Women’s Participation and Social Provisions in Peace Agreements

ABDUL KARIM ISSIFU Master’s Thesis Spring 2020

Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Supervisor: Professor Kristine Höglund

Word count: 22.683 ABSTRACT Is the inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements influenced by the participation of women, and if so, why? It is suggested that if women participate in the negotiation, the agreement is likely to broaden with social provisions. But our understanding regarding why social provisions are shaped by the participation of women is still limited as previous research rarely looked at this phenomenon. By drawing on theories suggesting women’s participation will broaden the scope of the negotiation, and theories proposing women through the agency for being at the negotiation table would push for social provisions, this study hypothesizes that if women participate, the agreements are likely to broaden with more social provisions. A content analysis of the agreements reached on Liberia 2003, Sierra Leone 1999, Côte d’Ivoire 2003 and Niger 1995, and a supplementary in-depth comparative case study presents evidence suggesting women does influence peace agreements to become more holistic with more social provisions. At the same time, this study also highlights the essence of taking other factors that shape the scope of the agreements and the presence or absence of social provisions such as the context and duration of the conflicts and the belligerent actor’ will into consideration.

Keywords: Côte d’Ivoire, Liberia, Niger, Peace Agreement; Sierra Leone, Social and Security Provisions, Women’s Participation

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research would not have been completed without the support and encouragement of many people to whom I am deeply grateful. First, I would like to thank my family, particularly my parent Memuna Issifu and K. C. George for their unconditional supports throughout my academic pursuits. Second, I am extremely grateful to the Rotary Foundation of Rotary International for awarding me a full scholarship to pursue this program. Third, I am thankful to all the teachers and non-teaching staff in the Department of Peace and Conflict Research (DPCR), particularly Professor Kristine Höglund for supervising this thesis. Fourth, a sincere appreciation goes to my lovely wife Abigail and son Chris- Andrew for their blessings throughout the program. Fifth, many thanks to my Swede host families (Ulrika, Staffan; Gro, Roine) for making me feel at home and the Rotary Peace Fellows (Class XVII) for their team support. Sixth, I am grateful to the entire students (Class 2018-2020) of the DPCR, especially Nathanael and Maikel for their wonderful love. Finally, my deepest gratitude goes to Felix Dade, Joseph Asante Jr., and Peter Baffour for their technical assistance.

3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CSO Civil Society Organization DDR Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration DV Dependent Variable GNR Government of National Reconciliation IPTI Inclusive Peace and Transition Initiative IV Independent Variable LURD Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy MARWOPNET Mano River Women’s Peace Network MARWOPNET Women of the Mano River Women’s Peace Network MODEL Movement for Democracy in Liberia MPCI Mouvement patriotique de Côte d'Ivoire NHRC National Human Rights Commission NPFL National Patriotic Front of Liberia NPP National Patriotic Party ORA Organization of The Armed Resistance PAM Peace Accords Matrix RUF Revolutionary United Front SSR Security Sector Reform TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission WIPNET Women in Peacebuilding Network WPS Women, Peace and Security

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1: Causal story explaining why peace agreements might include more social provisions if women participate in peace negotiations………………………………………19 Table 1: Summary of cases specifying variations in the cases’ characteristics………………………...23 Table 2: Outline to evaluate the provisions in peace agreements adopted in the PAM dataset………………………………………………………………………………………26 Table 3: The scope of peace agreements…………………………………………………………...33 Table 4: The scope of provisions in the four peace agreements…………………………………….34

4

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... 2 Acknowledgments...... 3 List of abbreviations...... 4 List of figures and tables...... 4 Table of contents...... 5

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 7 2. PREVIOUS RESEARCH ...... 9 2.1 Women’s Participation ...... 9 2.2 Impact of Women’s Participation in Peace Processes ...... 10 2.3 Social Provisions in Peace Agreements ...... 10 2.4 Identifying the Research Gap ...... 11 3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...... 12 3.1 Conceptualizing Women’s Participation ...... 12 3.1.1 Participation as Representation/Justice Argument ...... 13 3.2 Conceptualizing Peace Agreement ...... 15 3.3 Conceptualizing Social Provisions ...... 15 3.4 Conceptualizing Agency ...... 16 3.5 Main Theoretical Arguments ...... 17 3.6 Causal Story ...... 19 4. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD ...... 20 4.1 Case Study Design ...... 20 4.2 Data Analysis ...... 21 4.3 Case Selection...... 22 4.4 Contextualizing Provisions in Peace Agreements...... 25 4.5 Sources ...... 27 5. WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION AND THE SCOPE OF PEACE AGREEMENTS ...... 28 5.1 Liberia ...... 28 5.2 Sierra Leone ...... 29 5.3 Côte d’Ivoire...... 31 5.4 Niger ...... 32 5.5 The Scope of Peace Agreements ...... 33 5.6 Conclusion: Scope of Peace Agreements ...... 38 6 IN-DEPTH CASE STUDY ...... 39

5

6.1 Liberia: The Agency of Women at the Table ...... 39 6.1.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Liberia ...... 41 6.2 Sierra Leone: The Agency of Women at the Table ...... 42 6.2.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Sierra Leone...... 44 6.3 Côte D’Ivoire: Conditions That May Shape the Scope of The Agreement ...... 45 6.3.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Côte d’Ivoire ...... 48 6.4 Niger: Conditions That May Shape the Scope of The Agreement ...... 48 6.4.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Niger ...... 51 7 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ...... 51 7.1 Between-cases Comparison...... 51 7.2 Reflections on The Key Findings ...... 52 7.3 Alternative Explanations and Extra Observation ...... 55 8 CONCLUSIONS ...... 58 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………………….….60

6

1. INTRODUCTION In recent times, scholars have devoted considerable time and energy to investigate the extent to which social or security provisions are accepted by belligerent actors to include in peace agreements sets to terminate armed conflict (Joshi and Darby 2013; Lee, Mac Ginty and Joshi 2016). Social provisions include arrangements, such as human rights, education, gender equality or women’s rights, and security provisions includes arrangements for securing boundaries, disarming combatants, ensuring a monopoly of violence, and withdrawing foreign military forces (Newman, Paris and Richmond 2009; Lee et al 2016). While some scholars argue that male negotiated agreements are security centered (Pospisil and Bell 2018), others are of the view that the participation of women makes the agreements comprehensive with social provisions (Hillbert 2017; Jobarteh 2018). Women at the peace table are believed to promote social provisions like gender equality and women’s rights expected could address women’s issues and better agreement content (O’Reilly 2016; Jobarteh 2018; Krause, Krause and Bränfors 2018). Further, the participation of civil society women’s organizations is suggested makes the peace last, anchors the peace, build legitimacy for the peace process and widens the scope of the agreement to include social provisions (Anderline 2007; Nilsson 2012; Ellerby 2013; Jobarteh 2018).

But our understanding regarding why social provisions are shaped by the participation of women is still limited as previous research rarely looked at this phenomenon. There is still a lack of evidence- based knowledge on the impact of women’s participation in peace negotiations (Jobarteh 2018). The aim of this study is to contribute to the understanding of women’s special input in peace negotiations, and specifically to unfold why women’s participation affects social provisions in the agreements. This study sets to answer the following research question: Is the inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements influenced by the participation of women, and if so, why?

This research puzzle is addressed by drawing on theories suggesting that women’s participation in peace negotiations positively affects the inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements because an extensive set of social issues affecting women and girls are brought to the peace table (Wängerud 2000, Hillbert 2017). Similarly, it draws on theories suggesting women comprise at least half of the world’s population and who through an agency at the peace table gain the leverage to push for social provisions, which is also underpinned by wartime experiences, interests and expectations (Bjarnegård and Melander 2013; Mbwadzawo and Ngwazi 2013; Paffenholz and Ross 2015; Jobarteh 2018). Social provisions are proposed can contribute to postwar peacebuilding because they address grievances that underlie or trigger violent conflict and offer a means for the state to (re)build its legitimacy and

7 accountability (Ashby 2012; Ernstorfer 2013; McCandless and Rogan 2013). Based on the preceding debates and the theoretical arguments this research hypothesizes that if women participate in peace negotiations, the agreements are likely to broaden with more social provisions.

The hypothesized connection between women’s participation and social provisions is investigated in two key steps. First, I will examine if there is a correlation between women’s participation and the scope of social provisions in the agreement. This is done by comparing four peace agreements from the West Africa subregion signed in the post-Cold War era and ensuing from intrastate war over government incompatibility–power battle. Two of the agreements on Liberia 2003 and Sierra Leone 1999 included women at the peace table and the other two agreements on Côte d’Ivoire 2003 and Niger 1995 excluded women.

Second, this research attempts to reveal the causal mechanism and explore further about why the participation of women might shape the content of the agreement to include more social provisions. To conduct this, I employed an in-depth case study analysis of the four peace agreements, stressing on the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements to understand these nuances. This study used both primary and secondary sources. The primary source included the actual four peace agreements under study and government reports, and the secondary sources included books, academic journals and articles, theses and datasets among others. Triangulation was applied to evaluate the source of material used to minimize any potential biases.

The evidence from the research’s analysis proposes support for the hypothesis set for this study. The content analysis of the four peace agreements does provide a pattern suggesting that if women participate in peace negotiation, it is likely that more social provisions would be included in the agreement. Thus, both the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements appeared more holistic in scope covering more social provisions. However, the agreements on Côte d’Ivoire and Niger seem not holistic enough and with less social provisions. The inclusion of some social provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements suggests other conditions could also shape the scope of peace agreements. So, while the comparison suggests that women can contribute to the inclusion of more social provisions, other factors shape the scope of peace agreements and the presence or absence of social provisions in the agreements. Even though prior studies have shown support for the causal mechanism, it is vital to note that the research was based on context variations in the cases investigated, hence hard to draw a support for this justification. Rather, the analysis emphasizes the context and duration of the conflict

8 and the belligerent actor’ will as suggested conditions that may impact the scope and inclusion or exclusion of social provisions in the agreements.

The study proceeds as follows: Chapter 2 presents previous research that relates to this current study. In Chapter 3, the theoretical framework is presented, and Chapter 4 shows the research design and method taken to conduct this study. In Chapter 5, the results of the content analysis of the four peace agreements are presented. A supplementary in-depth comparative case study of the four peace agreements with special interest on the Liberia and Sierra Leone cases is presented in Chapter 6. The comparative analysis of the four peace agreements, reflections on the key findings, discussion of alternative explanations as well as extra observation are presented in Chapter 7. The study ends with the overall conclusions and suggestions on areas for future research on Chapter 8.

2. PREVIOUS RESEARCH This section provides information about previous studies that relates to my research focus. It starts with insights about women’s participation in peace agreements and continues with the prior research on social provisions in peace agreements. This section is vital because it sets forth the study’s focus on identifying the research gap that motivates my interest for this study.

2.1 Women’s Participation The crux of women’s participation is supported by two schools of thought, i.e., the functional/essentialist claim and the rights-based/constructionist perspective (Melander 2005). First, the functional perspective argues that women’s participation in peace negotiation is related to some positive outcomes such as the higher attainment of peace and so women should be given an equal opportunity to participate in the peace process (Caprioli2003; Karim and Beardsley 2013; Ellerby 2013; O’Reilly 2016). Also, women show higher aversion to violence and preference for peaceful methods of dealing with conflicts which come together with their unique ability to give birth, making them predisposed to a culture of peace (Melander 2005). The functional argument is, however, criticized. The assumption that women by nature are peaceful is universally untrue as a small number of women have participated as combatants or perpetrators of sexual violence in armed conflicts (Cohen 2013).

Second, the rights-based argument postulates that women comprise at least half of the world’s population and are not only brutally affected during and after wartime but have the agency to contribute to change. Therefore, women need equal rights as men to meaningfully partake in peace and security decision that affects their own lives and society in general (Bjarnegård and Melander 2013;

9

Paffenholz and Ross 2015). Since women are generally the majority in most conflict settings, gender violence and the use of rape as a weapon, in effect yields higher levels of postwar female mental health problems and traumatic challenges, including depression and post-traumatic stress disorders than men, so women have the rights to participate and share their experiences (Brounéus 2014; George 2018). The rights-based perspective, however, fails to recognize that smaller numbers of civilian men and boys have also suffered diverse forms of wartime sexual violence (Carpenter 2006; Cohen 2013).

2.2 Impact of Women’s Participation in Peace Processes The positive impact of women’s participation in postwar peacebuilding, conflict prevention and conflict resolution in countries like Liberia (Nilsson et al 2020), Sri Lanka (Höglund 2019), Bougainville (George 2018), Rwanda (Issifu 2015), and Kenya (Tongeren 2013) are enormous. Recent scholarship has shown the positive impact of women’s participation and provisions outline in peace agreements (Hillbert 2017; Jobarteh 2018). The participation of women in peace negotiations as observers, negotiators, mediators, signatories or arbitrators have been found to positively increase the chances of attaining durable peace and high rate of the implementation rate of the provisions outlined (Nakaya 2004; Gizelis 2009; Olofsson 2018). When women participate in peace processes, they often raise gender equality and women’s rights issues, which closely correlate with peace, hence contributing to strengthening the representativeness and legitimacy of the new political order that follows the signing of a peace agreement (O’Reilly 2016). Similarly, it is proposed that if women are less involved, agreements are reached less often, and the probability of reaching an agreement is even lower if women’s groups are not involved at all (Caprioli 2000). George (2018) illustrates the productive impact that women have in the Pacific societies as brokers of peace, reinforcing the idea that where attention is given to the WPS resolution area of participation, comprehensive forms of stability and security can follow. Yet, we rarely understand why women affect social provisions in peace agreements.

2.3 Social Provisions in Peace Agreements Social provisions in peace agreements is suggested can contribute to peacebuilding as they address grievances that cause or trigger violent conflict and provide a means for the state to (re)build its legitimacy and accountability (Ashby 2012; McCandless and Rogan 2013). The relationship between social provisions and peace durability has been established by scholars (Ashby 2002; Taydas and Peksen 2012; George 2018). For example, Ashby finds insufficient or inequitable access to healthcare and education as factors in the decision of adolescents and youth to join armed groups. Besides, Taydas and Peksen maintain that social investment in health, education and social security contributes

10 to conflict prevention because such provisions reduce grievances by offsetting the effects of poverty and inequality in society. Equally, George adds that social provision on education can bring immediate- term benefits in conflict areas by bringing people together, helping them solve problems, and giving them a path forward to avert conflict relapse.

The preceding accounts suggest that the absence of social provisions could be a potential threat to peace and human security. In effect, social provisions are gradually finding a space in contemporary peace agreements. Between 1990 and 1998 and through to 1999 and 2006, social provision in the area of education rose from 51 per cent to 59 per cent, 20 per cent to 30 per cent on health, and on social security/welfare from 20 per cent to 36 per cent in peace processes (United Nations Development Program 2008; McCandless and Rogan 2013).

2.4 Identifying the Research Gap Research examining women’s participation in peace processes and outcomes has a lengthy history (Byrne 1995). Yet, a significant number of these studies either centered on how women have been abused in war and overlooked in postwar peace processes (Togeby 1994; Fukuyama 1998) or how women have been excluded from formal peace processes (Ruddick 1989; Harrington 1992) as well as the successful role of women in grassroots peacebuilding (Issifu 2015), hence the need to recognize women in global peace and conflict discourse. Further, how female participants in peace negotiations are likely to affect the outcome of peace agreements to become robust and have a higher implementation rate of outlined provisions is studied (Gizelis 2009; Bell and O’Rourke 2010; Hillbert 2017). Similarly, the connection between social provisions and peace have been established by previous research (Ashby 2002; Taydas and Peksen 2012).

It has been argued that women participants in peace negotiations are more likely to support social provisions in peace agreements because negotiations with the participation of women as signatories have more provisions such as social and economic reform to show, but less provisions regarding military reform (Krause et al 2018). Besides, peace agreements are more likely to include gender social issue, referring to women’s rights and security if women participate in the negotiation (Jobarteh 2018). Also, women’s participation in peace processes has a positive impact on the content of peace agreements as well as the quality and durability of peace reached (Ellerby 2013; Jobarteh 2018). Despite the widespread literature on the impact of women’s participation in peace processes, little is known about why agreements may include social provisions if women participate. This study is set to unfold

11 this nuance. The theoretical framework that guides the development of the study’s hypothesis and direct the causal story is presented in the next chapter.

3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This section presents the main theoretical framework of the study. The theoretical framework guides the development of the study’s hypothesis and builds on theories on women’s impact on peace negotiations and theories on why women can shape the scope of peace agreements. Further, the concept of agency is explored to support the basis of the hypothesis formulation. This chapter starts by conceptualizing women’s participation, peace agreement, social provisions and continues with conceptualizing agency. This is followed by the main theoretical argument and ends with the causal story established.

3.1 Conceptualizing Women’s Participation Women’s participation in peace processes can take various forms, including direct participation as delegates, signatories as well as indirect participation as observers or consultants (Stone 2014; Krause et al 2018). But what is women’s participation? Women’s participation has been defined or explained by several scholars who underscore the need for women’s participation in decision-making processes (Melander 2005; Stone 2014; Krause et al 2018). Mbwadzawo and Ngwazi (2013) defined the concept as the process of contributing to the enlargement of the scope of the peace agreement, which carries an increased potential for securing a durable peace. Jabang (2016:17) defined women’s participation as “their representation, contributions and involvement in decision making processes within important societal settings.”

