Elite pact

Last updated

King John signing the Magna Carta -- the charter of rights of the powerful barons which has been described as "the greatest constitutional document of all times -- the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot". King John signing the Great Charter (Magna Carta) by English School.png
King John signing the Magna Carta the charter of rights of the powerful barons which has been described as "the greatest constitutional document of all times the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot".

An elite pact, settlement or political settlement is an agreement or understanding between political elites which moderates the violence and winner takes all nature of unrestrained conflict. Such settlements are often understood to transform government from an autocratic mode into more pluralistic, democratic form. [2] [3] However, others view the political settlement as normatively neutral. [4]

This concept in political theory is part of elite theory and state-building. Joel Migdal has suggested that the concept of political settlements has a pedigree going back to the work of Barrington Moore. Political settlements are the frameworks for governing a state established by elites, either through formal processes or informally over time. There are numerous definitions of political settlements and elite pacts, often including an emphasis on understandings between elites that bring about the conditions to end conflict, or maintain peace. In 2011 the World Bank's World Development Report suggested a new terminology for political settlements with the concept of `good enough coalitions.' [5]

Elite pacts can be explicitly articulated (enshrined in an evolving document – such as a peace agreement or a constitution).

Verena Fritz and Alina Rocha Menocal published a paper in 2007 arguing that political settlements are a `domain' at the heart of all state processes. They relate the concept to broader state theory (including the issues of elections and legitimacy). They stress that political settlements are not one-off events but evolve over time. [6]

Important contributions on the establishing of political settlements in modern (particularly newly democratic) states have also been made by Thomas Carothers and Marina Ottaway of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Also of note is JC Scott's work `Seeing Like a State' which explores the routes through which political settlements in medieval Europe began to consolidate formal state structures.

More recently Christine Bell of the Political Settlements Research Programme has argued that political settlements analysis is centrally concerned with how to understand and support elite pacts while enabling transformation to other forms of broader inclusion. [7]

In political science the concept of `political settlements' is distinct from short-term processes aimed at elite agreements, such as a `peace process' or `peace agreement.' Peace negotiations and agreements may be part of the process of achieving a political settlement, but the settlement itself is the period of time for which an elite agreement holds, which could last for days or centuries.

Controversially the political scientist Patrick Chabal has suggested that the concept of political settlements is often less useful than that of `political sedimentation,' the residue of elite accommodation that is left after a period of contestation or explicit conflict, (quoted from Whaites above) see also. [8]

The term political settlement is now use by key development agencies, despite confusion over what exactly the term means, and doubts over how the concept assists development actors intervene more effectively to support stable, open and inclusive political settlement.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kellogg–Briand Pact</span> 1928 international agreement

The Kellogg–Briand Pact or Pact of Paris – officially the General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy – is a 1928 international agreement on peace in which signatory states promised not to use war to resolve "disputes or conflicts of whatever nature or of whatever origin they may be, which may arise among them". The pact was signed by Germany, France, and the United States on 27 August 1928, and by most other states soon after. Sponsored by France and the U.S., the Pact is named after its authors, United States Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg and French foreign minister Aristide Briand. The pact was concluded outside the League of Nations and remains in effect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Failed state</span> State that has lost its ability to govern

A failed state is a state that has lost its ability to fulfill fundamental security and development functions, lacking effective control over its territory and borders. Common characteristics of a failed state include a government incapable of tax collection, law enforcement, security assurance, territorial control, political or civil office staffing, and infrastructure maintenance. When this happens, widespread corruption and criminality, the intervention of state and non-state actors, the appearance of refugees and the involuntary movement of populations, sharp economic decline, and military intervention from both within and outside the state are much more likely to occur.

