title: Democracy support and peaceful democratisation after civil war
Creators: name: Mross, Karina
Publisher: name: German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE)
publisherIdentifier: https://ror.org/01t3zke88
publisherIdentifierScheme: ROR
Year: 2019
Subjects: subject: Bürgerkrieg
subject: Governance
subject: Demokratie
subject: Frieden
subject: Demokratisierung
subject: Governance
subject: Civil War
subject: Democracy
subject: Peace
subject: Democratization

description: Evidence exists that democracies are particularly stable, yet also that processes of
 democratisation are highly susceptible to conflict, especially if democratisation occurs
 in the aftermath of violent conflict. New research from the German Development Institute /
 Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) indicates that external democracy support
 can help mitigate the destabilising effects of post-conflict democratisation. Since the
 1990s, democracy support has been integral to most peacebuilding efforts. Supporting free
 and fair elections or a vibrant media seems well-suited for fostering peace: Democratic
 institutions can actively deal with societal conflicts, in sharp contrast to authoritarian
 regimes, which often rely on repression. However, altering power relations through more
 political competition can also trigger power struggles, which newly emerging democratic
 institutions may have difficulty containing. Therefore, questions arise regarding
 countries that have embarked on a process of democratisation after civil war: Can
 democracy support help to mitigate destabilising effects, or does it reinforce them? If it
 can foster peace, how should it be designed in order to avoid renewed violence? <br> The
 wisdom or folly of supporting democracy to build peace after civil war has caused
 controversy, yet has rarely been tested empirically. This briefing paper summarises
 findings from DIE research that addresses this gap. The results demonstrate that: 
 

 
 External democracy support that accompanies post-conflict democratisation can help to
 foster peace after civil war. Importantly, it does not trigger renewed violence.
 

 Analysing the effects of two donor strategies to deal with trade-offs between
 stability (preventing renewed violence) and democracy shows that prioritising stability
 over democracy does not contain fewer risks than gradualist support, in contrast to
 widespread assumptions. In fact, the prioritising strategy can also fail, and even be
 counterproductive.

 The competitive elements of a democratic system explain both why it can help to avoid,
 or provoke, renewed violence. Democracy support facilitating “controlled competition”
 can mitigate the destabilizing effects: Support for political competition strengthens
 the peace-enhancing effects by promoting meaningful choice and enabling the peaceful
 allocation and withdrawal of political power. Fostering institutional constraints limits
 the discretionary power of the executive and enforces a commitment to democratic
 rules.

 
 These results can provide guidance to policy-makers when engaging in post-conflict
 situations:
 

 
 Donors should actively accompany post-conflict democratisation processes with
 substantial democracy support. They should not refrain from offering such support
 until stability has already proven to be sustainable, since it can make an important
 contribution towards strengthening peace and help in avoiding destabilising
 effects.
 

 When facing trade-offs between stability and democracy in post-conflict situations,
 donors should bear in mind that prioritising stability is not less risk-prone than a
 gradualist approach, which promotes both stability and democracy in an iterative way.
 Thus, prioritising stability should not be the obvious choice in post-conflict
 situations. Instead, donors should carefully scrutinise the political dynamics before
 applying either strategy and recall that a gradualist approach offers considerable
 potential for strengthening peace sustainably.

 Engaging in a context of post-conflict democratisation, donors should provide
 substantial support both for political competition and for institutional
 constraints.
description: Briefing Paper, 7/2019