O’Rourke (2014:137) has delineated five meanings or arguments from the feminist political theory underpinning women’s participation in decision-making within the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Resolutions, namely: “participation as the presence of role models; participation as representation; participation as deliberation; participation as inclusion and participation as expertise.” First, the participation of women in high profile and high visible peace processes serves as role model examples encouraging other more women with a clear understanding that women can and do perform such high-level roles in peace and security. Second, women’s participation can take the form of physical representation. This explanation provides a straightforward effort to the descriptive representation of women, that is, the physical presence of women in decision-making and having the opportunity to

12 take part in decision making processes. This argument sees women not just as victims, but also as partners and/or agents of change.

Third, participation as deliberation through the involvement and debate with those most affected by conflict and insecurity (largely women and girls) promises decision-making will arrive at thoughtful and reflective outcomes that will respect the manifold and evolving concerns of women. Fourth, participation as inclusion suggests women as victims and with accordance with the requirements of international law and peacekeeping, women should be involved. Finally, participation as expertise means participation in the form of women contributing their expertise in any level of the peace processes. After analyzing the five meanings of participation, it appears that the participation as representation/justice argument fits in this study. A detailed discussion of the representation/justice argument is presented below.

3.1.1 Participation as Representation/Justice Argument This study relies largely on O’Rourke’s (2014) explanations for women’s participation and other definitions to design a conceptual definition of women’s participation in this study. Participation as representation refers to a descriptive representation which simply means women’s physical presence in the decision-making processes in peace and security settings (O’Rourke 2014). In “descriptive” representation, representatives are in their own persons and lives in some sense typical of the larger class of persons whom they represent (Mansbridge 1999:629). A key reason for women’s descriptive representation is that it has an instrumental perspective (O’Rourke 2014; Jabang 2016). However, the instrumentalist claims about the greater durability of peace negotiations that include women fails to acknowledge the rights-based/justice claims which argues that women constitute at least half of the population and are affected by the conflict, hence the right of women to an equal presence in negotiations and decision-making processes on issues that affect their lives (O’Rourke 2014).

The questions about descriptive representation even become more complex when considered from a broader viewpoint (ibid). For instance, questions such as “how interests are aggregated, authorized and accounted make the debate more problematic. It contests the supposition that a group of women with a set of political interest could be represented in a descriptive representation. In such settings, if women who are included in negotiations are to represent the interests of women, by what mechanisms are such women authorized to represent this group and by what processes are such women held accountable to this group? The provisions within the WPS Resolutions that mandate women’s

13 descriptive representation includes no process requirements concerning how the included women are to be selected (ibid). “Even if such a process were in place, a further process would be required to ensure that the women who are included are held accountable to the broader constituency of women” (O’Rourke 2014: 139). To address these ambiguities an alternative justification for the descriptive representation lies in the justice claim suggested as having a strong explanation for more women participation since it has no authoritative provision. It promises a physical representation of women in the peace processes by focusing on the variety of women’s interest to be represented (Mansbridge 1999; O’Rourke 2014; Jabang 2016).

In the previous sections, it is stated that women’s participation in general term is explained by two schools of thought. First, women’s participation in terms of women as victims of warfare, hence, need to be included (Tickner 2001; Caprioli 2003; Peterson and Runyan 2010; Karim and Beardsley 2013; Ellerby 2013). Second, participation based on the population of women who are also victims of war devastations, hence the rights to participate (Melander 2005; O’Rourke 2014; Paffenholz and Ross 2015). Women’s physical representation and having the chance to freely express their views, expectations, share their knowledge, expertise in the peace processes and/or in any development discourse at any level is essential for women’s participation (Jabang 2016). This suggests that women’s participation is not restricted only to just the physical representation, but also the participation at every level of decision-making as agents of change and/or partners in development. For women to participate at every level of decision making in society, it is imperative that a conducive environment is created within which women will not only be present, but also can freely express their aspirations, needs, expectations and contribute efforts in postwar peacebuilding processes at every level without fear and hindrance.

Having women participating physically and not making their voices heard are two separate things. Women being physically present in decision making bodies without expressing their opinions/voices can be counterproductive as women’s presence symbolizes legitimizing decisions taken by the male (Mohanty 2002, quoted in Cornwall 2003). Hence, the combination of both is important for a meaningful participation of women. This suggests that women should physically be present and through their voice be part of the designing, implementation, monitoring and evaluation processes of activities or development at any level. The WPS Resolutions require women’s participation in decision- making in, for example, the implementation mechanisms of peace agreements and formal peace processes (O’Rourke 2014). Taken together, I suggest the conceptual definition of women’s

14 participation as: “their representation by presence, involvement and contribution by their voice at every level of the decision-making processes within crucial societal settings.” Considering the abstract interpretation and its overall inclusion this conceptual definition is considered suitable for this study.

This conceptual definition offers three vital assistance for this research. First, it is in line with the rights-based school of thought which underpins this study, postulating that women comprise at least half of the world’s population and are not only victims but have rights to be included. Second, it covers women’s physical representation as well as the knack for making their voices heard on relevant issues that trouble their aspirations, expectations and the development of society in general. It is important to note that representation in this context does not mean representation of “aggregated women’s interest” but having a diversity of numbers of women participating either individually or in groups (Mansbridge 1999; Jabang 2016). Third, it centers on seeing more women participate in every level of societal decision-making processes not just as victims, but also partners in postwar peacebuilding and development transformation. Together, in this study, women’s participation is where women serve as signatories or witnesses in the agreement. In the section that follows I have conceptualized peace agreement and social provisions for the purpose of this study.

3.2 Conceptualizing Peace Agreement PA-X Codebook (2018) defines peace agreement as formal, publicly available document, produced after discussion with conflict protagonists and mutually agreed to buy some or all of them, addressing conflict with a view to ending it. Lee et al (2016) explained peace agreements as a public commitment by the parties to addressing an end to the conflict through a range of political, constitutional, security, economic, and other goals such as social and institutional provisions. I will adopt Lee et al.’s definition for the purpose of this study. The accepted definition was developed from the Peace Accords Matrix (PAM) dataset in which this study adopts to evaluate the scope of provisions outlined in peace agreements. Detailed insight is provided in the subsequent sections.

3.3 Conceptualizing Social Provisions Social provision is a multidimensional concept that encompasses healthcare, education, social security/welfare, protection, human rights, etc., considered vital for human survival and social order (McCandless and Rogan 2013). UNICEF (2013) has listed clean water and protection as some social provisions that can support postwar peacebuilding to achieve positive results and at least build the resilience of individuals, especially women, communities and societies to overcome conflict. However,

15 for the purpose of this study, all the provisions listed under ‘rights’ in the PAM dataset summarized in the works of Joshi and Darby (2013) and Lee et al (2016) are considered social provisions in table 2. The next section conceptualizes agency, showing its relevance in the hypothesis set to be examined.

3.4 Conceptualizing Agency Agency denotes that individuals are well-informed and capable rather than inhibited by social norms and values (Moser and Clark 2001). Agency is a sociocultural mediated capacity to act (Ahearn 2001). The capacity of women (either individually or collectively) to make an effective and meaningful choice and actions, indicating the need of women themselves to be significant actors in the process of decision-making and/or change itself is suggested as an agency (Luintel 2016). Agency marks a paradigm shift in a view that recognizes women as active agents of change rather than passive victims of patriarchy or warfare, and that women can be both agents and victims in war and peace (Shepherd 2016). The functional perspective argues that men are the perpetrators while women are victims of violence in armed conflicts, yet the masculinized story of war does not describe the complexity of men’s and women’s role in the war (Olofsson 2018). Women’s representation on the assumption that women are victims of war weakens their agency and consequently the postwar development activities, in which women can participate and all their expectations and experiences of conflict addressed are undermined (ibid).

The assumption that women are just victims of violence is now taking a different turn in contemporary peace and conflict research. Thus, women in conflicts can take part as decision makers, negotiators, peace activists and participating in the military struggle (Manchanda 2005). The struggle here suggests it is time we start identifying women as agents instead of victims and strengthen their roles as partners for social transformation (Olofsson 2018). Women’s successful contributions to grassroots conflict prevention and peace processes in Liberia (Nilsson et al 2020), Kenya (Elfversson 2019), Bougainville (George 2018), South Africa (Noma, Aker and Freeman 2012) and Rwanda (Issifu 2015) suggest that if women were agents of war instead of victims of war, they may not use their agency to work for peace but rather for war. Also, considering women as victims of war that use their experience as victims to effect change and support peace activities provides an understanding of women as not only victims of warfare or agents of war, but both (Olofsson 2018). The recognition of women’s agency in peace and development could change the narrative about women as just vulnerable. As noted by Kofi Annan in Hunt and Posa (2001), for a very longtime women have demonstrated agency in peace education both in their families and their societies and have proved instrumental in building bridges

16 rather than walls. Given their roles as family nurturers, women have a huge agency investment in the stability of their communities and since women know their communities, they can predict the acceptance of peace initiatives, as well as broker agreements in their neighborhoods (ibid).

Women through agency act as agents to the level possible for them in the society they live in and in the circumstance where women are constrained by their gender roles, they use what means they have, to execute change (Olofsson 2018). Women may use the agency they have, to impact the conflict and the ones leading the conflict so that when they have more possibilities, they use them and show that once again, they have agency (ibid). The preceding arguments suggest women are victims of war, but also agents of change, who can use the agency they have at the negotiation table to impact peace processes, by expressing their experiences, expectations, aspirations and push for social needs relevant to women as well as support conflict transformation and reconciliation processes. The next section presents the main theoretical arguments of the study.

3.5 Main Theoretical Arguments It is suggested that women bring critical social topics to the peacebuilding agenda, that men seem to overlook (Castillejo 2016). Also, it is argued that women’s contributions in civil society at the grassroots level and as negotiating delegates for belligerent parties provide evidence suggesting that women’s participation can impact peace processes (Nakaya 2004; Anderline 2007). The participation of women-focused civil society groups at the peace table makes it more likely for the scope of the agreement to be broadened and anchored as women’s diverse experiences are raised at the table and the peace legitimized (Nilsson 2012; Ellerby 2013). Specifically, women-centered civil society organizations in the peace process are likely to push for social provisions on human rights, gender equality or gender-based violence (GIZ 2012). These remarks point to a possible suggestion that women do bring an agency to the peace processes.

Novel ideas and approaches to peace negotiations are needed in contemporary peace processes (O’Reilly and Súilleabháin 2013). One of the suggestions is that the participation of women could be an important development instrument for contributing to an era where new perspectives and different experiences of war are brought to the negotiation table by women. Also, a sense of more durable peace is reached when women participate in the peace process with fresh ideas (ibid). Further, the participation of women is suggested can increase the likelihoods of attaining durable peace outcomes and high rate of the implementation rate of the provisions outlined (Gizelis 2009; Olofsson 2018).

17

The preceding accounts suggest that women represent an agency of fresh ideas needed for a robust peace agreement and a successful implementation of the provisions outline in the agreement.

Further, it is argued that women regularly bring a better understanding of the root causes of armed conflict to the peace table because women speak effectively about the impact of violence on daily life, relating the experiences and voices of ordinary people, including men and women, young and old (Anderlini 2004). Anderline suggests further that women tend to have a holistic method of resolving armed conflict, often inspired by the dream of a peaceful future, particularly for their children. She adds that women tend to focus on practical social issues related to the quality of life and human security, rather than control over political power, and brings greater recognition of the discrimination and abuse faced by women and other marginalized sectors to the peace table. Anderlini’s observation unpacks two important nuances. First, it points to a possible suggestion that women biologically are more peaceful than men. Second, it suggests the agency of women being at the negotiation table gives them leverage to bring a holistic set of issues to the table, which in turn broadens the scope of the agreement to be more holistic or comprehensive.

It is also argued that women have a positive impact on peace outcomes by insisting on the inclusion of social provisions in the agreements (Aggestam 2016; Jobarteh 2018). Women award high priority to social policies and are expected to push for social provisions specific to women’s needs at the peace table (Wängerud 2000; Hillbert 2017). Women may support the inclusion of social policies such as child healthcare, education and the labor force in peace agreements because women are functionally pro-peace and pro-democratic (Phillips 1998; Paffenholz and Ross 2015). Research has revealed that women have a less positive approach towards war than men, and experimental studies show that if women handle conflicts, they may use methods that promote peace to a greater extent than men (Melander 2016). This account also points to a suggestion that women are more peaceful than men.

Further, it is argued that women’s interests in conflicts are broader than those of the men involved in negotiations (O’Rourke 2014). Women have distinct experiences and interests in conflict, and the expectations from others, give women strong reasons to advocate for social provisions (Jobarteh 2018). The experiences, expectations and interests that women bring broadened the scope of the negotiations as women push for social provisions and raise other relevant social issues that might have gone unnoticed by men (Jobarteh 2018). Further, the unique wartime experiences of women such as rape as a weapon of war and prior grassroots peace commitments are likely to guide the decisions of

18 women participants in negotiations to push for social provisions, including women’s right expected can address their postwar challenges. This account point to a possible suggestion that women are not only victims of war, but also agents of change, who through the agency for being at the peace table may voice out the problems that affects women, expresses their expectations and aims for social needs.

It is inferred in the preceding arguments that getting a seat at the negotiation table gives women an agency and the leverage reinforced by expectations and experiences to focus on making their voice heard, and social needs advocated for a possible integration into the final agreement. Following this logic, together with the extensive set of assumptions, this study hypothesizes that if women participate in peace negotiations, the agreements are likely to broaden with more social provisions. The next section presents the causal story underpinning this study.

3.6 Causal Story This study relies on prior scholarship and hypothesizes that if women participate in peace negotiations, the agreements are likely to broaden with more social provisions. For the purpose of this study women’s participation is defined as women’s representation by their presence, involvement and contribution by their voice at every level of the decision-making processes within crucial societal settings. Social provision is a multidimensional concept, but for the sake of this study provisions outlined under ‘rights’ in the PAM dataset summarized in the works of Joshi and Darby (2013) and Lee et al (2016) are considered social provisions (see table 2).

Figure 1: Causal story explaining why peace agreements might include more social provisions if women participate in peace negotiations

The participation An agency at the peace table More social provisions

of women broadens the negotiation included in the peace processes agreement

The causal story for this hypothesis is shown in figure 1. With the participation of women in peace negotiations, novel perspectives are brought to the peace table by the women, which is expected to broaden the scope of the negotiation process. Women often bring a better understanding of conflict onset to the peace table as they express effectively about the effect of violence on daily life, connecting the experiences and voices of vulnerable people. Therefore, the agency that women get for being at

19 the negotiation table gives them the leverage to bring a holistic set of social issues to the peace table which in turn broadens the scope of the peace agreement.

How women are impacted by intrastate conflict is different from men, and so women participants are likely to bring different expectations, interests and experiences to the peace table that will then widen the scope of the agreement to become more comprehensive. Unlike men, wartime atrocities such as rape as a weapon of war against a significant number of women and girls affects women population differently, such that victims continue to face psychosocial and inequality challenges in the postwar era than men. So, it is expected that the agency that women get for being at the peace table offers them the momentum to push for more social provisions like women’s rights, the right of self- determination, human rights, and other social provisions around health reforms, internally displaced persons, and refugee issues presumed could protect women.

Following the assumption of agency together with wartime experiences, interest and expectations, it is practical to think that if women participate a holistic set of issues would be brought to the peace table. Taken together, in effect, these will increase the likelihood of the agreement to become more holistic with more social provisions. Similarly, women are supposed to be insisted on the inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements because women award high priority to social policies informed by their pro-peace and pro-democratic character. In effect, women are likely to push for more social provisions which then may broaden the agreement to become comprehensive. In the chapter that follow, the research design used to conduct this study is presented.

4. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD This chapter presents the network of steps taken to conduct this study. It begins with information on case study design, research analysis, and the case selection method, highlighting why the selected cases are suitable for this study. It followed with insight about how provision in peace agreement is contextualized in this study and ends with the sources of material used in this study.

4.1 Case Study Design Comparative case study is the research design used to conduct this study. Case study is a systematic inquiry into an event or a set of related events which aims to describe and explain the phenomenon of interest (Bromley 1990). Purposively, this design is adopted in order to grasp deeply and explain the causal mechanisms, knowing that the phenomenon under investigation is rare to observe (Johnson and Reynolds 2012). Since women’s participation is generally rare and because I am interested in

20 grasping intensely about why women can shape the scope of peace agreements to become broaden with more social provisions, it is necessary to employ a comparative case study design for this study. More so, with the availability of multiple sources of information the case study design is considered appropriate for this study (Leonard-Barton 1990). Case study method provides an in-depth analysis of a few cases, but a shortcoming is that its findings cannot be generalized to a wider set of cases (Johnson and Reynolds 2012). So, I am not aiming at making generalization, instead, this study is intended to expand and generalize theoretical suppositions.

4.2 Data Analysis This study is primarily a qualitative comparative study which employs content analysis technique in analyzing research data, including the four peace agreements under study. The research question about why peace agreements include more social provisions if women participate will be analyzed in two systematic steps. First, four peace agreements where two involved the participation of women (Liberia 2003 and Sierra Leone 1999) and the other two without women participants (Côte d’Ivoire 2003 and Niger 1995) would be compared with special attention to the provisions outlined in the agreements. In relation, I will enumerate these provisions and examine the level of references made to them regarding their inclusion. This analysis is aimed at examining if there is a connection between the IV ‘women’s participation’ and the DV ‘social provisions’. Generating the association between the IV and DV will help establish empirically whether the participation of women at the negotiation table has any effect on the scope and the number of social provisions outlined in the peace agreement, and to infer the causal mechanism that develops. In all, this would produce a greater understanding of the causal mechanism that leads to the inclusion of more or less of social provisions in peace agreements and shed light on the generalizable causal mechanism.

The content analysis technique is employed in this study to produce a systematic comparison of the four peace agreements under study. Content analysis is a research method that provides a systematic and objective means to make valid inferences from verbal, visual, or written data to describe and quantify specific phenomena (Downe-Wambolt 1992). Using content analysis, I can reflect on the research question more deeply and be able to analyze and present systematically the peace agreements under study. In turn, this will make it possible to draw some interpretation of the results (Boréus and Bergström 2012). Also, when the facts or provisions from the text and/or peace agreements are presented in the form of actual numbers, I will still count and then assess these provisions qualitatively so that I can understand how prominently social provisions feature with other types of provisions - in

21 this case security provisions. It is important to note that content analysis technique could lead to a biased interpretation of the evidence. To minimize this potential risk, I was well informed about the criteria for the different categories of provisions in peace agreements before analyzing the agreements. Thus, I took into consideration my “pre-understanding”, both in the planning process as well as during the analyzing process to minimize any bias of my influence (Long and Johnson 2000).

Additionally, in order to reveal the causal mechanism between women’s participation and the inclusion of more social provisions in peace agreements an in-depth comparative case study analysis of the four peace agreements, particularly on the Liberia and Sierra Leone cases would be conducted to unfold these nuances. This study relied on both primary and secondary sources and provided space for a careful reflection on alternative explanations that may also influence the content of the peace agreement in relation to the provisions included.

4.3 Case Selection Having discussed the network of methodological steps and their choice taken to conduct this study, I now turn to the case selection method. Considering the above discussion, it is strong enough to say that a small-N study design is appropriate for this research. Choosing a small-N study design also requires systematic guidelines (Gerring 2007). I admit that an appropriate strategy for achieving a clearly defined research objective should be demonstrated in the choice of cases and analysis of a single case or several cases within the class or subclass of the phenomenon under investigation (George and Bennett 2005). So, I will select my cases with a variation on the IV, which is ‘women’s participation’. Having cases with variation in the IV will offer me the chance to examine whether a change in the IV generates a change in the DV which is ‘social provisions.’

Further, when comparing cases and investigating why the IV impacts the DV, it is key to select cases that are usually more similar in every sense than the IV. This technique is known as the Mill’s method of difference or the most similar systems design (Anckar 2008). Picking cases that are as similar as possible, apart from the IV, explaining any eventual change in the DV by the difference in the IV is done more confidently (Johnson and Reynolds 2012). In other words, we choose as objects of research cases that are as similar as possible, except regarding the phenomenon, the effects of which we are interested in assessing (Anckar 2008). Despite the strength, we cannot, however, escape the criticism that any most similar systems design is likely to suffer from the problem of ‘many variables, small number of cases’ (Lijphart 1971, p. 685). Yet, having these principles in mind, the four cases chosen

22 for this study are the Accra Peace Agreement on Liberia (2003), the Lomé Peace Agreement on Sierra Leone (1999), the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement on Côte d’Ivoire (2003), and the Agreement Between the Niger Republic Government and the Organization of the Armed Resistance (ORA) on Niger (1995). A key reason for choosing these four most similar cases is the ambition to keep constant as many extraneous variables as possible (Bartolini 1993).

In terms of the similarities in the selected cases, it is significant to observe that the cases are all situated in the West Africa subregion, the conflict is intrastate armed conflicts regarding government incompatibility-power battle, and the peace agreements were signed in the post-Cold War period. Nevertheless, on the one hand, two of the peace agreements were reached with the participation of women, on the other hand, two of the peace agreements were concluded with an all-men participant. I have carefully summarized the features of these cases in table 1 below. As the cases are situated in West Africa, it is appropriate for the research’s comparison because it presupposes that cases from the same subregion are perhaps more similar in terms of their environmental and geographical background, compared to the cases from different subregions.

Table 1: Summary of cases specifying variations in the cases’ characteristics

Summary of Cases

Liberia Sierra Leone Côte d’Ivoire Niger Accra Peace Lomé Peace Linas- Agreement Btn Agreement Agreement Marcoussis Niger Gov’t and 2003 1999 Agreement2003 ORA 1995 Women participants Yes Yes No No

West Africa Yes Yes Yes Yes

Intrastate conflict Yes Yes Yes Yes

post-Cold War period Yes Yes Yes Yes

More social provisions ? ? ? ?

Thus, having cases from the same geographical location over different periods of time could obviate a higher risk of many other explanatory variables taking into consideration some of the similarities in contextual context (Jabang 2016). Also, comparing countries within the same subregion is prudent

23 from a practical point of view because, for example, this research requires an extensive understanding of the local context (Höglund 2011). Similarly, studying countries in the same subregion do not only make it possible for some factors hold constant and thus allows for the analysis of alternative explanations, but also comparing countries in the same subregion can generate new theoretical and empirical insights (Putnam 1993; Brosché 2014).

The resemblance of the intrastate conflict nature of the four cases under study unpacks two vital nuances. First, these are conflicts that take place within internationally recognized borders, revolving around similar issues about conflicts between the government and rebel groups over political power (Bowd and Chikwanha 2010), making the type of resolutions at least similar compared to an interstate conflict, where the issues over government would not be the source of meticulous contestation. Second, it uncovers who the framers of peace agreements are at the negotiation table and why more provisions over others appears in the final peace agreements. Also, having the peace agreements signed in the period after the end of the post-Cold War presents three important similarities for inquiry in relation to the study’s hypothesis.

First, women’s participation and inclusion in political and peace-making decisions were strongly recognized in the world by this period reinforced by the Beijing Declaration (Hillbert 2017; United Nations Women 2015). Second, social reconstruction was strongly identified by this era as one that could empower women and foster greater gender equality and sustainable peace and development (Jaquette 2003; PeaceWomen 2019). These circumstances are strongly favorable for bringing broader issues to the peace negotiation table by women. Third, peace agreements around this time were more oriented towards either conflict resolution, management or transformation, and provisions relevant to security peace rather than social peace were the major focus (Lee et al 2016). This makes us presume that both social and security provisions was the attention of all the major peace agreements signed during this period.

Despite the many similarities in the four cases, there are still some variations. First, some of the agreements are more holistic or comprehensive than others, although they all meet the adopted definition offered by Lee et al (2016) in the previous section. Thus, some are partial agreements. Partial peace agreements are not holistic, they typically deal with either a few conflict parties or address specific issues only, and do not tell much about the interests and views of the conflict parties or the issues that were excluded from the preceding negotiation processes (ibid). This suggests that a peace

24 agreement reached by only a few conflict parties in which women were not part of the negotiation process is likely not to be a holistic agreement. Second, the four cases vary in terms of the duration of the negotiation processes. Consequently, examining the effect of the IV will be somewhat problematic for this research. Due to research material unavailability, this study considered the four cases still suitable for investigation because they are relevant to the research question and hypothesis set. Hence, I will take into consideration the effect of the varying influences when examining the cases in relation to the research question and the findings that would emanate from this study.

Before analyzing the content of the four peace agreements under investigation, a brief summary of the intrastate conflicts through to the period up to the negotiations and signing of the agreements would be presented. Purposively, the summary of the conflicts will offer an opportunity to obtain a context-specific relevant background information of the four cases. Further, the negotiation period through to the time when the agreements were finally signed would be relevant for the analysis of the content of the four agreements.

4.4 Contextualizing Provisions in Peace Agreements In the previous chapter, I examined various definitions of peace agreements and adopted the definition offered by Lee et al 2016. To reiterate, Lee et al defined peace agreements as a public commitment by the parties to addressing an end to the conflict through a range of political, constitutional, security, economic, and other goals such as social and institutional provisions. According to the PAM dataset, summarized by Joshi and Darby (2013) and Lee et al (2016) concluded peace agreements should include the following six major categories of provisions outlined in table 2. These categorized major provisions are cease-fire, security, rights, institutions, external arrangements, other arrangements, and sub-divided to take into consideration specific peace agreement provisions. For example, prisoner release and women’s rights fall under the ‘security’ and ‘rights’ provisions respectively. By using the outline in table 2, these categories of provisions would be evaluated through the process of counting how many sub-provisions under ‘security’ and ‘rights’ were included in the four peace agreements selected in this study. The ‘rights’ provisions in table 2 is translated as ‘social’ provisions. This means I would use the two terms interchangeable for the purpose of this study. Although peace agreements, according to the PAM dataset entail six categories of provisions, I will focus only on the security and social provisions because of my research question and the hypothesis set for examination.

25

There are seven provisions under security in the PAM dataset in table 2. However, I have also found in the peace agreements literature other regularly appearing provisions that the PAM dataset categorization of ‘security’ and ‘rights’ does not mention. In effect, I have increased the seven sub- provisions under ‘security’ with other four sub-provisions (boundary demarcation; regional or United Nations (UN) peacekeeping force; UN, International, or Internal Verification; and withdrawal of troops) offered by Lee et al (2016). In all, I have identified 11 sub-provisions under ‘security’ which are all relevant to this study. The four additional sub-provisions are policy areas extensively applied in peacekeeping and peacebuilding programs since the end of the Cold War and they mostly support the security approaches towards peace (Lee et al 2016). These are also vital for the research puzzle.

Table 2: Outline to evaluate the provisions in peace agreements adopted in the PAM dataset

Category of Provisions Sub-provisions Security Demobilization, Disarmament, Military Reform, Police Reform, Paramilitary Groups, Prisoner Release, Reintegration.

Rights Amnesty, Children’s Rights, Citizenship, Cultural Protections, Education Reform, Human Rights, Indigenous Minority Rights, Internally Displaced Persons, Media Reform, Minority Rights, Official Language and Symbol, Refugees, Reparations, Right of Self Determination, Women’s Rights.

Further, I have identified 15 sub-provisions under ‘rights’ in the PAM dataset in table 2. In a similar vein, I have expanded the sub-provisions to include two additional items: inter-ethnic state relations, and truth or reconciliation mechanisms offered by Lee et al (2016). I have added these additional sub- provisions because they have received increased emphasis in recent seminal findings from international organizations (ibid) which also are relevant to this study. In all, I have 17 sub-provisions under social which are considered relevant for this study.

Notably, if the names of sub-provisions in the PAM dataset in table 2 is not exactly what is mentioned in the four peace agreements under study, but have the same meaning, I will still place it under the category where it fits. For example, in the PAM dataset, we have military reform under ‘security’ and so, if I see security reform in the peace agreements, I would assume it to have the same meaning as military reform. Further, this study places a benchmark on the definition of a peace agreement. As noted in the PAM dataset that peace agreement should have six major categories of provisions. However, the social and security provisions which are the focus of this study should have at least one-

26 third of the sub-provisions outlined in any more holistic or comprehensive peace agreement. For example, a peace agreement should include 17 sub-provisions under social and 11 sub-provisions under security. In all, we have 28 sub-provisions. So, for the scope of the peace agreement to be evaluated for the purpose of this study as more holistic or comprehensive it should involve the participation of women and include at least 9 sub-provisions, and below the benchmark is considered less holistic or partial agreement. Further, as the sub-provisions are counted and assessed, each agreement will be given a score and based on the score it will be easy to compare the scope of agreements in terms of being more holistic/comprehensive or less holistic/partial between them.

As already stated in the previous section, this study theorized that women’s participation in peace negotiations is expected to broaden the scope of the peace agreement to become comprehensive because the agency that women get for being at the table brings a diverse set of issues. Therefore, this benchmark would help understand better if the negotiations that women participate are more likely to broaden the scope of the agreement to look more holistic with more social provisions than those that women do not participate. In order to uncover if there is a connection between the IV and the DV, I will count and assess the number of all the sub-provisions in the four cases under study and at the same time pay special attention to the agency that women bring to the negotiation table in relation to the impact on the scope and provisions outlined in the agreements.

4.5 Sources To answer the research question accurately, I relied meticulously on both primary and secondary sources for this study. Primary sources included the actual peace agreements negotiated, government reports, bulletins, etc. Generally, there are a variety of sources that may be interrogated to find related information yet searching information on women’s participation in peace agreements were somewhat under-reported and challenging, particularly for Côte d’Ivoire and Niger, contrary to Liberia and Sierra Leone which has been studied extensively.

The secondary sources included books, academic journals and articles from peace and conflict scholars, theses, reports, media (local and international), UN data, and academic datasets, etc. Usually, secondary sources are written or produced by scholars, agencies, journalists and other authors who give accounts of the phenomenon in which they did not participate directly or observed. As noted by Dulic in Höglund and Öberg (2011) such a situation makes secondary sources challenging with regards to authenticity. To minimize such an encounter, I applied triangulation to carefully evaluate the source

27 of the research material. The chapter that follows presents information about the scope of the four peace agreements under investigation with a special focus on women’s participation and the provisions in the agreements.

5. WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION AND THE SCOPE OF PEACE AGREEMENTS This section presents the evidence emanating from the content analysis of the four peace agreements under study. It begins with an overview of the intrastate conflicts followed by women’s role in grassroots peace processes as well as in the negotiation process. The analysis of the scope of the four peace agreements is highlighted in an overview, and for the purpose of the benchmark accepted for this study, the agreements are categorized as being more holistic or comprehensive if women participated in the negotiation process and included one-third (at least 9) of the sub-provisions outlined in the PAM dataset in the agreements. Besides, if women did not participate and the agreements included less than one-third of the sub-provisions, it is considered less holistic or partial agreements. In relation, analysis of the provisions included in the agreements and a discussion of the results in connection with the research’s hypothesis are presented. The analysis starts with the Liberian and Sierra Leonean cases through to Côte d’Ivoire and the Nigerien cases.

5.1 Liberia The peace agreement analyzed in this study is the agreement signed on 18th August 2003 in Ghana, and it is known in the UN archives and the PAM dataset as the Accra Peace Agreement (Joshi, Quinn and Regan 2015). Liberia illustrates a case where the final peace agreement was reached with women participants in the peace negotiation process. In 1980, the Americo-Liberian rule was overthrown in a coup d’état by Samuel Doe, an indigenous Liberian from the Krahn tribe. Nine years later, on December 1989, armed conflict broke out, and sustained until 1997, when Charles Taylor, a leader of one of the armed groups - National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), was elected president on the ticket of the National Patriotic Party (NPP), formerly the NPFL (Hillbert 2017; Inclusive Peace and Transition Initiative (IPTI) 2018). Two years in the presidency, a second intrastate conflict begun by an anti-Taylor armed group called the Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) in 1999. LURD continued through the year 2000 with vicious attacks on the border town of Voinjama in the northwest of Liberia’s Lofa County. Despite the fighting, Taylor refused to negotiate with the LURD because the conflict was not ripe for resolution (Zartman 2000), hence the fighting continued.

28

In 2003, a fragment group from the LURD known as the Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL) was formed. LURD and MODEL progressed steadily towards the Liberian capital Monrovia. The progression of these armed groups became a threat that Taylors’ regime was forced to negotiate for peace (Wallensteen and Eriksson 2009). Taylor was later compelled under diplomatic and military pressure to resign on 11 August 2003. The regime’s power was passed over to the Vice president, Moses Blah, and Taylor left for exile in Nigeria (Nilsson 2009). On 18 August 2003, the peace agreement was signed in Accra between the Government of Liberia, the two rebel factions (LURD and MODEL) and political parties, leading to a transitional government.

Women in Peacebuilding Network (WIPNET) contributed to grassroots peace processes in Liberia. The experiences from grassroots peace processes contributed greatly at the macro level: the Accra Peace Agreement in Ghana in 2003. Women’s groups, including WIPNET at the grassroots level consistently advocated for the peace process to address multifaceted social problems, including gender inequalities in the country. Local women were mobilized by the WIPNET for a “Mass Action for Peace” dubbed: “We Want Peace; No More War”, advocating for a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement. During the peace negotiations, a few members of WIPNET travelled to Ghana, where they mobilized Liberian refugee women living in the Buduburam refugee camp to launch protests outside the negotiation hall in Accra. Subsequently, these women strategically blocked the entrance to the negotiating room until the framers of the agreement who initially boycotted the negotiations were finally influenced to go and conclude the agreement (Nilsson et al 2020). The agreement that ensued, Mano River Women’s Peace Network (MARWOPNET) and WIPNET participated in the peace negotiation process and through persistent advocacy some of their aspirations and needs were integrated in the agreement (Alaga 2010; Tripp 2015). The final agreement was reached between 4 June 2003 and 18th August 2003.

