Beyond the Time and Space of Peace Talks: Re-appropriating the Peace Process in Sri Lanka

A peace process almost always acts as the catalyst to transition from conflict. In reality, the peace process is usually dominated by peace negotiations between the main contending parties who are able to direct the content and progress of the movement towards peace. However, as conflicts rarely reduce into bilateral disputes, the elite nature of peace talks can exclude or ignore broader, cross-cutting interests in society. Using the Sri Lankan peace process as the central case study, this article explores both the illegitimacy of containing the peace process at the macro-level and the valuable contribution of civil society subordinated in the efforts to achieve peace. The article concludes that all levels of society must be engaged in peace processes in order to realise a deep and sustainable peace. The framework and impetus of peace processes very often focus on bilateral negotiations between central political actors with the assistance of an external third party mediator. While each peace process contains its own complex and contextual particularities, transitions in societies as diverse as Colombia, Israel/Palestine and Northern Ireland share the common feature of elevating elite-based and exclusive peace negotiations to the centre of the broader movement towards of peace. Broader society is only afforded a subordinated role at the peripheries, however strong its organisation and capacity. This paper explores the potential hegemonic effects of a central focus on peace talks. As conflicts rarely reduce simply into a linear dispute between two sides, the perspectives and interests of many other parties may be left out of the negotiations. Rather, the framework of the peace talks reduces the broad and often conflicting and cross-cutting experiences of society through an aggregation process which produces a intelligible yet simplistic narrative. As such, Part I of the paper locates elite-driven peace processes within a history of colonial and post-colonial formations through cyclic repetitions of power and highlights the instability of a peace reached on an exclusionary and appropriating basis. This section includes a discussion on the further distancing of society from participation in its own present and future through the involvement of the 40 Beyond the Time and Space of Peace Talks international community without a simultaneous reach inwards. This section emphasises that the involvement of the international community reflects both an inevitable and important development of contemporary peace processes but underlines that without a corollary increase in the participation of broader society can lead to further disenfranchisement and instability. Part II provides a case-study of the peace process in Sri Lanka to demonstrate the impact of hegemonic peace talks on the overall project for peace. As a society suspended in a state of no-war/no-peace since the Ceasefire Agreement of 2002, the devastation facing Sri Lanka as a result of the Indian Ocean tsunami in December 2004 initially raised hopes of a resumption of the stalled peace talks between the government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and the rebel faction, the LTTE (also known as the Tamil Tigers), which controls many parts of the North and East of the island. The unity was only short-lived however. The parties are already divided on the rehabilitation efforts and political killings have once again resumed. At this stage, the future of the peace process must be considered with particular attention to the disenfranchisement of broader society through the lack of a participatory role in previous negotiations. As a result, this section examines the impact of the structure of the bilateral negotiations in Sri Lanka as enabling the parties to hold society in a state of no war/no peace without any sequencing or progression towards a permanent peace. In particular, the section addresses the continuance of human rights violations throughout the ceasefire period as an inevitable consequence of the bilateral structure which subordinates the rights of individuals to the overarching concern of peace. Finally, Part III locates the case-study on Sri Lanka within a broader analytical discussion of the need to ensure deeper peace processes with particular focus on inclusion and broad participation as well as the integration of a comprehensive human rights framework. Part I: The Hegemonic Impact of Bilateral Peace Processes This section considers the negative impact hegemonic, elite-based peace processes can have on the larger project for peace. First, the section looks at the legitimacy of the occupation of public space by the two main contending actors. The section then considers the general implications of the involvement of the international community without a simultaneous reach inwards to broader society. In order to provide a conceptual and overarching framework for the elite-nature of the peace talks, the paper refers to the “macro” and “supra-macro” levels of society to depict the distance the main political actors to the peace talks and the international community respectively operates from broader society.