Good governance is the process of measuring how public institutions conduct public affairs and manage public resources and guarantee the realization of human rights in a manner essentially free of abuse and corruption and with due regard for the rule of law. Governance is "the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented ". Governance in this context can apply to corporate, international, national, or local governance as well as the interactions between other sectors of society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peace treaty</span> Agreement to formally end hostilities between two or more warring parties

A peace treaty is an agreement between two or more hostile parties, usually countries or governments, which formally ends a state of war between the parties. It is different from an armistice, which is an agreement to stop hostilities; a surrender, in which an army agrees to give up arms; or a ceasefire or truce, in which the parties may agree to temporarily or permanently stop fighting.

Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and retribution. Committed group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by actively communicating information about their conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of group and by engaging in collective negotiation. Dimensions of resolution typically parallel the dimensions of conflict in the way the conflict is processed. Cognitive resolution is the way disputants understand and view the conflict, with beliefs, perspectives, understandings and attitudes. Emotional resolution is in the way disputants feel about a conflict, the emotional energy. Behavioral resolution is reflective of how the disputants act, their behavior. Ultimately a wide range of methods and procedures for addressing conflict exist, including negotiation, mediation, mediation-arbitration, diplomacy, and creative peacebuilding.

Gestalt therapy is a form of psychotherapy that emphasizes personal responsibility and focuses on the individual's experience in the present moment, the therapist–client relationship, the environmental and social contexts of a person's life, and the self-regulating adjustments people make as a result of their overall situation. It was developed by Fritz Perls, Laura Perls and Paul Goodman in the 1940s and 1950s, and was first described in the 1951 book Gestalt Therapy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nation-building</span> Constructing national identity using state power

Nation-building is constructing or structuring a national identity using the power of the state. Nation-building aims at the unification of the people within the state so that it remains politically stable and viable in the long run. According to Harris Mylonas, "Legitimate authority in modern national states is connected to popular rule, to majorities. Nation-building is the process through which these majorities are constructed." In Harris Mylonas's framework, "state elites employ three nation-building policies: accommodation, assimilation, and exclusion."

The term "illiberal democracy" describes a governing system that hides its "nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures". There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy or whether it even exists.

Consociationalism is a form of democratic power sharing. Political scientists define a consociational state as one which has major internal divisions along ethnic, religious, or linguistic lines, but which remains stable due to consultation among the elites of these groups. Consociational states are often contrasted with states with majoritarian electoral systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peace and conflict studies</span> A subject in social science

Peace and conflict studies or conflict analysis and resolution is a social science field that identifies and analyzes violent and nonviolent behaviors as well as the structural mechanisms attending conflicts, with a view towards understanding those processes which lead to a more desirable human condition. A variation on this, peace studies (irenology), is an interdisciplinary effort aiming at the prevention, de-escalation, and solution of conflicts by peaceful means, thereby seeking "victory" for all parties involved in the conflict.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Taba Summit</span> Talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority

The Taba Summit were talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, held from 21 to 27 January 2001 at Taba, in the Sinai. The talks took place during a political transition period – Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak had resigned six weeks previously on 9 December 2000, and elections were due on 6 February 2001, and the inauguration of President George W. Bush had taken place just one day prior, on 20 January 2001.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">State-building</span> Term in social sciences and humanities

State-building as a specific term in social sciences and humanities, refers to political and historical processes of creation, institutional consolidation, stabilization and sustainable development of states, from the earliest emergence of statehood up to the modern times. Within historical and political sciences, there are several theoretical approaches to complex questions related to the role of various contributing factors in state-building processes.

A fragile state or weak state is a country characterized by weak state capacity or weak state legitimacy leaving citizens vulnerable to a range of shocks. The World Bank, for example, deems a country to be ‘fragile’ if it (a) is eligible for assistance from the International Development Association (IDA), (b) has had a UN peacekeeping mission in the last three years, and (c) has received a ‘governance’ score of less than 3.2. A more cohesive definition of the fragile state might also note a state's growing inability to maintain a monopoly on force in its declared territory. While a fragile state might still occasionally exercise military authority or sovereignty over its declared territory, its claim grows weaker as the logistical mechanisms through which it exercises power grow weaker.

