Introduction
This review focuses on patterns of civil wars and the duration of peace in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The researchers observed that wars in Southeast Asia were “intractable in the face of negotiated settlements and that longer wars increased the duration of peace” (Derouen, Bercovitch, and Wei, 2009). Still, the duration of peace increased with subsequent wars. However, the effects of wars were indistinct unless the research focused on every repeated event.
These authors trace civil wars in Southeast Asia and the Pacific region since 1945. The article shows that there is no noticeable increase in wars. However, wars tend to last longer with repeated patterns. The authors note that some civil wars exhibit prolonged patterns, dysfunctional and repeated violent tendencies.
These authors focus on factors affecting peaceful outcomes in civil wars and factors, which explain the duration of peace after civil wars.
The article looks at two tendencies in civil wars. First, there are interactive processes between the warring groups. Second, coercive behaviors maintain rivalry between the groups. There are also periods of heightened violence and cessations.
Literature Review
The article shows that civil wars may end through cessations, military victories, negotiations, or through some changes in the system. However, most of these wars usually recur based on how they end. This is because ways in which civil wars end “influence the quality and duration of the subsequent period of peace” (Derouen, Bercovitch and Wei, 2009).
The authors review various studies and theories in civil wars to develop a conceptual framework for the study. They developed four hypotheses based on different views from the reviewed literature. They noted that military victories resulted in long-lasting peace and stability than other forms of victories. This observation came from studies of Luttwak (1999), Licklider (1995), Mason, Gurses, and Brandt (2005), Werner (1999), Walter (2002) and Fearon (2004). Walter emphasizes the role of a third party in establishing credibility in negotiations. They also note that the defeat of a military signifies the end of a war.
On patterns of wars and duration of peace, they looked at the work of Box-Steffensmeier and Zorn (2002). These authors argue that political events have tendencies to recur. The study then applied Cox and Weibull duration models to understand patterns and duration of wars. They also applied the ‘positive’ learning model. This model posits that repeated negotiations result in better understandings between parties. This is because negotiations provide better opportunities for peace than war.
These authors also based the study on Fearon (2004) to develop a model for types of civil wars and the duration of peace. The work of Cunningham, Gleditsch, and Salehyan (2005) showed that available data only focused on low-level wars.
Methodology
The study model focused on the duration of peace after civil wars, repeated events, outcomes, and types and costs of wars. The researchers studied patterns and duration of civil wars using the above approaches and other studies.
The methodology focused on three areas. These included types of wars or parties to wars, forms of conflict termination and repeated patterns in wars and peace duration.
Results
The researchers presented their results in tables to confirm or deny their hypotheses. The results are consistent with other studies.
The article concludes that reactions to recurring patterns of war and methods of termination influence subsequent wars and the duration of peace. Long periods of peace result from repeated acts of violence or aggressive behaviors. This situation provides opportunities for mediation. The challenge is that negotiated solutions create fragile conditions. This calls for a mediator to mediate or to guarantee the security of the deal. In some cases, a party may not want a mediator in the process.
References
Box-Steffensmeier, J. and Zorn, C. (2002). Duration Models for Repeated Events. Journal of Politics, 64, 1069–94.
Cunningham, D., Gleditsch, K. and Salehyan, I. (2005). Dyadic Interactions and Civil War Duration. Honolulu, Hawaii: International Studies Association.
Derouen, K., Bercovitch, J. and Wei, J. (2009). Duration of Peace and Recurring Civil Wars in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Civil Wars, 11(2), 103–120.
Fearon, J. (2004). Why do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer than Others? Journal of Peace Research, 41, 275–301.
Licklider, R. (1995). The Consequences of Negotiated Settlements in Civil Wars, 1945– 1993. American Political Science Review, 89, 681–90.
Luttwak, E. (1999). Give War a Chance. Foreign Affairs, 78, 36–44.
Mason, D., Gurses, M. and Brandt, P. (2005). Durable Peace after Civil Wars? Civil War, Outcomes and the Duration of Peace. Washington, DC: APSA.
Walter, B. (2002). Committing to Peace: The Successful Settlement of Civil Wars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton.