| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyses frictions in strengthening civil society (CS) for peacebuilding. It argues that frictions are caused by the fact that policies for CS support in post-conflict settings are rooted in a Western discourse on the role of civic actors in politics and society. Consequently, intervention practices do not match local practices of civil society in non-Western, conflict-affected countries. In trying to locate suitable local counterparts, intervening international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) struggle to reconcile criteria of 'international legitimacy' (based on values of inclusivity, tolerance and non-violence) and 'local legitimacy' (local support and roots). The frictions to which this leads are illustrated with case studies from our research over the past years. They show that when intervention models based on such discourses meet realities on the ground, there is often some margin for action and space for negotiation on both sides. In two cases, this led to unexpected outcomes, which were not necessarily negative from the perspective of peacebuilding. However, friction does not always yield unexpected or positive outcomes. In the third case, it led merely to an imposition of norms on the part of intervening INGOs.
|