The Failure of Deadline Diplomacy for Darfur

Aug 2006, Vol. 151, No. 4
By Laurie Nathan

This article focuses on the Abuja process and argues that it had three primary dynamics: the negotiating parties were unwilling to engage in negotiations and failed dismally to forge agreements; the international partners pursued a counterproductive strategy of ‘deadline diplomacy’ that inhibited rather than stimulated progress; and the mediators were consequently unable to undertake effective mediation. As a result of these dynamics, the Darfur Peace Agreement cannot be said to be a negotiated settlement.

It concludes by arguing that the Abuja process highlighted and reinforced two general lessons for mediation that is intended to end civil war. First, the disputant parties have to shape, embrace and own a peace agreement if it is to have any chance of resolving the conflict and establishing an enduring peace. Second, there is no such thing as a viable quick accord; however grave the situation, mediators have no option but to be patient.

Copyright © 2012 RUSI Registered Charity (no. 210639)

• Site Map
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Site by 4T2