5.2 Sierra Leone The peace agreement examined in this study is the agreement signed on 7 July 1999 in Togo, and it is known in the UN archives and the PAM dataset as the Lomé Peace Agreement (Joshi et al 2015). Sierra Leone demonstrates a case where the final peace agreement ensuing the terrible armed conflict was concluded with women participants at the peace negotiation table. The post-independence era bedeviled the country with a decade long civil war following the All People’s Congress (APC) rule from 1968 to 1992 (Peters 2011). During the earlier period, military coups in 1967, 1968, 1992, 1996,

29

1997, presented a history of endemic social unrest that escalated into overt civil war in 1991, lasting until 2002 (M’cleod and Ganson 2018).

The armed conflict started on 23 March 1991 when the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), with external support from Charles Taylor’s NPFL forces in Liberia, tried to oust Joseph Momoh’s regime so that Foday Sankoh takes over the power (Global Security 2020). Subsequently, Foday Sankoh, launched guerrilla attacks on villages in eastern Sierra Leone on the Liberian border. Momoh’s failure to topple the rebel insurgency presented an opportunity for a coup d’état led by Captain Valentine Strasser on 29 April 1992, forcing president Momoh into exile in Guinea (Global Security 2020). The National Provisional Ruling Council was formed and by 4 May 1992 Captain Strasser was the Head of State of the country. Fighting continued between Foday Sankoh’s RUF and the successive government until the Lomé Peace Agreement was finally signed on 7 July 1999 between the Government of the Republic of Sierra Leone and RUF.

Prior to the signing of the peace agreement, women contributed to the grassroots peace process. In mid-1994, women focused civil society groups under the umbrella name of the ‘Women’s Forum’ were committed to promoting peace at the local level. As early as 1995, women in Freetown, the capital, and Pujehun in the eastern province of Sierra Leone, tried to negotiate directly with the rebel leaders of RUF to end the violence. Led by the Sierra Leone Women’s Movement for Peace (SLWMP), the Women’s Forum initiated a series of debate on peace and conflict resolution by 1995, advocating that the crisis had not only become too terrible to be left to the military regime alone, but women also have unique skills to bring to the peace process (Dyfan 2003). Subsequently, women participated in the two national consultative conferences – Bintumani (1) in 1995 and Bintumani (2) in 1996 – which set the agenda for the elections and the formal peace process (Barnes and Polzer 2000). The Sierra Leonean women and women’s civil society active involvement in these two conferences became the revolutionary point in the national decision to proceed with multi-party elections and a negotiated settlement of the war (Dyfan 2003).

The SLWMP series of peace campaign helped set the agenda for the democratization and peace negotiation process (Jusu-Sheriff 2000; Dyfan 2003; Bangalie 2011). Women’s experience gained from the Bintumani I, II played a role at the peace table. Similar issues pushed by women at the Bintumani I, II conferences were brought to the peace table where the women persistently advocated for gender equal society, women’s rights and protection and other vital social needs. In effect, the agreement

30 included some of the issues advocated by women, including major reforms in the education system as well as healthcare. The agreement concluded between 25 May 1999 and 7 July 1999 saw the participation of women in the negotiation process (Gberie 2005; Williamson 2006).

5.3 Côte d’Ivoire The peace agreement analyzed in this study is the agreement signed on 23 January 2003 in France, and it is known in the UN archives as the Linas-Marcoussis Peace Agreement (United Nations Peacemaker 2003). Côte d’Ivoire shows a case where the final agreement was reached by an all-male participant in the peace negotiation process. The immediate post-independence period was marked with no major conflicts. Between 1960 and 1993 Côte d’Ivoire was a one-party state. Parti Démocratique de la Côte d’Ivoire-Rassemblement Démocratie African was the sole political party in the country with Félix Houphouët-Boigny as the president (Hillbert 2017). In the 1960’s and the 1970’s, the country’s economy flourished due to a mix of openness to foreign investment, cheap immigrant labor from surrounding countries, and high prices of the country’s main exports: coffee, cocoa and wood (Vaïsse 2003). However, in the 1980s Côte d’Ivoire’s economy started to regress and austerity measures triggered an upsurge of protestations (Hillbert 2017).

In effect, a multi political system was established with four main political parties and three rebel groups (Vaïsse 2003). Henri Konan Bédié became the president following the death of Houphouët-Boigny in 1993. The country was politically polarized due to ethnic, regional and religious differences. In 1999 the first coup d’état in the county’s political history was staged by General Robert Guei of the Union pour la démocratie et le progrès en Côte d’Ivoire, one of the four political parties (Hillbert 2017). This event led to an election in 2000, where Guei lost to Laurent Gbagbo and subsequently died in 2002. Thereafter, one of the main rebel groups, Mouvement patriotique de Côte d’Ivoire (MPCI) based in the North (Bouaké) began their insurgencies, hence the onset of the conflict in September 19, 2002.

The MPCI combined forces with the other two rebel groups, i.e., Mouvement populaire ivoirien du grand oust and Mouvement pour la justice et la paix based in the western part of the country to fight the government (Vaïsse 2003). In 2003 peace negotiations between the government and all the political parties as well as the rebel groups was held in Linas-Marcoussis near Paris and led to the signing of the agreement on 23 January 2003. This an all-male agreement was determined between 15 January and 23 January 2003.

31

5.4 Niger The peace agreement examined in this study is the agreement signed on 15 April 1995 in Burkina Faso, and it is known in the UN archives and the PAM dataset as the Agreement between the Niger Republic Government and the Organization of The Armed Resistance (ORA) (Joshi et al 2015). Niger demonstrates a case where the final peace agreement was signed with only male participants in the peace negotiation process. Following political independence, President Hamani Diori ruled the country for 14 years under a one-party civilian regime system. Niger remained relatively peaceful until President Diori witnessed a failed coup in 1963 and an assassination attempt in 1965 by Djibo Bakary’s Mouvement Socialiste Africain (MSA)-Sawaba group, which had launched an abortive rebellion in 1964 (Van Walraven 2003). However, in the early 1970s, Diori’s regime was overthrown by Col. Seyni Kountché and a small military group named Conseil Militaire Supreme (Decalo and Idrissa 2012).

Many attempted coups (in 1975, 1976 and 1984) ensued until General Saibou won the presidential election on 10 December 1989 to become the first president of the Second Republic (Nohlen, Krennerich and Thibaut 1999; Decalo and Idrissa 2012). Through a multi-party democratic presidential election, Mahamane Ousmane became the first president of the Third Republic (Nohlen et al 1999; Decalo and Idrissa 2012). The Third Republic faced rebellion by Tuareg rebel insurgencies in the Agadez and Toubou regions. The onset of the conflict in November 1991 is known as the Tuareg Rebellion (Minorities at Risk Project 2004). Tuareg turmoil sparked the formation of two rebel groups called the Front for the Liberation of Aïr and Azaouak and the Front for the Liberation of Tamoust. These armed groups attacked different towns, including Tchintabaraden and fought the government until April 1995 when a peace agreement was signed between the Niger government and the Niger-based Tuareg rebel group – ORA in Ouagadougou with an all-male framers of peace agreement (Decalo and Idrissa 2012). The agreement was decided over a period between March 1995 and April 1995 (ibid).

The next section presents the scope of the provisions outlined in the four peace agreements, highlighting the number of social and security provisions in the agreements and with special reference to the presence or absence of women’s participation at the peace table. My aim is to ascertain how relevant the results would be as far as the hypothesis that if women participate in peace negotiations, the agreements are likely to broaden with more social provisions is concerned.

32

5.5 The Scope of Peace Agreements In this section, I have categorized the scope of the four peace agreements under study as more holistic when it involves the participation of women and one-third of sub-provisions in the PAM data set included in the agreement, and less holistic when it does not involve women’s participation and less than one-third of the sub-provisions. The evidence suggests that the Liberia and Sierra Leone peace agreements are more holistic and comprehensive while Côte d’Ivoire and Niger peace agreements are less holistic or partial. In table 3, the cases are presented in relation to the framers of peace agreements and the scope of the agreements.

Table 3: The scope of peace agreements

Scope of Cases Women’s An all-male agreement Participation participant

Liberia (2003) Yes No More holistic Sierra Leone (1999) Yes No

Côte d’Ivoire (2003) No Yes Less holistic Niger (1995) No Yes

This study hypothesizes that if women participate in peace negotiations, the agreement is expected to broaden with more social provisions. This suggests that the participation of women is more likely to widen the scope of the negotiation processes to become more holistic or comprehensive with more provisions, particularly social needs outlined in the final agreements. Prior research confirms this assumption by suggesting that women’s interests in conflicts are broader than those of the men involved in negotiations, and that the experiences, expectations and interests that women bring broadened the scope of the peace negotiations as women push for more social provisions and raise other relevant social issues that might have gone unnoticed by men (O’Rourke 2014; Jobarteh 2018). Further, it is suggested that peace agreements negotiated by only men are more likely to be rivetted towards security agenda (Martin 2006; Lee et al 2016; Pospisil and Bell 2018). So, the agreements on Liberia and Sierra Leone which involved women participants were expected to be more holistic with more social provisions.

33

The evidence emanating from the analysis of the agreements does show that the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements are more holistic with more social provisions. Further, the evidence from the analysis of the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements does show the agreements as less holistic with fewer social provisions. Result from the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreement is perplexing since the agreements were reached by only men and still included some social provisions. This observation is given further interrogation in the course of the analysis. In order to assess and analyze the four agreements a more detailed overview is required. In table 4, the scope of provisions outlined in the four peace agreements is presented for an in-depth evaluation and analysis.

Table 4: The scope of provisions in the four peace agreements

Cases Social/Rights Provisions Security Provisions

Liberia 2003 Part 6: Human rights issues Part 2: Int’l. peacekeeping Part 6 (Art XXIII): TRC Part 3: DDR Part 8 (Art XXVIII): Gender issues Part 4: SSR Part 9 (Art XXX, 1a): Refugees Part 5: Release of prisoners Part9(ArtXXX,1b): Displaced 4 major security provisions persons Part 9(Art XXXI): Vulnerable groups Part 10: Amnesty 7 major social provisions Sierra Leone 1999 Part 2 (Art VI, 2ix): TRC Part 4 (Art XVI): DDR Part 3(Art IX): Amnesty Part 4 (Art XVI): Paramilitary Part5(Art XXIV): Human rights groups issues Part 4 (Art XVII): SSR Part 5 (Art XXXI): Education Part 4 (Art XVIII): Withdrawal Part 5 (Art XXII): Refugees of mercenaries Part 5 (Art XXII): Displaced Part 4 (Art XIII): Int’l Peace persons keeping Part 5 (Art XXX): Children’s rights Part 5 (Art XXI): Release of 7 major social provisions prisoners 6 major security provisions Côte d’Ivoire 2003 Annex V: Media reform Element 2: Int’l. peacekeeping Annex VI: Human rights Element 3f: SSR Annex VII.5 Amnesty Element:3g Disarmament 3 major social provisions Element3i: Release of prisoners Annex VII: Demobilization 5 major security provisions Niger 1995 Clause 10 (Sec III): Reconciliation Clause 3a: Boundary demarcat- Clause 15: Amnesty ion Clause 22c: Cultural protection Clause 13: DDR

34

3 major social provisions Clause 17a/b: SSR Clause 14c: Paramilitary forces 4 major security provisions

Social provisions appear to be the most significant occurring provisions in the agreements in which women were invited to participate in the negotiation processes making the agreement more comprehensive. As presented already, previous research has suggested that women participants in peace process shape the content of peace agreements to include wide-ranging social provisions (Steinberg 2007; Ruiz-Navarro 2019). The inclusion of more social provisions in the agreements in which women participated affirms to the suggestions offered by previous research that women have a positive impact on peace outcomes for insisting on the inclusion of social provisions in the agreements (Stone 2014; Aggestam 2016; Jobarteh 2018). It also confirms the suggestions that women award higher priority to social policies (Wängerud 2000; Hillbert 2017), and that women would rather push for more social provisions such as childcare, education and the labor force because women are functionally pro-peace and pro-democratic in character (Phillips 1998; Paffenholz and Ross 2015). These are issues under the ‘social/rights provisions’ in the PAM dataset which lead to the expectation that peace agreements in which women are invited to participate would make the negotiation processes more holistic with more social provisions.

Additionally, security provisions are found to be the most occurring in the peace agreements signed, in which women were not invited to participate in the negotiation process. This gives support to earlier research suggesting that exclusively male participated peace negotiations usually shape the contents of the peace agreements towards security provisions (Pospisil and Bell 2018). Further, it reaffirms prior suggestion that peace agreements are engrossed on a security agenda that revolve primarily around compromises negotiated in secret by political-military elites who are almost exclusively men (Martin 2006; Lee et al 2016).

At this point, it is important to analyze if women demonstrate an agency for being in the peace table in order to have the leverage to push for more social provisions. As women are expected to bring a novel perspective through the agency they get at the table, this research assumes the agreements in which women participate to be more holistic with more social provisions expected could support and address women’s needs. The agreement on Liberia shows a significant number of social provisions. The agreement had 7 sub-provisions under social, which includes human rights, gender issues,

35 refugees, and displaced persons, etc., compared to the 4 sub-provisions under security. This evidence supports prior research which suggests that women have a positive impact on peace outcomes by insisting on the inclusion of social provisions in the agreements (Aggestam 2016; Jobarteh 2018). And that if women participate in peace negotiations, by their experiences of war, expectations and interests in the conflict, they may shape the contents of the negotiations to include more social provision (Jobarteh 2018). The evidence emanating from the Liberia case supports the study’s hypothesis.

Similarly, the Sierra Leone agreement included a good number of provisions on social issues. The Sierra Leone agreement had 7 sub-provisions on social, including human rights, refugees, displaced persons, education and amnesty among others compared to the 6 sub-provisions on security. This evidence also supports previous study’s suggestions that the participation of women in peace negotiations is likely to broaden the scope of the peace agreements to include social provisions because women usually bring up an extensive set of issues to the negotiation table (Hillbert 2017). Hence, the evidence from the Sierra Leone case supports the study’s hypothesis.

However, the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements which both appear not holistic according to the benchmark stipulated in the previous section, still included some social provisions, even where there were no women participants who through an agency for being at the peace table is expected to push for social provisions. Some of the sub-provisions under social included in the Côte d’Ivoire agreement are human rights, media reform and amnesty. However, comparably, the Côte d’Ivoire agreement included more sub-provisions under security (5) than social (3), confirming the earlier suggestion that peace is largely oriented toward security rather than social, both in terms of the contents of the agreements and in the prioritization of the implementation of agreement provisions (Newman et al 2009; Lee et al 2016; Pospisil and Bell 2018). Further, the evidence suggests a different pattern since women did not participate and yet some social provisions were included.

In a similar vein, the Niger agreement included some social provisions. Some of the sub-provisions under social included in the agreement are reconciliation, amnesty and cultural protection. The inclusion of social provisions in the Niger agreement also suggests a different explanation that needs further investigation. Yet, when we compare, we see there are 4 sub-provisions under security against 3 sub-provisions under social in the Niger agreement. Hence, the evidence stemming from the analysis of the Niger agreement validates the suggestions that securitization has taken ascendency in peace negotiations led mostly by men (Pospisil and Bell 2018).

36

Going by the arguments from previous research that exclusively male participated peace negotiations usually shapes the content of the peace agreements towards security provisions we should not have observed both Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements included some social provisions in the final agreements in which women did not participate. This remark suggests there may be an alternative explanation of why social provisions are included, other than the agency that women could bring to the table leading to the inclusion of social provisions. The inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements could also be analyzed in the context of the conflict, the will of the framers of the peace agreement as well as the duration of the negotiation processes. By the context of the conflict I mean the duration or lifespan of the conflict. Long duration conflicts are protracted wars that last for a minimum of 10 years with underlying rivalry between the parties (Wayman 1982; Brecher 2016). The 10-year criteria have been better used in interstate wars, but it is still applicable in intrastate wars because the latter also involves rivalry between the belligerent parties. Protracted conflicts are complex, severe, enduring and often violent (Azar 1990).

For the purpose of this study, intrastate conflict is protracted if the conflict lasts for at least 10 years, otherwise is a short duration conflict. Short duration conflicts may necessitate more security related provisions to ensure that the conflict does not become protracted. This is evident in both Côte d’Ivoire and Niger cases. The Côte d’Ivoire war analyzed in this study lasted for about 6 months and 4 years in Niger, hence both appeared to be security centered.

In a similar vein, long duration wars may require a more socially focused peace agreement. Due to the protracted nature of long duration wars, human security is often adversely affected, social infrastructures and services (healthcare, education, housing, water sources, etc.) are destroyed, and regularly results in gender-based violence among others. This is evident in both Liberia and Sierra Leone cases. The Liberia case examined in this study lasted over a period of 14 years before the final agreement was concluded. Also, the Sierra Leone war analyzed in this study technically lasted 10 years before the final agreement was signed. As the Liberian and Sierra Leonean wars appeared protracted the ensuing agreements were socially focused. This shows the context of the conflict may impact the inclusion of certain provisions over others. However, in the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements in which women participated, women demonstrated an agency which contributed to the broadening of the agreement with the inclusion of more social provisions. This, therefore, show an evidence pointing to a vivid pattern relating to agency of women at the peace table and the inclusion of more social provisions in the peace agreements.

