Many people around the world felt their lives were more dangerous after the signing of a peace agreement than before, the Glencree Summer School heard yesterday.
The keynote speaker, Prof Steven Stedman, of the University of Stanford's centre for international security and cooperation in California, outlined the results of his study on the international implementation of peace agreements.
The theme of the eighth annual event at the Glencree Centre for Reconciliation in Co Wicklow is "The Rocky Road of Reconciliation".
"When you look at a lot of different peace processes, after the initial euphoria what you find on the ground is a lot of fear and a lot of people with a sense of loss," Prof Stedman said.
People in many different countries had experienced a loss of status, identity and control following the signing of a peace agreement. There was frequently a feeling that law and order had broken down as crime increased and civilian security decreased.
"Many people felt their lives were more dangerous in the aftermath of the settlement," he said.
Prof Stedman said the "demobilisation of combatants" was the most important factor in ensuring the success of a peace process in the short term. This involved persuading people who used violence that they would be reintegrated into society if they stopped using violence.
"If you don't do this, you're stumped. If you don't convince people who have guns they're going to have a livelihood," he said. The patrons and weapons suppliers of paramilitary groupings also had to be convinced that peace was the way forward.
In the long term, the reform of the police and judiciary had to be addressed. He said it was common in conflict situations for one side to believe the police service was "owned" by the other side. This had important ramifications, including making disarmament more difficult.
Prof Stedman said too much international attention could be as damaging to a peace process as too little. There was a danger that if international politicians did too much, then local parties could step back from the process. "They don't have to take the tough decisions that go into making peace," he said.
The existence of a political process was not enough to ensure the end of violence. Relationships between people "at the bottom" had to be established if the process was going to be successfully implemented. Unless these relationships existed, people would reject leaders who wanted to make compromises.
Mr Stephen Rourke, chairman of the Glencree Centre for Reconciliation, said there was a feeling after the signing of the Belfast Agreement that non-governmental organisations would no longer be needed. This had not proved to be the case.
There had been a significant reduction in the number of lives lost but an increase in intercommunity conflict in certain areas, particularly north Belfast, mid-Ulster and north and east Antrim.
"The depths of sectarianism are obviously not going to lend themselves to a quick fix," he said. "This particular situation looks very dark . . . but peace is worth fighting for," he concluded.
The summer school continues until tomorrow.
