conclusion of a peace agreement is much less available. This study aims to fill that gap by investigating the sources of financial support for armed groups during ceasefires and peace negotiations. Through information gathered from the selected cases of ETA in the Basque Country, the LTTE in Sri Lanka, the KNU in Myanmar, GAM in Aceh, and several armed groups in Mali, the study examines the various internal and external options available for NSAG funding when a unilateral or bilateral ceasefire is in place and analyses whether ceasefires represent a fundraising constraint or an opportunity for non-state belligerents. The study also makes projections for the longer-term prospects of NSAGs’ receiving financial support to sustain their post-war security, political and socio-economic transformations. Lastly, some general lessons are drawn for third parties involved in supporting peace processes with NSAGs.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Peace, Ceasefire, and Armed Conflict
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Powering to Peace: Integrated Civil Resistance and Peacebuilding Strategies

Author:
Veronique Dudouet
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC)
Abstract:
Since the Arab Spring, states, civilians, and many nongovernmental organizations have watched as contentious events play out across the globe. Many wondered how these events would unfold, which would succeed, and just as significantly, whether those contesting power would come to be victimized by the very governments they were protesting against. In this report we seek to understand why some popular uprisings experience mass killings and others do not. In particular, we focus in on the characteristics of violent and nonviolent uprisings to better understand the types of contentious events that are most likely to elicit government crackdowns. Analyzing new data on state violence and popular uprisings from 1955 to 2013, we find that mass killings are associated with particular country and regime characteristic. Preexisting subgroup discrimination and certain types of authoritarian regimes, for instance, are important predictors of governmental violence. Yet, characteristics of popular uprisings are significant as well. Not every uprising is equally threatening to regime elites, and some – like violent movements with foreign support – are much more likely to elicit mass killings than others. In turn, nonviolent resistance, though oftentimes constituting an even greater challenge to oppressive regimes than armed struggle, tends to also decrease the likelihood of mass atrocities. These findings therefore have important implications for policymakers seeking to prevent mass atrocities, and for activists seeking to stay safe in the course of a popular uprising.
Topic:
Civil Society, Peace Studies, and Peacekeeping
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Mediating Peace with Proscribed Armed Groups

Author:
Veronique Dudouet
Publication Date:
05-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
Reforms to antiterrorism legislation are required to improve its effectiveness and fairness and make it possible to engage diplomatically with proscribed armed groups. The legal bases for proscription should be clarified and the criteria for delisting published. Listing and delisting instruments should be more nuanced and flexible. In addition, a separate legal and political component should facilitate engagement with proscribed groups in peace processes and humanitarian work. Political engagement with proscribed armed groups is possible and desirable when, first, the conflict parties (state and non state alike) are interested in exploring political solutions to a conflict; second, the parties are seen as legitimate representatives of social, political, or cultural interests by their community; third, parties have the capacity to deliver a ceasefire or peace agreement; fourth, engagement could generate significant behavioral change on the part of the actors involved; and fifth, strategic national interests favor engagement, or there is a strong demand by allies or the conflict victims to engage politically. Potential mediators working with proscribed groups should be aware of the risks of conferring legitimacy to a violent group, undermining moderates, and possibly extending the conflict if parties use negotiations to buy time or strengthen themselves militarily. Engagement also is not recommended when the position and demands of an armed group are so radical and outrageous that there is no possibility of finding an acceptable common ground. To enhance the chances of effective negotiations, mediators should thoroughly analyze the situation, set realistic expectations, and regularly evaluate the process and outcome of engagement. Various state and non state interveners should collaborate and divide labor among themselves. All significant armed groups and unarmed stakeholders should be involved in negotiations through multiple forms and tactics of engagement, recognizing that all conflict parties are entitled to continue pursuing their goals through nonviolent political means.
Topic:
Humanitarian Aid, Politics, and Peacekeeping