37

Following the arguments from prior studies, the evidence from the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements could be explained as a result of the agency that women participants brought to the peace table which may have contributed to that significant number of social provisions. Hence, the Liberia and Sierra Leone cases are evidences that point to support the hypothesis. But, how do we know if it is the agency that women brought to the peace table which led to the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements being more holistic with more social provisions. In the sections that follow, this puzzle is addressed through an in-depth case study analysis of the two cases to establish the causal mechanism. Also, we observe that both Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements in which women were not invited to participate still included some social provisions. This is very interesting to observe as mixed result is revealed. There may be possible influential factors and this study will try to uncover these factors through an in-depth case study analysis in the subsequent sections.

5.6 Conclusion: Scope of Peace Agreements The content analysis of the four cases illustrates a clear pattern of relationship between women’s participation and the inclusion of more social provisions. The agreements on both Liberia and Sierra Leone, which had women participants in the negotiation included more social but less security provisions. Also, these agreements are more holistic in scope. The Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements suggest a strong support for the study’s hypothesis. The evidence from the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements has confirmed that including more women in peacemaking is not just the right thing to do, but also the smart thing to do (Clinton 2011). However, both Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements are considered partial in this study. As noted already in the preceding section, partial peace agreements are not holistic, they normally deal with either a few conflict parties or address specific issues only (Lee et al 2016). Further, the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements included more security provisions, affirming prior research which argues that peace agreements negotiated by only men are security centered (Pospisil and Bell 2018). More so, the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger cases have reaffirmed prior suggestion that security provisions in agreements tends to stress on security in relation to belligerent actors that are mostly men, and often fail to take into account women’s experiences of insecurity during conflict time, and the social security needs they expect and require the peace process to deliver (ibid).

However, Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements which did not include women in the negotiation process, the agreements still included some social provisions. This also suggests that peace negotiations in which women do not participate is likely to include some/fewer social provisions in the

38 agreements. Therefore, the inclusion of social provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements calls for a deeper analysis to ascertain why, despite no women’s agency at the peace table these agreements still included some social provisions. Doing so, other possible influential factors would be uncovered. In the next section, I have presented an in-depth case study analysis of the four cases to establish the causal mechanism on the Liberia and Sierra Leone cases, and the possible explanations about what shaped the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements to include some social provisions and the rivetted security agenda.

6 IN-DEPTH CASE STUDY This section will analyze the negotiation processes of the four peace agreements more in-depth. In relation to the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements, the aim is to establish the mechanism and understand better if and/or why women do bring any agency to the peace table which in turn leads to a holistic agreement with more social provisions. Further, it would unfold what other factors could influence the inclusion of social provisions in agreements in which women are not part of the negotiation process: in relation to the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements. This section will start with the Liberia case followed by Sierra Leone before Côte d’Ivoire and ends with the Niger case.

6.1 Liberia: The Agency of Women at the Table In the previous section, we observed that the women in WIPNET played a key role in grassroots peace processes but were not invited initially to the peace table. However, the Mano River Women’s Peace Network (MARWOPNET); women civil society group was formally requested to participate at the negotiation table as observers following their massive role in grassroots peace processes during the ceasefire and before the main negotiation process (Nilsson 2012; IPTI 2018). Outside and around the negotiation hall, the women’s civil society organizations, including the Liberian refugee women, Christian Women of WIPNET and the Muslim Women of Peace Network continued to lobby for more women’s inclusion in the peace processes and presented the Golden Tulip Declarations stating their demands (Saiget 2016).

The Declaration outlined key issues including (1) involving more women in the negotiation process, (2) integrating and supporting Liberian women in all decision-making policies on HIV/AIDS prevention and control (3) ensuring 50 percent representation of women in the Transitional Leadership (4) ensuring women participants as observers at the Accra Peace Talks be made delegates and be given voting rights, including places on the Vetting Committee and (5) a greater participation

39 of women in peacekeeping missions as well as the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process (Golden Tulip Declaration 2005). The impact of refugee women was a crucial turning-point, changing the pace of negotiations towards a more committed and inclusive direction (Nilsson 2009). Women in the WIPNET shaped the overall peace process significantly, largely through mass action for peace campaign at the grassroots level, which influenced the main negotiation process (IPTI 2018).

Women participants from MARWOPNET at the negotiation table focused particularly on WIPNET’s expectation and objective of a gender equal society, thereby persistently advocating on gender issues, pushing for the inclusion of the Gender Ministry in the transitional government and other social welfare provisions around, education, refugees and displaced persons’ social welfare issues. Through persistence at the table, women were able to shape the scope of the negotiation such that gender, education, and health and social welfare ministries were finally accepted and included in the agreement. The Part 9, Art XXXI, 3 of the agreement stipulates that “The NTGL, in formulating and implementing programs for national rehabilitation, reconstruction and development, for the moral, social and physical reconstruction of Liberia in the post-conflict period, shall ensure that the needs and potentials of the war victims are taken into account and that gender balance is maintained in apportioning responsibilities for program implementation.” The agreement also states that seats in the national legislature shall be provided for civil society representatives of women (Dayton and Kriesberg 2017). Prior to the negotiation processes seat in the national legislature was monopolized by men so for this social provision as outlined in the Golden Tulip Declaration by women to find its way in the final agreement suggest women influenced the negotiation process.

The evidence observed, presents two important support for prior studies. First, it conforms with earlier research which argued that women positively impact peace agreements to include social provisions (Aggestam 2016; Jobarteh 2018) as women place high priority to social policies specific to women’s needs (Wängerud 2000; Hillbert 2017). Second, this evidence also affirms previous research which postulates that the expectations of others, give women participants at the table the momentum to shape the content of peace agreements by pushing for more social provisions, including gender equality in the peace agreements (Jobarteh 2018).

Liberian women generally and the women in these two groups strongly collaborated and coordinated in the search for peace prior to and during the negotiation process. For example, when WIPNET was later invited officially to participate at the negotiation table as observers they declined the offer on the

40 basis that they could be more effective working from outside at the grassroots level, and that they did not also want to compete with women in the MARWOPNET at the negotiation table (Gbowee 2011). Subsequently, the agency demonstrated by women shaped the negotiation process such that women in MARWOPNET were offered the opportunity to handle the Gender Ministry (ibid). This suggests that women demonstrated agency at the table, changing the narratives about women as not only the victims of warfare but partners in development.

The Liberian women in general terms impacted the scope of the peace process and the outcome of the agreement in three important ways. First, women affected the content of the negotiation process through their prior experiences of peace activism at the grassroots level. Second, women participants affected the negotiation process through an agency of influence at the table underpinned by the expectations of the grassroots people. This influence caused the framers of the peace agreement to buy, for instance the Ministry of Gender in the final agreement (IPTI 2018). Third, the task given to the women to handle the Gender Ministry suggest that women are considered as partners and not just victims of war. This is what the rights-based argument underpinning this study postulates. Fourth, women were not just represented, but also made their voices heard, this evidence strengthens the study’s conceptual definition of participation.

Based on the evidence from the analysis we see that Liberian women demonstrated an agency at the negotiation table which then widen the scope of the peace agreement to include more social provisions such as the Gender Ministry in the agreement. In all, 7 sub-provisions under social compared to the 4 sub-provisions under security were outlined in the agreement. The emanating evidence suggests that the agency for being at the peace table offer “windows of opportunity” for women to demand change and social transformation (Melander 2005; Ellerby 2013; Anderson 2016; Krause et al 2018). These findings support the hypothesis set.

6.1.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Liberia This study hypothesized that if women participate in peace negotiations, the agreement is likely to be broadened with more social provisions as women brings an extensive set of issues to the negotiation table. The peace agreement on Liberia as observed was concluded with the participation of women in the negotiation process, which in this study is considered more holistic with a significant amount of social provisions. Importantly, evidence from the analysis of the agreement does show women demonstrated an agency in the negotiation table which contributed to the widening of the scope of

41 the agreement to include more provisions. Thus, this supports the study’s hypothesis. A major part of the negotiation process in the Liberian case is the contribution of women-centered civil society groups.

The women created a broader scope of inter-religious network to have a leverage of a common aspiration in the attempt to make and build peace. Prior studies have suggested that networks between women across ethnic and religious borders have a positive impact on achieving successful peacebuilding because women’s networks are able to bridge the divide even in situations where leaders have deemed conflict resolution futile in the face of so-called intractable ethnic hatreds (Hunt and Posa 2001). The Golden Tulip Declaration was a parallel peace negotiation effort that influenced the main peace negotiations such that some of the demands outlined gained attention. For instance, it was included in the peace agreement that seats in the national legislature shall be provided for civil society representatives (Saiget 2016; Dayton and Kriesberg 2017). Finally, for the women to even be invited to participate in the negotiation process first of all was a great accomplishment of women’s groups in Liberia as well as the task given to handle the Gender Ministry suggest women as not just victims of war, but also agents of change and actors of peace and development. This observation affirms the rights-based perspective underpinning this study.

6.2 Sierra Leone: The Agency of Women at the Table Women’s efforts created a suitable platform for the UN and the International Community to broker the final peace agreement in Sierra Leone. At the peace table, the government delegation of 10 members included two women, and the rebel delegation of 10 members also included a woman as well as a 13-member cross-section of secular CSOs – comprised some women, including the Women’s Forum in the negotiation process (Dyfan 2003). The inclusion of these numbers of women as well as the civil society women’s groups in the negotiation process both as delegates and observers suggests that a better understanding of the conflict and a novel perspective was required in the peace process. Already argued, the inclusion of civil society women’s groups is more likely to broaden the scope of the negotiations, as it increases the chances for women to present new perspectives, express women’s specific experiences and social needs (Anderline 2007; Ellerby 2013). So, women and civil society women participants in the Sierra Leone peace negotiations were expected to bring novel perspectives which in turn would broaden the scope of the negotiation process to include more social provisions.

The women in SLWMP on the theme: ‘Try Peace to End This Senseless War’ organized a series of collective nonviolent campaigns, appeals, peace marches, rallies, symbolic Muslim and Christian prayer

42 meetings and mobilized women from diverse backgrounds throughout the country to pressure the government and the RUF for a negotiated settlement. For instance, the Women’s National Salvation Front nonviolently confronted the RUF and exposed their numerous atrocities on Radio Democracy. Anti-rebel debates were aired on Radio Democracy, which certainly, kept the women’s groups united by their opposition to the violence and called for peace. These efforts yielded results as they encouraged ECOWAS to intervene; an intervention that resulted significantly in the restoration of democracy leading to the peace negotiations (Bangalie 2011).

Civil society organizations, including women’s groups held numerous meetings with both the Government and the rebel RUF delegations as well as with the international delegates and observers during the negotiations (Dyfan 2003). Similarly, these groups managed to organize a “one family” meeting of all Sierra Leoneans at the negotiation table to negotiate the issues openly in facing the country and to chart the way forward (ibid). More so, based on the agency for being at the table women shaped the negotiations through informal lobbying and consultation on the periphery of the negotiations. For example, towards the end of the negotiations the RUF unexpectedly backtracked provocatively on previously agreed ideas, insisting on such major changes that many participants thought the continuation of the negotiations was in danger (Hayner 2007). In response, the women and several civil society observers invited critical RUF leaders outside the peace table, and strongly confronted them to retract their afterthought position and consider other social intervention programs in the agreement. This confrontation almost resulted in a physical fight, but it was an effective strategy: the next day at the negotiation table, RUF withdrew its position and agreed to continue with the talks and subsequently accepted an education reform (free education), a key social provision that women have continually advocated (Hayner 2007). This remark confirms earlier suggestions that women’s contributions in civil society at the grassroots level and as negotiating delegates for belligerent parties can shape the scope of the negotiation processes towards social necessities (Nakaya 2004 and Anderline 2007).

Women were able to make good use of the agency at the table by influencing the negotiation process through persistent advocacy for gender equal society, women’s rights and protection and other important social needs. Through insistent attempts the framers of the peace agreement bought more social provisions, including health and women’s issues in the final agreement. Part 5, Art XXXI of the final agreement stipulated that “The Government shall provide free compulsory education for the first nine years of schooling (Basic Education) and shall endeavor to provide free schooling for a further

43 three years. The Government shall also endeavor to provide affordable primary healthcare throughout the country.” Further, Part 5, Art XXVIII, 2., maintained that “Given that women have been particularly victimized during the war, special attention shall be accorded to their needs and potentials in formulating and implementing national rehabilitation, reconstruction and development programs, to enable them to play a central role in the moral, social and physical reconstruction of Sierra Leone.”

The recognition in the agreement that special care shall be accorded to women’s needs and potentials in formulating and implementing national rehabilitation, reconstruction and development programs, so that women are enabled to play a central role in the moral, social and physical reconstruction of Sierra Leone suggest that women are agents of change, but not just victims of war. This observation also supports the rights-based argument that underpins this study. Further, the inclusion of these social provisions suggests that women were not just represented, but also the agency for being at the table was a leverage to make their voices heard. This account also reinforces the conceptual definition of participation that guides this study. Women’s influence at the negotiation table could also be attributed to prior experiences in the Bintumani I, II conferences as learn in the previous section. Importantly, the inclusion of 7 sub-provisions under social in the Sierra Leone agreement proposes that women brought a better understanding of the conflict and social needs to the peace table.

This evidence supports prior submission that women regularly bring a better understanding of the root causes of armed conflict to the peace table as women speak effectively about the impact of violence on daily life, relating the experiences and voices of ordinary people (Anderlini 2004). Based on the evidence emanating from the analysis we observe that Sierra Leonean women did demonstrate an agency at the negotiation table which then broadened the scope of the final agreement to include more social provisions. These findings strongly support the hypothesis set.

6.2.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Sierra Leone This study hypothesized that the participation of women is expected to broaden the scope of the agreement to include more social provisions as women brings a wider set of issues to the peace table. The peace agreement on Sierra Leone was reached with the participation of women at the negotiation table and considered in this study as more holistic with a substantial number of social provisions. Evidence stemming from the analysis shows women proved an agency at the negotiation table which contributed to the broadening of the scope of the agreement to include more provisions. This evidence strongly supports the study’s hypothesis. Additionally, a key aspect of the negotiation process

44 in the Sierra Leone case is the peace commitment of civil society women’s groups. The effort in organizing a “one family” meeting of all Sierra Leonean at the peace negotiation table to negotiate the issues openly in facing the country and to plan the way forward was significant in the negotiation process (Dyfan 2003). This effort created an open forum for transparency and accountability in the peace process.

Further, the formal and informal negotiation strategies adopted by women created an opportunity for a common ground peace approach where at both the micro and macro levels women’s voice was heard. The invitation to the key RUF leaders outside the negotiation room by the civil society women’s groups and strongly challenging RUF to retract their afterthought position was essential to the outcome of the agreement. Through the agency demonstrated by women the RUF withdrew its position and agreed to continue with the talks and afterward decided for free education social policy in the agreement, which women have repeatedly supported (Hayner 2007). The impact of women’s civil society groups in the Sierra Leone agreement supports earlier research which argues that women’s contributions as negotiating delegates for belligerent parties can impact peace process, and the inclusion of women-focused CSOs increase the likelihoods for women to express women’s specific experiences and social needs (Anderline 2007; Nilsson 2012; Ellerby 2013).

6.3 Côte D’Ivoire: Conditions That May Shape the Scope of The Agreement The Côte d’Ivoire agreement which was signed without women or civil society women’s groups in the negotiation process is seen as partial with more security provisions. This reflection shows support for earlier research that suggests that a negotiated settlement reached by all-male peace actors are often security focused, making it difficult for social provisions to find space in the agreements (Janine 2010; Pospisil and Bell 2018). However, the Côte d’Ivoire agreement included 3 sub-provisions under social (media reforms, human rights and amnesty) even though there was no agency of women at the peace table. The social provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire agreement are vital for the transformation and reconstruction of any postwar country. An acknowledgment of human rights issues as central to the development of the postwar country by the male warring actors is highly promising because human rights should be treated nonnegotiable in countries recovering from war damage (Waldron 2012).

Human rights issues in general appear to be a difficult topic in peace negotiations. They are often unpopular subject at the peace table because male combatants may feel that they have too much to lose from giving rights and power to other actors, especially women (Jobarteh 2018). This suggests

45 that male combatants at the peace table are unlikely to push for social provisions around gender equality or human rights in the agreement. Yet, the Côte d’Ivoire agreement included human rights social provision without the presence of women at the negotiation table. Women-centered civil society groups in peace processes usually have a substantial amount of information about women and so are particularly crucial for pushing for social provisions that address gender inequality and human rights issues in the agreement (Krause et al 2018). Consequently, like women, male belligerents may also advocate for women’s rights, especially if they have an extensive knowledge about women’s complex issues. Except for knowledge, it takes a man with great confidence that is tough enough to stand up for his possibly unpopular believes (Jobarteh 2018).

It could be inferred that the inclusion of human rights in the agreement suggests the warring actors had some level of knowledge about human rights. This proposes that comprehensive knowledge and information about human rights and women’s issues could shape the content of peace agreements with or without the presence of women at the table. Although there are more than a few reasons why women are more likely to advocate for social provisions around women’s rights, gender equality and human rights, it does not mean that such issues could not be pushed by men. Rather, men, just like women, need to have a prior idea about the problems facing women as well as vital knowledge about human rights in order to push for social provisions around women’s issues in the agreement (ibid).

