ABSTRACT

Based on conflict data, interviews and media monitoring, this study of Myanmar’s non-inclusive ceasefires develops a four-step argument about the effect of ceasefires in complex conflict systems. First, non-state armed groups rarely co-ordinate their actions strategically. This makes it easy for governments to obtain ceasefires with some groups while fighting others. Second, when ceasefires ensure armed groups’ survival, they mostly hold. Third, non-inclusive ceasefires do not reduce a country’s overall level of violence, since fighting tends to escalate with excluded groups. On this basis we conclude that non-inclusive ceasefires do not present a viable alternative to an inclusive peace process.

摘要

基于冲突数据、采访和媒体监测，这项对缅甸非包容性停火的研究提出了一个关于停火在复杂冲突系统中的影响的四步论证。首先，非国家武装团体很少在战略上协调他们的行动。这使得政府很容易在与其他团体作战的同时与一些团体达成停火。其次，当停火确保武装团体的生存时，他们大多坚持。第三，非包容性停火不会降低一个国家的整体暴力水平，因为战斗往往会因受排斥的群体而升级。在此基础上，我们得出结论，非包容性停火不是包容性和平进程的可行替代方案。