Paths to Reconciliation

What constitutes successful reconciliation and how do I know it when I see it? Under what conditions do societies achieve reconciliation after civil war and autocratic rule? To answer these important questions, I created the Coexistence Dataset and categorized 172 “coexistent periods” according to four distinct levels of societal relationship. I evaluate each period over 10 years and find that high levels of societal reconciliation are uncommon, occurring in only 27% of cases.

To achieve genuine reconciliation (and not merely the absence of conflict or autocratic rule), justice is critical – justice that holds perpetrators accountable and restores victims. When implemented well, such justice translates into trust and reconciliation between groups, even in deeply divided societies.

Using a configurational approach to account for the interactions of justice practices with background conditions, I find that there are many different paths that consistently result in reconciliation. When background conditions are favorable, the implementation of justice practices that restore victims virtually guarantees a country will reach high levels of societal reconciliation. When conditions are not so favorable – such as when the state is weak, or the society is deeply divided, or both – reconciliation is more difficult but still possible. In these “difficult cases” international intervention, an active civil society, and balanced justice practices are critical. The aftermath of the civil war in Sierra Leone and the management of the Basque conflict in Spain illuminate the challenges and pitfalls of reconciling societies when the state is weak and when the society is deeply divided. Both cases and the findings from across the Coexistence Dataset contain important lessons for future policymakers interested in reconciling societies after conflict and autocratic rule.