Further, the inclusion of the social provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire agreement unpacks two essential nuances. First, it provides an important opportunity to rethink the functional claim, which argues as though unlike women, men were only militarily focused or socially insensitive. Male belligerent actors may also care for the social protection and respect of women, especially if they have considerable knowledge about women’s issues (Jobarteh 2018). Second, one may argue that social provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire agreement were not given a priority because they are not outlined in the main content of the agreement but annexed. Though this could be a legitimate remark, it is still imperative to recognize the efforts of the male warring actors to include the social provisions in the final agreements. The structure of peace agreement is less relevant, but the implementation of the provisions is what matters because each type of agreement has a distinct purpose and serves a value towards building positive momentum for a final settlement (Yawanarajah and Ouellet 2003).

Moreover, what might have also shaped the Côte d’Ivoire agreement to include more security provisions and less social provisions could be explained by other factors. The context of the conflict

46 is a possible explanatory factor. Based on conflict duration some male peace negotiators may support security provisions while women may advocate for social provisions and vice versa. The Côte d’Ivoire conflict which lasted for about six months is seen in this study as short duration war. Based on the context of the conflict the male warring actors considered security agenda as a topmost priority, expected could prevent the conflict from becoming protracted. Consequently, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR), and security sector reform (SSR) were considered in the agreement as key provisions for the consolidation of the state’s monopoly of force to uphold the rule of law in the post war country (McFate 2010).

The SSR was anticipated could lead to a professional and accountable national police and military services that could ensure human security are safeguarded so the people are safe to embark on their daily socioeconomic activities. The SSR was given an extreme priority expected to help prevent ex- combatants from becoming insurgents or joining criminal gangs (McFate 2010). Similarly, the inclusion of the DDR program in the agreement was suggested might shifts ex-combatants into the new security forces, where they no longer threaten the state’s monopoly of force, and remove fear and panic and build trust in the country by reducing the probable threat to peace such as proliferation of weapons so that people can carry on their daily social and economic activities (McFate 2010). Under this condition, civilians are largely free from persistent fear of grave threats to physical safety, including national and host nation leaders, international aid workers, returnees, women, and children (United States Institute of Peace (USIP) 2020).

The Côte d’Ivoire agreement does suggest that grounded on the duration of the conflict, securitization approach was considered the immediate solution to help transform the country. Securitization agenda is a key concern in negotiating peace process, since security arrangements are particularly important for safeguarded citizens, including women from all forms of physical threats and violence that affects all aspects of their lives (Pospisil and Bell 2018). Without the security aspects of peace being achieved first in postwar countries, social aspect of peace, including women’s protection is highly impossible (Lee et al 2016). Unless and until physical security can be guaranteed, other forms of security are very difficult to achieve (Pospisil and Bell 2018).

The evidence from the analysis of the Côte d’Ivoire agreement suggest that the agreement was security focused not because women or civil society women’s groups were not at the peace table or because the male peace actors were socially insensitive, but based on the context of the conflict security

47 approach was anticipated could help prevent the war from becoming protracted. After all, more representative forms of civil society participation do not necessarily translate into actual influence over the peace process (Aulin 2019), and the inclusion of too many actors can thwart negotiations and may even avert an agreement from being concluded in the first place (Nilsson 2012). At worst, bringing in unarmed actors like women’s groups to the peace table may involve extra veto players, which can make it more difficult to arrive at an agreement (Cunningham 2007).

6.3.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Côte d’Ivoire This study hypothesized that if women participate in peace agreement is likely to broaden with more social provisions as women brings an inclusive set of issues to the peace table. The analysis of the Côte d’Ivoire case shows the agreement was reached without the participation of women to prove an agency proposed can broaden the scope of the agreement to have more social provisions. In effect, the Côte d’Ivoire agreement appears less holistic with more security arrangements. This observation shows support for previous studies proposing that state-centric male dominated peacemaking emphasizes on security peace, stressing on disarming combatants as the ultimate approach to terminate wars (Lee et al 2016; Pospisil and Bell 2018).

Further analysis suggests that the inclusion of provisions in peace agreements, either social or security is not only dependent on the presence or absence of women or women-focused civil society, but also other factors like the context of the conflict. If that was the case, then social provisions were not expected to be included in the Côte d’Ivoire agreement where there was no agency of women at the peace table. Rather, the context of Côte d’Ivoire war may have informed the male warring actors to press on for security agenda suggested could prevent the conflict from becoming protracted, and to consolidate the state’s monopoly of force to uphold the rule of law.

6.4 Niger: Conditions That May Shape the Scope of The Agreement Security is a key concern in negotiating peace and a primary focus of male warring actors in peace processes (Pospisil and Bell 2018). Peace negotiations monopolized by male belligerents are ‘partial’ towards security agenda (ibid). The assumption is that male-centered peace negotiations are expected to be security focused. In the analysis of the Niger agreement, we observed this assumption to be valid. The Niger agreement in which women were not invited to the peace table in effect was security centered. Further, prior research suggests that peace negotiation without the inclusion of women and civil society women’s groups is more likely to exclude social provisions because these are issues that

48 are usually raised by women, which in turn broadens the scope of the agreement (Anderline 2007; Ellerby 2013). Going by this assumption, the Niger agreement was expected to overlook social provisions. Yet, the agreement still included some social provisions, although there was no agency of women. The Niger agreement included 3 social provisions (reconciliation, amnesty, and cultural protection) considered as important for the rebuilding of any country recovering from war devastations.

Some of the important issues outlined under the social provisions in the Niger agreement includes the fact that there would be a rehabilitation of existing health infrastructures, reconstruction and equipment of new health centers, creation of institutions of higher education in the Northern regions as well as the creation of cultural centers and regional museums to promote the image of culture, history and oral traditions without downplaying the multiplying cultural and sportive exchanges between all regions (Clause 15, p. 2 and Clause 22c).

To analyze further, the reference to health social issues in the Niger agreement (Clause 22c. 1) uncovers two crucial issues. First, this evidence shows that some male belligerent actors are also concerned about the health wellbeing of all persons in countries that are recovering from war devastations. This remark is contrary to what the so-called functional thinkers would want us to believe women are the only socially sensitive people in society. Second, the account subjects the rights-based proponents’ arguments also to further scrutiny. The health social provision in the Niger agreement confirms that some male combatants do acknowledge that a smaller number of civilian men and boys also suffers diverse forms of wartime sexual violence. So, just like women and girls, noncombatant men and boys would also need access to healthcare service to overcome the war induced health challenges. So, like women, some men also care about the social protection of all persons in war and postwar areas (Jobarteh 2018). As uncovered, the inclusion of social provisions in the Niger agreement by the male warring actors could be explained by other factors discussed further below.

An analysis of the preceding accounts suggests the inclusion of provisions in peace agreements is not only shaped by the presence or absence of women, but also other external influence. The context of the war in terms of the time period could be a possible explanation. It is possible in the context of the conflict to define or prescribe the type of provisions expected to end the conflict and ensure postwar transformation. If we analyze the duration of the Niger conflict, starting from the onset up to the period the agreement was finally signed, the emanating evidence does offer a vivid reflection that

49 proposes a connection between the duration of the war and the inclusion of more security provisions in the agreement. The Niger war lasted for 4 years and based on the duration of the war the male warring actors included more security provisions suggested could prevent the conflict from becoming intractable. The framers of the agreement were more interested in substantial security arrangements to first stop the conflict (McFate 2010; Pospisil and Bell 2018). The armed actors at the peace table were committed to ‘first stop the fighting’ by adopting the security approach in the agreement between military actors, with other issues to be dealt with subsequently (Pospisil and Bell 2018).

Parties to the conflict strongly stressed on DDR/SSR security arrangements in the Niger agreement as the primary provisions that could help avoid conflict relapse and solidify postwar peace in the country. Under the DDR program, the parties agreed that the special peace committee would supervise the implementation of the operations of disarmament, integration, demobilization and the recuperation of all arms, munitions and material of war. This proposes that the male warring actors assumed the DDR security arrangement could ensure civilians are free from the threats to safety (USIP 2020). Besides, the SSR program was given a serious attention anticipated could contribute to the process of preventing former combatants from becoming insurgents and making it unattractive to (re)joining criminal gangs (McFate 2010). In addition, the SSR/DDR programs in the agreement were expected to first stop the fight, making it possible for the creation of social programs in the zone affected by the war to follow (Pospisil and Bell 2018).

Evidence from the analysis of the Niger agreement suggest that based on the context of the conflict the agreement was shaped towards security agenda as the surest attempt to prevent the conflict from reversion and not because women were not invited to the peace table. After all, the agreement, even included some important social provisions in the absence of women. Even the participation of several unarmed actors, including women’s groups can complicate the negotiation process and may prevent an agreement from being reached in the first place (Nilsson 2012). The efficacy of the agreement is what is key and not the inclusion of too many actors. The inclusion of several civil society actors, including women’s groups may negatively affect the efficacy of the agreement by shrinking the set of potential concessions and making it harder to convince the warring actors to stop fighting and implement the peace settlement (Cunningham 2007; Jarstad and Sisk 2008; Nilsson 2012). So, it is suggestive in the analysis that the context of the war may have also shaped the Niger agreement towards a securitization approach.

50

6.4.1 Conclusions: Case Analysis of Niger This study hypothesized that if women participate in peace negotiations there is an increased chance for the agreement to broaden with more social provisions as women bring a general set of issues to the peace table. Evidence emanating from the analysis does show the Niger agreement without women at the table appeared less holistic, but security centered. This remark support prior research arguing that male belligerents are more likely to push for security arrangements in peace agreements (Pospisil and Bell 2018).

Further analysis reveals the Niger agreement included some social provisions. This suggests that the inclusion of provisions in peace agreements, either social or security is not solely dependent on the presence or absence of women at the peace table. If that was the case, social provisions should not have appeared in an agreement negotiated by only male combatants. Rather, the context of the conflict is a possible condition that may shape the content of peace agreements. Hence, based on the context of the conflict security agenda was the focus of the framers of the Niger agreement; suggested could end the conflict and promote the security of all persons throughout the country.

7 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS In this section the cases will be compared to further unpack nuances relating to the inclusion of provisions outlined in the four peace agreements. The aim of this comparison is also to analyze the finding’s impacts on the hypothesis set and, on the theories, presented already in this research.

7.1 Between-cases Comparison Prior research suggests that the inclusion of civil society organizations, including women’s groups in peace negotiations makes it more likely to broaden the scope of the agreements and make the peace durable (Anderline 2007; Nilsson 2012; Ellerby 2013). The Liberia and Sierra Leone negotiations in which women and civil society women’s groups participated, the agreements appeared more holistic. So, it is possible to think that the inclusion of women did shape the scope of the agreements to become more holistic with 24 out of the 39 total provisions in the four agreements. Further, we observe that more than half (15) of the total provisions (24) in the Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements constitute social provisions. This is an evidence that gives support to the theoretical argument that the agency of women at the negotiation table gives them the leverage to bring a holistic set of issues, which in turn broadens the scope of the agreement to become comprehensive with more social arrangements. This observation also supports prior research suggesting that women may push for social policies because

51 women are functionally pro-peace and pro-democratic who shows negative attitudes towards security investment and war arrangements than men (Phillips 1998; Paffenholz and Ross 2015; Melander 2016). These results support the study’s hypothesis and reinforces the theoretical arguments.

However, although Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements appear security centered and not holistic enough such that women were absent at the negotiation table, these agreements still included some social provisions. In all, Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements contain 15 out of the 39 total provisions in the four agreements. Further, we observe that 6 out of the 15 provisions constitute social provisions. This observation is contrary to what prior research suggests that male produced agreements are partial and/or less likely to include social arrangements (Janine 2010; Pospisil and Bell 2018). Going by these assumptions, we should not have observed the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements included some social arrangements. This remark makes the assumptions doubtable and requires further investigation.

Additionally, evidence about the inclusion of social provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements unpacks two important nuances. First, it provides an imperative chance to reassess the functional school of thought, which argues as though unlike women, men are always socially unresponsive. Second, per the study’s hypothesis, the results show an interplay of other factors than just the presence or absence of women that shapes the content of the peace agreements. In the sections that follows I have provided some possible explanations for this variation.

7.2 Reflections on The Key Findings Firstly, this research is a small-N study cases comparison. The small-N design permitted an analysis and comparison of the content of the four peace agreements, and an in-depth case analysis of the four agreements. These comparisons helped to establish the causal mechanism resulting in the inclusion of more social provisions in peace agreements.

This study relied on both primary and secondary sources. To increase authenticity by reducing potential biases or exaggerations associated with secondary source I applied triangulation to evaluate the source of the research material. Information, particularly on Côte d’Ivoire and Niger cases were hard to find, contrary to Liberia and Sierra Leone which has been studied widely.

Secondly, this study selected most similar cases from the West Africa subregion. Cases with a variation on the IV, which is ‘women’s participation’ was selected for this study. Having cases with variation in the IV offered the chance to study whether a change in the IV causes a change in the DV which is

52

‘social provisions.’ Despite the strength, it is key to note that most similar systems design is likely to suffer from the problem of ‘many variables, small number of cases’ (Lijphart 1971, p. 685). A key reason for choosing these four most similar cases is the motivation to keep constant as many extraneous variables as possible (Bartolini 1993). Though most similar cases were selected still there are a few differences between the cases that the research could not control for. These variations are primarily the scope of the agreement, the duration of the negotiation processes, and the conflict duration. These observations are further discussed below.

First, it is crucial to note that if there is enough time of the negotiation process, there is a possibility that an attainment of a broader scope of agreements will increase because participants would have the ample time to establish their positions, interests and needs in the negotiation process. Thus, if the peace process is kept stable and long enough by the relative accommodation of the extremists’ demands a resultant coalition can be strong enough to achieve a comprehensive and stable agreement (Licklider 2003). The analysis of this research shows that the peace agreements on Liberia (3 months) and Sierra Leone (3 months) reached over a long duration of the negotiation process appeared comprehensive and holistic in scope, containing more provisions (24) in general and social provisions (15) in particular, while the peace agreements on Côte d’Ivoire (9 days) and Niger (1month) concluded over a short duration of the negotiation process appeared less holistic, covering less provisions (15) in general and social provisions (6) in particular. This evidence suggests that peace negotiation over a long duration might increase the possibility that the scope of the agreement would become broader with more social provisions and not necessarily about whether women participated or not. Therefore, this may perhaps need to be observed as a confounding factor when investigating the scope of provisions in peace agreements. However, long duration of the peace negotiation process may also suggest reluctance and struggle for the conflict parties to find a level ground for successful peacemaking (Badran 2014).

Second, if we analyze the duration and context of the intrastate conflicts for all the four cases, beginning with the conflict’s onset up to the time the agreements were finally signed, the emanating evidence does suggest a clear thought that proposes a connection between the context of conflicts and duration, and the inclusion of more social provisions in the peace agreements. There are 24 social and security provisions included in the Liberia (14 years of war) and Sierra Leone (10 years of war) agreements which appears to be a long duration wars compared to the 15 social and security provisions in the Côte d’Ivoire (6 months of war) and Niger (4 years of war) agreements which looks short

53 duration wars based on this study. Liberia and Sierra Leone agreements which followed a long duration of wars all together had 15 social provisions compared to the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger peace agreements which ensued after a short duration of the wars, resulting in 6 social provisions.

Meanwhile, it has been suggested that long duration wars are more likely to produce a less holistic or a limited in scope agreement because of the probable refusal of the warring parties to accept others’ long entrenched positions or demands (Badran 2014; Hillbert 2017). Yet, the evidence shows otherwise. Instead, the Liberian and Sierra Leonean conflicts examined in this study have been protracted and costly wars, yet these agreements show a broadened scope with a significant number of social provisions outlined. So, based on Badran (2014) and Hillbert’s (2017) arguments, we should have seen the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements rather more broaden with a significant number of provisions outlined. As the opposite is seen, Badran and Hillbert’s arguments become questionable.

Further, earlier studies argue that the participation of civil society groups, including women’s associations in peace negotiations is expected to widen the scope of the agreements, as it increases the likelihoods for women being at the table to express women’s aspirations (Anderline 2007; Ellerby 2013). Moreover, it is maintained that women have a positive impact on peace durability and outcomes by insisting on the inclusion of social provisions in the agreements (Nilsson 2012; Aggestam 2016; Jobarteh 2018), and that women award high priority to social policies and are expected to push for social provisions specific to women’s needs at the peace table (Wängerud 2000; Hillbert 2017). These arguments suggest that the absence of women at the table is likely to see agreements excluded social provisions as there is no agency of women to advocate for them.

Nevertheless, the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements in which women or significant civil society women’s groups did not participate in the negotiation processes, the male belligerents still included some social provisions. This reflection is also contrary to what some earlier studies have suggested that it is problematic for social provisions to find a space in peace agreements where the negotiation actors are typically men (Bell 2006; Janine 2010; Pospisil and Bell 2018). If this were the case, the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger agreements should not have included the social provisions. Taken together, the evidence from the analysis suggests that the inclusion of social provisions in both the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger peace agreements in which women were absent suggest a different explanation. The section that follows present the alternative explanations for this study.

