Choosing to engage: armed groups and peace processes

This brief summarises important issues to consider on how best to engage armed groups in peace processes. It also presents analysis and 12 case studies of first-hand experience in peace negotiations by intermediaries and leading figures involved in armed groups. The paper gives details of issues such as:

• Responsibility to protect: local populations bear the brunt of fighting in most of today’s armed conflicts
  
• Make peace by talking with your enemies: experience suggests that exclusively military solutions to conflict are inadequate to make lasting peace
  
• Terms of engagement: engagement does not equate to appeasement or complicity in violence
  
• Multiple types of intermediaries: representatives of intergovernmental organizations and states often have clear mandates to serve as intermediaries in peace processes
  
• Humanitarian engagement: can offer a less divisive entry point to talk to armed groups than potentially thornier security and political issues
  
• Choosing to talk: strategic factors in armed groups’ decision-making
  
• Indicators of opportunities and constraints.
  

Conclusions:

• Dialogue with armed groups is key to peace processes that can end violent conflict, protect populations and address underlying conflict issues
  
• Engagement can take many forms, from unofficial contact to substantive negotiations, involving various third parties
  
• Proscription of armed groups is a blunt instrument and can be counterproductive
  
• Improved interaction and cooperation between governmental and unofficial intermediaries would benefit all parties pursuing effective engagement strategies.