Jus post bellum is a concept that deals with the morality of the termination phase of war, including the responsibility to rebuild. The idea has some historical pedigree as a concept in just war theory. In modern times, it has been developed by a number of just war theorists and international lawyers. However, the concept means different things to the contributors in each field. For lawyers, the concept is much less clearly defined, and many have rejected the usefulness of the concept altogether. The concept continues to attract scholarly interest in the field of international humanitarian law.

Power sharing is a practice in conflict resolution where multiple groups distribute political, military, or economic power among themselves according to agreed rules. It can refer to any formal framework or informal pact that regulates the distribution of power between divided communities. Since the end of the Cold War, power-sharing systems have become increasingly commonplace in negotiating settlements for armed conflict. Two common theoretical approaches to power sharing are consociationalism and centripetalism.

The Beijing Consensus or China Model, also known as the Chinese Economic Model, is the political and economic policies of the People's Republic of China (PRC) that began to be instituted by Deng Xiaoping after Mao Zedong's death in 1976. The policies are thought to have contributed to China's "economic miracle" and eightfold growth in gross national product over two decades. In 2004, the phrase "Beijing Consensus" was coined by Joshua Cooper Ramo to frame China's economic development model as an alternative—especially for developing countries—to the Washington Consensus of market-friendly policies promoted by the IMF, World Bank, and U.S. Treasury. In 2016, Ramo explained that the Beijing Consensus shows not that "every nation will follow China’s development model, but that it legitimizes the notion of particularity as opposed to the universality of a Washington model".

Promoting recovery from conflict is not limited to simply a humanitarian, security or development issue and often involves a combination of all three. Stabilization of fragile states is an approach and a process regarding the fragility and security of said states. Hence, stabilization is an essential concept in relation to fragile and failed states, where basic institutions and services are lacking and where conflict is an influential factor. OECD uses the term from fragility to resilient to describe the process of stabilization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oslo Accords</span> 1993–1995 Israeli–Palestinian peace agreements

The Oslo Accords are a pair of interim agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO): the Oslo I Accord, signed in Washington, D.C., in 1993; and the Oslo II Accord, signed in Taba, Egypt, in 1995. They marked the start of the Oslo process, a peace process aimed at achieving a peace treaty based on Resolution 242 and Resolution 338 of the United Nations Security Council. The Oslo process began after secret negotiations in Oslo, Norway, resulting in both the recognition of Israel by the PLO and the recognition by Israel of the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and as a partner in bilateral negotiations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro</span> 2012 preliminary peace agreement

The Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro is a preliminary peace agreement signed in the Malacañan Palace in Manila, Philippines on October 15, 2012. The agreement calls for the creation of an autonomous political entity named Bangsamoro, replacing the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) which was described by Former President Benigno Aquino III as "a failed experiment".

Christine Bell, FBA, FRSE, is a legal scholar, specialising in human rights law. As of 2018, she is Professor of Constitutional Law and Assistant Principal at the University of Edinburgh.

References

  1. Danny Danziger, John Gillingham (2004), 1215: The Year of Magna Carta, p. 278
  2. John Higley, Michael Burton (1998), "Elite Settlements and the Taming of Politics", Government and Opposition, 33 (1), Blackwell Publishing Ltd.: 98, doi:10.1111/j.1477-7053.1998.tb00785.x, S2CID   143545478
  3. Albert Breton (1997), "Elite pacts", Understanding democracy, Cambridge University Press, p. 33, ISBN   978-0-521-58236-0
  4. Kahn, Mustaq 2010, Political Settlements and the Governance of Growth-enhancing Institutions, working paper
  5. "Welcome to World Bank Intranet" (PDF).
  6. State building Archived 1 October 2008 at the Wayback Machine odi.org.uk
  7. Bell, Christine 'What we talk about when we talk about Political Settlements', PSRP Working paper 1, 1 September 2015
  8. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 October 2008. Retrieved 26 October 2008.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)