54

7.3 Alternative Explanations and Extra Observation The analysis of this research suggests a significant support to the study’s hypothesis of women’s participation in peace negotiations having a positive effect on the inclusion of more social provisions in the final agreements. To contest the results further the research will now analyze two alternative explanations with two extra observations.

Firstly, there is a large body of scholarly work that attribute the comprehensiveness of peace agreements containing a significant number of provisions that includes the social issues of women to the participation of women’s CSOs in the peace negotiations (Anderline 2007; Nilsson 2012; Ellerby 2013). This situation arises because of an increased likelihood for women with an agency for being at the table to express women’s specific experiences and diverse social needs. Also, the participation of women is expected to broaden the scope of the agreement to cover more provisions because of the influence women have on the negotiations through support from the international community (Hillbert 2017). Particularly, civil society women’s groups at the peace table may advocate for social provisions such as social justice, human rights, gender equality or gender-based violence (GIZ 2012). In relation, Castillejo (2016) stress that women bring key social issues to the peacebuilding agenda, that men seem to overlook. Based on these arguments this study assumes the participation of women at the peace table is expected to broaden the scope of the agreement to include more social provisions.

However, it is equally possible that peace negotiations without women’s participation in the negotiation process would have some provisions on social issues. Importantly, in such conditions, the inclusion of social provisions in the peace agreements is not only dependent on the participation of women or women-centered civil society organization, but the individual peace actors’ will. After all, more representative forms of civil society participation do not necessarily translate into actual influence over the peace process (Aulin 2019). The same way the participation of women’s organizations in peace negotiations is not a promise for higher quality peace agreements (O’Reilly, Súlleabháin and Paffenholz 2015). Further, even if the women’s civil society groups represent women or as a delegate at the negotiation table could voice the concerns of local women’s groups, it does not automatically mean that all individual women will also voice concerns other than the concerns voiced by men in the peace negotiations (Jobarteh 2018).

Instead, outcomes of participation are affected by a wide set of factors including the actor’s will. For instance, depending on the individual peace actors’ will, women in some areas may push for more

55 social provisions while others in a different setting might advocate for more security provisions, and the same for men. In the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger cases, the actors in the peace negotiations were all men, yet the agreements included some social provisions on human rights, media reforms, sociocultural protection and amnesty. Two key remarks can be identified here. First, the assumption that unlike men, women or women’s civil society group would impact the content of the negotiations by consistently pushing for social provisions in the peace agreement is doubtful. Second, the expectation that women participants may consistently push for more social provisions has somewhat been ruled out because the likelihood that the agreements would include more provisions in general and social provisions, in particular may be informed by the individual actors’ will other than the presence or absence of women. After all, the so-called feminist incline men and those with knowledge about gender inequalities and human rights may also advocate for gender equality social provision and other social needs of women (Jobarteh 2018). Therefore, the inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements could also be explained as influenced by the peace actors’ will.

Secondly, the inclusion or exclusion of certain provisions in peace agreements may depend on the context and duration of the conflict. It is practical to expect that conflict with longer durations are likely to include more social provisions because the longevity of the conflicts may have caused severe destructions to social fabric: social amenities and social services like hospitals, schools, housing or water. Hence, social provisions may be highly required. Also, it is realistic to think that conflicts with short duration are likely to include more security provisions than social because the short duration of the conflict may not have led to large scale destruction on existing social fabric and that national security would require to prevent the conflict from becoming protracted. Previous research suggests that if the parties have been fighting a protracted and costly wars for a specific cause, they would be less eager to negotiate a solution on this cause with the other party (Badran 2014). In effect, this unwillingness might spill over and include not just the specific cause, but also other issues likely to result in a limited provision in a peace agreement (Hillbert 2017).

Basically, this suggests that wars fought over short durations are likely to be security centered because of the absence of deep-rooted demands which could affect the scope of the agreement from becoming holistic with more provisions. We observed this scenario in the Côte d’Ivoire (6 months) and Niger (4 years) cases. We found that these two conflicts were short duration wars and the male combatants at the peace table included more provisions on security based on the context of the conflicts. However, we observe a different pattern in the Liberia (14 years) and Sierra Leone (10 years) cases. These two

56 countries witnessed a longer duration of war devastations and included more provisions, especially on social in the agreements. What could explain this variation? A possible answer to this puzzle is that what shapes the scope of provisions in agreements depends on several factors (Dam‐de Jong 2019).

Thirdly, an extra observation, relating to the evidence of the research’s analysis, is the duration of the negotiation process. It is critical to underscore that if there is enough time for the peace negotiation process, there is a likelihood that a larger scope of provisions in peace agreements will increase because participants would have the enough time to establish their positions, interests and needs at the table. The analysis of this research shows that the peace agreements on Liberia (3 months duration) and Sierra Leone (3 months duration), which were reached over long duration of the negotiation process are holistic in scope as they contained more provisions in general and social provision in particular, while the peace agreements on Côte d’Ivoire (9 days duration) and Niger (1 month duration) concluded over a short duration of the negotiation process are less holistic and limited in scope in general and social provisions in particular.

This evidence suggests that peace negotiation process over a long duration might increase the likelihood that the scope of the agreement would become broader with more social provisions. Further, longer duration of negotiations is vital to ensure a successful peace negotiation process, it gives ample time as potential peace spoilers are likely to be correctly diagnosed in the course of the peacemaking process (Stedman 1997). However, we should also be mindful that longer duration of the peace negotiation process may suggest unwillingness of the belligerent parties to negotiate for peace which its itself is a risk to the success of the peace process (Badran 2014).

Final observation is that it is important to acknowledge that international mediators may also influence the inclusion of social provisions such as gender equality, women’s rights, education reform and children’s rights among others. External mediators are powerful agents who can introduce their own agendas and affect negotiations in their desired direction (Hillbert 2017). The mediator’s ability to build a strong relationship and gain trust of the combatant parties increases the chances of influencing the mediation outcome by making the agreement comprehensive with social provisions like gender equality or women’s rights and issues (Folke Bernadotte Academy and Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2018; Jobarteh 2018).

57

8 CONCLUSIONS A substantial amount of time has been dedicated to examining the extent to which social or security provisions are recognized in agreement sets to end armed conflict by belligerent actors. While some scholars claim that an all-male negotiated agreements are security focused, others are of the opinion that if women or civil society women’s organizations, participates at the negotiation table it makes the agreements comprehensive with social provisions. Yet, our understanding about why social provisions are shaped by the participation of women is still limited. This study aimed to contribute to the understanding of women’s special input in peace negotiations by addressing the following research question: Is the inclusion of social provisions in peace agreements influenced by the participation of women, and if so, why? The theoretical framework used to address this research puzzle centered on theories on women’s participation and the agency that women demonstrate at the peace table. These theories served as the basis for the hypothesis which expected the agency that women get for being at the peace table broadens the scope of the negotiation to become more holistic, thus leading to more social provisions in the agreements.

The evidence emanating from the research’s analysis suggests support for the hypothesis set for this study. The research makes the conclusion that women participants in peace negotiations might shape the scope of peace agreements to include more social provisions, while taking other influential conditions into consideration. For instance, the belligerent actor’ will may be an influential factor that also impacts the inclusion of provisions in peace agreements. This could be observed in the Côte d’Ivoire and Niger cases where social provisions were still included in the agreements negotiated by all-male actors – a sign that belligerent actor’ will is an influential factor.

The in-depth analysis of the negotiation processes on Liberia and Sierra Leone provided a greater understanding for establishing the research’s causal mechanism, thus, an agency at the peace table broadens the negotiation processes to include more social provisions. Although earlier studies have shown support for the causal mechanism, it is important to state that the research was based on context variations in the cases investigated, hence hard to draw a vivid support for this justification. Rather, women’s participation together with the context and duration of the conflict and the belligerent actor’ will are suggested to be essential conditions that shape the scope of peace agreements and the presence or absence of social provisions in the agreements.

58

Taken together, evidence stemming from this study reinforces previous research on the positive relationship between women’s participation and social provisions as well as the durability of peace (O’Reilly 2016; Hillbert 2017; Jobarteh 2018). Importantly, associating women to social provisions in peace agreements also strengthens the idea that peace and conflict are more than just security issues. As this study has not rated either of the provisions above the other it is imperative to state that both social and security provisions in peace agreements can play a complementary role in postwar peacebuilding. So, these provisions should be offered an equal attention during peace negotiations. Thus, security provisions in peace agreements can offer an enabling condition that allows social arrangements of peace to function. For example, a successful DDR/SSR can provide a secured environment for developing an efficient civil society. In a similar vein, remedying the social aspects that might trigger and/or prolong armed conflict is equally possible to avert security threats. Therefore, peace is not a one-or-the-other binary; it is comprised of a confection of security and social elements (Lee et al 2016).

It is instructive to add that the causal mechanism between women’s participation and the inclusion of more social provisions should be explored further, with respect to the likelihood of controlling for more complex confounding variables. Essentially, this research has contributed to the contemporary studies on women’s impact on the provisions outline in peace agreements by directing at likely explanations and ways to further explore the impact women participants might have on the content of peace agreements. There are several points of departure for further studies. First, future research may want to examine the comparison of agreements reached by an all-male, an all-female or gender- mixed team with the outcome of provisions outlined in the agreement. Second, if possible future research can explore the impact of women participants on the inclusion of all the six provisions stated in the PAM dataset and not just social and security provisions. The comparison should not necessarily be at the macro level, but also micro level studies would be interesting to uncover.

59

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aggestam, Karin and Svensson, Isak. 2018. Where are the Women in Peace Mediation? In Karin Aggestam and Ann Towns (eds) Gendering Diplomacy and International Negotiations. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 149–168.

Aggestam. Karin. 2016. “Genus, medling och fredsdiplomati”, in Krig/fred. RJ:s årsbok 2016/2017 217- 231, edited by Björkman, Jenny and Jarrick, Arne. Stockholm, Göteborg: Makadam förlag.

Ahearn, M. Laura. 2001. “Language and Agency.” Annual Review of Anthropology 30:109-137. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.109

Alaga, Ecoma. 2010. Challenges for Women in Peacebuilding in West Africa. AISA Policy Brief, Briefing 18.

Anckar, Carsten. 2008. “On the Applicability of the Most Similar Systems Design and the Most Different Systems Design in Comparative Research.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 11(5): 389-401, https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401552.

Anderline, N. Sanam. 2007. Women Building Peace: What They Do, Why It Matters. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Anderlini, N. Sanam. 2004. “Peace Negotiations and Agreements.” Inclusive Security, Sustainable Peace: A Toolkit for Advocacy and Action, p. 16-32. International Alert.

Anderson, J. Miriam. 2016. Windows of Opportunity: How Women Seize Peace Negotiations for Political Change. Oxford University Press, Oxford; New York.

Ashby, Phil. 2002. “Child Combatants: A Soldier's Perspective.” Lancet 360:11-12.

Aulin, Jenney. 2019. “Civil Society Inclusion in Peacebuilding: Who, How and so What?” Conciliation Resources, Issue 28:39-41.

Azar, Edward. 1990. The Management of Protracted Social Conflict: Theory and Cases. Aldershot: Darthmouth Publishing Company Limited.

Badran, Ramzi. 2014. “Intrastate Peace Agreements and The Durability of Peace.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 31(2):193-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894213501133

Bangalie, N. Florence. 2011. “An Examination of The Role of Women in Conflict Management: Sierra Leone a Case Study.” Master’s thesis, University of Malta.

Barnes, Catherine and Polzer, Tara. 2000. Sierra Leone Peace Process: Learning from The Past to Address Current Challenges. An Expert Seminar Report. https://reliefweb.int/report/sierra- leone/sierra-leone-peace-process-learning-past-address-current-challenges.

Bartolini, Stefano. 1993. “On Time and Comparative Research.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 5(2):131– 167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951692893005002001.

60

Bell, Christine and O’Rourke, Catherine. 2010. “Peace Agreements or Pieces of Paper: UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and Peace Negotiations and Agreements.” ICLQ (59):941-980. DOI:10.1017/S002058931000062X.

Bell, Christine. 2006. “Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status.” The American Journal of International Law 100(2):373-412.

Bjarnegård, Elin and Erik Melander. 2013. ‘Revisiting Representation: Communism, Women in Politics, and the Decline of Armed Conflict in East Asia’. International Interactions 39(4):558- 574. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2013.805132.

Boréus, Krisitina and Bergström, Göran. 2012. Textens mening och makt: metodbok i samhällsvetenkspalig text- och diskursanalys. 3rd edition. Poland: Dimograf.

Bowd, Richard and Chikwanha, B. Annie. 2010. “Understanding Africa’s Contemporary Conflicts: Origins, Challenges and Peacebuilding.” Institute for Security Studies Monograph 2010(173):281. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC48718.

Brecher, Michael. 2016. The World of Protracted Conflicts. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books

Bromley, B. Dennis. 1990. “Academic Contributions to Psychological Counselling: I A Philosophy of Science for The Study of Individual Cases.” Counselling Psychology Quarterly 3(3): 299-307. DOI: 10.1080/09515079008254261.

Brosché, Johan. 2014. “Masters of War. The Role of Elites in Sudan’s Communal Conflicts.” Report / Department of Peace and Conflict Research 102. 195 pp. Uppsala: Department of Peace and Conflict Research. ISBN 978-91-506-2381-9.

Brounéus, Karen. 2014. “The Women and Peace Hypothesis in Peacebuilding Settings: Attitudes of Women in the Wake of the Rwandan Genocide.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 40(1): 126-151. https://doi.org/10.1086/676918.

Byrne, Bridget. 1995. Gender, Conflict and Development. Volume I: Overview. BRIDGE Report No. 34. Brighton: IDS, University of Sussex.

Caprioli, Mary. 2000. “Gendered Conflict.” Journal of Peace Research 37(1):51–68. doi:10.1177/0022343300037001003.

Caprioli, Mary. 2003. Gender Equality and Civil Wars. CPR Working Papers. No. 8, Washington, DC: World Bank.

Carpenter, R. Charli. 2006. “Recognizing Gender-Based Violence Against Civilian Men and Boys in Conflict Situations.” Security Dialogue 37(1): 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010606064139.

Castillejo, Clare. 2016. “Women Political Leaders and Peacebuilding”. Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Center Report. Available at https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/6ccaf3f24b120b8004f0db2a767a9d c2.pdf. Accessed 1 April 2020.

61

Clinton, R. Hillary. 2011. “Keynote Address at the International Crisis Group’s ‘In Pursuit of Peace’ Award Dinner.” New York, December 16, 2011, available at. https://2009- 2017.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2011/12/178967.htm.Accessed4 April 2020

Cohen, K. Dara. 2013. “Female Combatants and the Perpetration of Violence: Wartime Rape in the Sierra Leone Civil War.” World Politics 65(3):383-415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887113000105.

Cornwall, Andrea. 2003. “Whose Voices? Whose Choices? Reflections on Gender and Participatory Development.” World Development 31 (8): 1325 -1342.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305- 750X(03)00086-X.

Cunningham, David E. (2007) Responding to Multi-Party Civil Wars: Designing Peace Processes that Make Peace More Likely. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association’s Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, August 30–September 2.

Dam‐de Jong, Daniëlla. 2019. “Building a Sustainable Peace: How Peace Processes Shape and are Shaped by the International Legal Framework for The Governance of Natural Resources.” Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law:1- 12. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12307

Dayton, W. Bruce and Kriesberg, Louis. 2017. Perspectives in Waging Conflicts Constructively: Cases, Concepts and Practices. Rowman and Littlefield.

Decalo, Sameul and Idrissa, Abdourahmane. 2012. Historical Dictionary of Niger. Historical Dictionaries of Africa. Scarecrow Press.

Downe‐Wambolt, R. N. Barbara. 1992. “Content Analysis: Method, Applications, and Issues.” Health Care for Women International 13(3): 313-321, https://doi.org/10.1080/07399339209516006

Dyfan, Isha. 2003. Peace Agreements as A Means for Promoting Gender Equality and Ensuring Participation of Women: A Framework Model Provisions. United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW). EGM/PEACE/2003/EP.5.https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/peace2003/repor ts/EP5Dyfan.PDF.

Elfversson, Emma. 2019. “The Political Conditions for Local Peacemaking: A Comparative Study of Communal Conflict Resolution in Kenya.” Comparative Political Studies 52(13-14): 2061-2096. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414019830734

Ellerby, Kara. 2013. “(En)gendered Security? The Complexities of Women’s Inclusion in Peace Processes.” International Interactions 39(4): 435-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2013.805130.

Ellerby, Kara. 2016. “A Seat at The Table Is Not Enough: Understanding Women’s Substantive Representation in Peace Processes.” Peacebuilding 4(20):136-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2016.1192240.

62

Ernstorfer, Anita. 2013. The Role of Social Services for Peacebuilding. Friend: Working Group on Peace and Development.https://www.frient.de/news/details/the-role-of-social-services-for- peacebuilding.

Folke Bernadotte Academy and the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 2018. “Swedish Women Mediation Network: Presentations of the network members.” www.fba.se accessed, 27 May 2020.

Fukuyama, Francis. 1998. “Women and the Evolution of World Politics.” Foreign Affairs 77(5):24-40. DOI: 10.2307/20049048.

Gardiner, K. Judith. ed. 1995. Provoking Agents: Gender and Agency in Theory and Practice. Urbana: Univ. Illinois Press.

