Please refer to the attached file.
Mediation is widely understood as third-party-assisted negotiations aimed at preventing, managing, or resolving armed conflicts in which the conflict parties’ consent to the mediator taking some degree of control over the process.1 The value of mediation as a tool to facilitate political solutions to violent conflict is under severe pressure, a major review of mediation practice in 2024 noted that “the policy and practice of mediation have struggled to keep pace with the changing realities of conflict and global politics. Innovation is necessary to meet the challenges presented by contemporary armed conflicts; specifically, approaches to mediation are needed that respond to the armed actors that are integral to contemporary conflict environments.
Dudouet et al. note that the global context in which war-to-peace transitions take place has changed profoundly. Traditional liberal peacebuilding models are under strain, and mediators are increasingly confronted with fragmented, transnational, or semi-authoritarian environments that challenge established assumptions about peacemaking. New patterns of conflict, such as the internationalization of internal wars, the fragmentation of armed groups, and the rise of actors with Islamist agendas, create additional complexities. Meanwhile, a new generation of mediators from outside the traditional Western sphere is reshaping the ways peace can be facilitated, prompting both challenges and opportunities for international engagement in peace processes.
In response to the evolving landscape of contemporary armed conflicts, mediation practice has evolved to include a broader range of actors and innovative approaches that emphasize local engagement, leverage technology to achieve inclusivity, and address the socioeconomic factors driving armed conflicts. The field of mediation has also undergone significant professionalization. The recognition of the complexity of contemporary armed conflicts and the challenges mediators face has led to the establishment of dedicated mediation support structures providing technical expertise and hands-on operational support to mediation teams, and which promote learning from past initiatives. Notwithstanding these advances, it is increasingly common that the parties to an armed conflict, be they international, national, or more localized armed groups, are often reluctant to engage in serious peace talks. Mediation processes are too frequently not welcome, not working, or not equal to the disruptive local, national, and geopolitical forces of the current moment.5 In summary, Dudouet et al. ask, “What are the implications of the downward trend in signed peace agreements and the upward trend in new mediators?”
Mediation, as the mainstay of international conflict resolution initiatives, requires continuous updating and evolution to meet the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts. The process of identifying replicable practices from successful mediation efforts aims to enhance mediation and ameliorate the impacts of armed conflicts. In this regard, the process leading to the signing in Mozambique of the Maputo Accord for Peace and National Reconciliation on August 6, 2019 holds a number of lessons for policymakers and mediation practitioners.