
Publications
Les initiatives de rétablissement et de construction de la paix prévoient souvent un partage du pouvoir au sein de gouvernements de transition. Le partage du pouvoir garantit la participation de représentants de groupes importants aux décisions politiques, non seulement au sein du pouvoir exécutif mais également dans les domaines législatif, judiciaire, militaire et policier. Pendant une période de transition, le partage du pouvoir entre groupes rivaux limite le risque de prépondérance d'un parti au détriment de la sécurité de tous les autres. Le Liberia, le Burundi, la République démocratique du Congo, le Kenya, le Népal, l'Iraq et l'Afghanistan, par exemple, se sont tous dotés de tels gouvernements, à qui sont confiés des processus délicats : démobilisation et réintégration de combattants, organisation du retour de personnes déplacées, tenue d'élections et de négociations autour de nouvelles constitutions.
Natural-resources can be a major cause of internal strife if mismanaged or shared unfairly. This is especially the case in divided societies where the uneven geographic distribution of natural resources corresponds to ethnic or religious divides.
In an increasing number of countries, natural-resources have become a focus of efforts to end civil wars and establish new national compacts. In this context, the challenge is to balance the tensions that arise between strong local feelings of ownership over "their resources" against the overall importance of natural resources to national development.
In "Negotiating Natural Resources for Peace: Ownership, Control and Wealth-Sharing" Nicholas Haysom and Sean Kane argue that this trend makes it important to broaden knowledge and understanding of governing arrangements for natural-resources, a subject which has not traditionally received extensive treatment in constitutions and peace agreements. According to Mr. Haysom:
"Natural-resource bargaining may not be the most glamorous or sexy subject, but if the parties get it wrong it can be fatal to a social compact, constitution or peace treaty."
The Oslo forum 2009 took place against the background of a new optimism, largely heralded by the new US administration and its emphasis on civility in international relations. After a period of confrontation marked by the ‘war on terror' and weakening of mediation efforts, there is now a renewed demand in many areas for diplomacy and negotiation. Yet, recent developments in Sri Lanka, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan demonstrate the concurrent strand of scepticism about the usefulness of dialogue in resolving some of today's conflicts.
Beyond major conflicts in Africa over the territorial integrity of states such as Sudan and Somalia, many recent conflicts on the continent are ignited by grievances over bad governance and exclusionary political practices. In many cases, flawed or failed elections have either precipitated political disputes or aggravated simmering tensions into an outburst of conflict.