Gberie, Lansana. 2005. A Dirty War in West Africa: The RUF And the Destruction of Sierra Leone. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Gbowee, Leymah. 2011. Mighty Be Our Powers: How Sisterhood, Prayer, and Sex Changed a Nation at War. New York: Beast Books.

George, L. Alexander and Bennett, Andrew. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England.

George, Nicole. 2018. WPS and Women’s Role in Conflict-Prevention: The Case of Bougainville. In Sara E. Davies and Jacqui True (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Women, Peace, and Security (pp. 475-488) New York, NY, United States: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190638276.013.64.

George, Stacia. 2018. Opinion: “Education as a Key to Solving conflicts.” Chemonics International. https://www.devex.com/news/sponsored/opinion-education-as-a-key-to-solving-conflicts- 92252.

Gerring, John. 2007. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. NY: Cambridge Univ. Press.

GIZ. 2012. Promoting Women’s Participation in Peace Negotiations and Peace Processes. Promoting Gender Equality and Women’s Rights. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Berlin.

Gizelis, Theodora-Ismene. 2009. “Gender Empowerment and the United Nations Peacebuilding.” Journal of Peace Research 46(4):505-523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343309334576.

Global Security. 2020. Liberia First Civil War 1989-1996. Alexandra VA: USA. Available at https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/liberia-1989.htm,Accessed5-04- 2020.

Golden Tulip Declaration. 2003. Golden Tulip Declaration of Liberian Women Attending the Peace Talks in Accra, Ghana 15 March 2003. Available at: https://www.peacewomen.org/sites/default/files/rep_goldentulipdeclarationliberianwomen peacetalks_representvariouslibwomensorg_2003_0.pdf. Date of retrieval: 16 April 2020.

63

Harrington, Mona. 1992. “What Exactly Is Wrong with the Liberal State as an Agent of Change?” In Gendered States: Feminist Revisions of International Relations Theory, edited by V. Spike Peterson, 65–82. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

Hayner, Priscilla. 2007. Negotiating Peace in Sierra Leone: Confronting the Justice Challenge. The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, Geneva. https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/55192/SierraLeoneReportrevise_1207.pdf

Hillbert, Sarah. 2017. “Female Mediators and the Comprehensiveness of Peace Agreements.” Master’s thesis, Uppsala University.

Höglund, Kristine and Öberg Magnus. 2011. Understanding Peace Research. Routledge. http://www.bokus.com/bok/9780415571975/understanding-peace-research/.

Höglund, Kristine. 2011. “Comparative Field Research in War-torn Societies.” In Understanding Peace Research, eds. K. Höglund and M. Öberg. London and New York NY: Routledge.

Höglund, Kristine. 2019. “Testimony Under Threat: Women’s Voices and The Pursuit of Justice in Post-War Sri Lanka.” Human Rights Review 20:361–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-019- 0549-3.

Hunt, Swanee and Posa, Cristina. 2001. “Women Waging Peace.” Foreign Policy 124(2001): 38-47. Web copy at http://www.tinyurl.com/yx8oje8w.

Inclusive Peace and Transition Initiative. 2018. Women in Peace and Transition Processes. IPTI Case Study Series. Graduate Institute, Geneva.

Issifu, A. Karim. 2015. The Role of African Women in Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: The Case of Rwanda. The Journal of Pan African Studies 8(9): 63-78.

Jabang, Sireh. 2016. “What Conditions Enhance Women’s Participation in Post Conflict Peacebuilding Processes Within International Efforts?” Master’s thesis, Uppsala University.

Janine, Davidson. 2010. Lifting the Fog of Peace: How Americans Learned to Fight Modern War. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Jaquette, Jane. 2003. “Feminism and the Challenges of the ‘Post-Cold War’ World.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 5(3):331-354, DOI: 10.1080/1461674032000122704

Jarstad, Anna and Sisk, D. Timothy. 2008. Introduction. In From War to Democracy, edited by Anna Jarstad and Timothy D. Sisk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jobarteh, I. Tengbjer. 2018. “Women’s Participation in Peace Negotiations and The Inclusion of Gender Provisions.” Master’s thesis, Uppsala University.

Johnson, B. Janet and Reynolds, T. Henry. 2012. Political Science Research Methods, 7th edition, London: SAGE Publications.

64

Joshi, Madhav and Darby, John. 2013. “Introducing the Peace Accords Matrix (PAM): A Database of Comprehensive Peace Agreements and Their Implementation, 1989-2007.” Peacebuilding 1(2):256-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2013.783259

Joshi, Madhav, Quinn, M. Jason and Regan, M. Patrick. 2015. “Annualized Implementation Data on Comprehensive Intrastate Peace Accords, 1989-2012.” Journal of Peace Research 52(4): 551-562. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343314567486.

Jusu-Sheriff, Yasmin. 2000. Sierra Leonean Women and the Peace Process. Accord Issue 9 Sierra Leone. London: Conciliation Resource. http://www.c-r.org/accord/sierra-leone/sierra-leonean- women-and-peace-process.

Karim, Sabrina, and Beardsley, Kyle. 2013. “Female Peacekeepers and Gender Balancing: Token Gestures or Informed Policymaking?” International Interactions 39(4):461-488. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2013.805131.

Krause, Jana, Krause, Werner and Bränfors, Piia. 2018. “Women’s Participation in Peace Negotiations and The Durability of Peace.” International Interactions 44(6):985-1016. DOI: 10.1080/03050629.2018.1492386.

Lee, SungYong, Ginty, M. Roger and Joshi, Madhav. 2016. “Social Peace Vs. Security Peace.” Global Governance 22(4):491-512. Accessed February 5, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/44861197.

Leonard-Barton, Dorothy. 1990. “A Dual Methodology for Case Studies: Synergistic Use of a Longitudinal Single Site with Replicated with Multiple Sites.” Organizational Science, 1(3): 248- 266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.248.

Licklider, Roy. 2003. Obstacles to Peace Settlements. In Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. R. (Ed.). Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict (pp.697- 718). Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace Press.

Lijphart, Arend. 1971. “Comparative Politics and The Comparative Method.” American Political Science Review 65(3):682–693. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1955513.

Long, Tony and Johnson, Martin. 2000. “Rigour, Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research.” Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing 4(1):30-37. https://doi.org/10.1054/cein.2000.0106.

Luintel, G. Gyanu. 2016. “Intrastate Armed Conflict and Peacebuilding in Nepal: An Assessment of the Political and Economic Agency of Women.” Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2747. Portland State University. DOI: 10.15760/etd.2748.

M’cleod, Herbert and Ganson, Brian. 2018. The Underlying Causes of Fragility and Instability in Sierra Leone. The LSE-Oxford Commission on State Fragility, Growth and Development. https://www.theigc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Sierra-Leone-Report-v2.pdf.

Manchanda, Rita. 2005. “Women's Agency in Peace Building: Gender Relations in Post-Conflict Reconstruction.” Economic and Political Weekly 40(44/45): 4737-4745.

65

Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes’.” The Journal of Politics 61 (3): 628–657.https://doi.org/10.2307/2647821.

Martin, Harriet. 2006. Kings of Peace, Pawns of War: The Untold Story of Peace-Making. London and New York: Continuum.

Mbwadzawo, Melody and Ngwazi, Nomfundo. 2013. “Mediating Peace in Africa: Enhancing the Role of Southern African Women in Mediation.” Policy and Practice Brief, Accord 25.

McCandless, Erin and Rogan, James. 2013. “Bringing Peace Closer to The People: The Role of Social Services in Peacebuilding.” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 8(3):1- 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/15423166.2013.866877.

McFate, Sean. 2010. The Link Between DDR and SSR in Conflict-Affected Countries. USIP: Washington, DC. https://www.usip.org/publications/2010/05/link-between-ddr-and-ssr-conflict- affected-countries.

Melander, Erik. 2005. “Gender Equality and Intrastate Armed Conflict.” International Studies Quarterly 49(4):695-714. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2005.00384.x.

Minorities at Risk Project. 2004. Chronology for Tuareg in Niger. Available at https://www.refworld.org/docid/469f38c2104.html. Accessed 1 April 2020.

Mohanty, Ranjita. 2002. Women’s Participation in JFM In Uttaranchal Villages. Mimeo.

Moser, O. N. Caroline and Clark, C. Fiona. 2001. Victims, Perpetrators or Actors? Gender, Armed Conflict and Political Violence. pp: 4-5. New York: Zed Books.

Mzvondiwa, N. Cecelia. 2007. “The Role of Women in the Reconstruction and Building of Peace in Rwanda: Peace Prospects for The Great Lakes Region.” Africa Security. Review16(1):99-106. DOI:10.1080/10246029.2007.9627637.

Nakaya, Sumie. 2004. “Women and Gender Equality and Peacebuilding.” In Building Sustainable Peace, edited by T. Keating and W.A. Knight, 143–166. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press and United Nations.

Newman, Edward, Paris, Roland and Richmond, Oliver. 2009. New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Nilsson, Desirée, Svensson, Isak, Teixeira M. Barbara, Lorenzo, M. Luís and Ruus, Anton. 2020. “In the Streets and at the Table: Civil Society Coordination during Peace Negotiations.” International Negotiation 25 (2020): 1–27. DOI: 10.1163/15718069-25131241.

Nilsson, Desiree. 2009. “Crafting a Secure Peace: Evaluating Liberia’s Comprehensive Peace Agreement 2003.” Uppsala University and the Mediation Support Unit, Department of Political Affairs, United Nations, Uppsala: Universitetstryckeriet.

Nilsson, Desirée. 2012. Anchoring the Peace: Civil Society Actors in Peace Accords and Durable Peace. International Interactions 38(2): 243-266. DOI:10.1080/03050629.2012.659139.

66

Nohlen, Dieter, Krennerich, Michael and Thibaut, Bernhard. 1999. Elections in Africa: A Data Handbook, p685. Oxford University Press. DOI:10.1093/0198296452.001.0001.

Noma, Emiko, Aker, Dee and Freeman, Jennifer. 2012. “Heeding Women’s Voice: Breaking Cycles of Conflict and Deeping The Concept of Peacebuilding.” Journal of Peacebuilding and Development 7(1):7-32. DOI: 10.1080/15423166.2012.719384.

O’Reilly, Marie and Súilleabháin, Ó. Andrea. 2013. “Women in Conflict Mediation: Why it matters”. Issues Brief, International Peace Institute.

O’Reilly, Marie, Súlleabháin, O. Andrea and Paffenholz, Thania. 2015. Re-imagining Peacemaking: Women’s Roles in Peace Processes. New York: Int’l. Peace Institute.

O’Reilly, Marie. 2016. Inclusive Security and Peace Societies: Exploring the Evidence 1. Prism: a Journal of the Center for Complex Operations 6(1):2033.

O’Rourke, Catherine. 2014. “Walk(ing) the Halls of Power”? Understanding Women’s Participation in International Peace and Security.” Melbourne Journal of International Law 15: Transitional Justice Institute Research Paper No. 14-11. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2537401.

Olofsson, Linda. 2018. Women’s Role in Peace Processes: A Comparative Study of Women’s Participation in the Peace Processes in Africa and West Asia. Bachelor thesis, Linnaeus University.

Paffenholz, Thania and Ross, Nicholas. 2015. “Inclusive Peace Processes – An Introduction.” Development Dialogue (Part 1):28-37.

Paffenholz, Thania, Ross, Nicholas, Dixon, Steven, Schluchter, Anna-Lena, True, Jacqui. 2016. “Making Women Count – Not Just Counting Women: Assessing Women’s Inclusion and Influence on Peace Negotiations.” Geneva: Inclusive Peace and Transition Initiative and UN Women.

PA-X Codebook. 2018. Peace Agreements Database and Dataset: Codebook. University of Edinburg: Scotland. Available at https://www.peaceagreements.org/files/PA_X_codebook_Version1_Feb_20_20.pdf. Accessed on 03-03-2020.

PeaceWomen 2019. “Linking Feminist Sustainable Peace, Sustainable Development, and Postwar Infrastructure Reconstruction.” Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. https://www.peacewomen.org/node/103483.

Peters, Krijn. 2011. War and The Crisis of Youth in Sierra Leone. Cambridge University Press Cambridge.

Peterson, V. Spike and Runyan, S. Anne. 2010. Global Gender Issues in The New Millennium. 3.th edn, Westview, Boulder, Colo; Oxford.

Phillips, Anne. 1998. Feminism and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pospisil, Jan and Bell, Christine. 2018. ‘Securing’ Peace: Women and Security Arrangements in Peace Processes. UN Women: New York.

67

https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Inclusive-peace-processes- Securing-peace-en.pdf

Putnam, D. Robert. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

Ruddick, Sara. 1989. Maternal Thinking: Towards a Politics of Peace. London: Women’s Press.

Ruiz-Navarro, Catalina. 2019. A Feminist Peace in Colombia? Feminist Foreign Policy HEINRICHBÖLL-STIFTUNG. https://www.boell.de/en/2019/02/14/feminist-peace

Saiget, Marie. 2016. “Women’s Participation in African Peace Negotiations: Cooperating with The UN agencies in Burundi and Liberia.” Peacebuilding 4(1): 28-40.

Shepherd, J. Laura. 2016. “Victims of Violence or Agents of Change? Representations of Women in UN Peacebuilding Discourse.” Peacebuilding 4(2): 121-135.

Stedman, S. John. 1997. “Spoiler Problems in Peace Processes.” International Security 22(2): 5-53. DOI: 10.2307/2539366.

Steinberg, Donald. 2007. Failing to Empower Women Peacebuilders: A Cautionary Tale from Angola. PeaceWomen E-News, April 25, 2007.

Stone, Laurel. 2014. “Women Transforming Conflict: A Quantitative Analysis of Female Peacemaking.” SSRN. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2485242. Accessed February 23, 2020.

Taydas, Zeynep and Peksen, Dursun. 2012. “Can States Buy Peace? Social Welfare Spending and Civil Conflicts.” Journal of Peace Research 49(2): 273-287.DOI: 10.1177/0022343311431286.

Tickner, J. Ann. 2001. Gendering World Politics: Issues and Approaches in The Post-Cold War Era. Columbia University Press, New York.

Togeby, Lise. 1994. “The Gender Gap in Foreign Policy Attitudes.” Journal of Peace Research 31(4):375- 392. DOI:10.1177/0022343394031004002.

Tongeren, V. Paul. 2013 “Potential Cornerstone of Infrastructures for Peace? How Local Peace Committees Can Make A Difference.” Peacebuilding1(1):39-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2013.756264.

Tripp, A. Mari. 2015. Women and Power in Post-Conflict Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316336014.

UNICEF 2013. “The Contribution of Social Services to Peacebuilding and Resilience: Evolving Theory and Practice.” UNICEF HQ: New York. http://www.erinmccandless.net/uploads/3/1/5/5/31558725/the_contribution_of_social_s ervices_to_peacebuilding_and_"resilience_-_unicef_study_final.pdf.

68

United Nations Development Program. 2008. “Post Conflict Economic Recovery: Enabling Local Economic Ingenuity.” New York: UNDP.

United Nations Peacemaker. 2003. “Linas-Marcoussis Agreement.” United Nations Document Retrieval https://peacemaker.un.org/cotedivoire-linasmarcousis2003.

United Nations Women. 2015. “The Beijing Platform for Action Turns 20.” UN: New York. https://beijing20.unwomen.org/en/about

United States Institute of Peace. 2020. Physical Security. USIP: Washington, DC. https://www.usip.org/guiding-principles-stabilization-and-reconstruction-the-web- version/safe-and-secure-environment/nec-1

Vaïsse, Justin. 2003. The Crisis in Côte d'Ivoire. U.S.-France Analysis Series. The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC. https://www.brookings.edu/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/vaisse20030325.pdf.

Van Walraven, Klass. 2003. Sawaba’s Rebellion in Niger (1964-1965): Narrative and Meaning. In Abbink, J., De Bruijn, M. and K. van Walraven, eds, Rethinking Resistance: Revolt and Violence in African History, pp. 218-252. Leiden and Boston: Brill.

Waldron, Jeremy. 2012. Dignity, Rank, and Rights. Oxford University Press, New York.

Wallensteen, Peter and Eriksson, Mikael. 2009. “Negotiating Peace: Lessons from three comprehensive peace agreements.” Uppsala University and the Mediation Support Unit, Department of Political Affairs, United Nations, Uppsala: Universitetstryckeriet.

Wängerud, Lena. 2000. “Testing the Politics of Presence: Women’s Representation in the Swedish Riksdag”, Scandinavian Political Studies 23(1):67-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.00031.

Wayman, W. Frank. 1982. War and Power Transitions during Enduring Rivalries. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Institute for the Study of Conflict Theory and International Conflict, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois.

Williamson, John. 2006. “The Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration of Child Soldiers: Social and Psychological Transformation in Sierra Leone.” Intervention 4(3):185-205. DOI:10.1097/WTF.0b013e328011a7fb.

Yawanarajah, Nita and Ouellet, Julian. 2003. ‘Peace Agreements’ Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Available from http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/structuring-peace-agree. Accessed on 10/02/2020.

Zartman, I. William. 2000. Ripeness: The Hurting Stalemate and Beyond. In International Conflict Resolution after the Cold War, edited by Paul C. Stern and Daniel Druckman. Washington DC: National Research Council Press, p.225.

69