12.05.2018 Views

JPI Spring 2018

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

CONCLUSION<br />

In the Walter hypothesis, scholars have argued that to resolve the commitment problem<br />

among combatants, third parties should provide them with both security guarantees and power sharing<br />

guarantees. However, the case studies above demonstrate that combatants are likely to make use of<br />

the security guarantees that third parties provide for them to escape from the burdens of power<br />

sharing, and thus, to prolong civil wars. Therefore, the guarantees that third parties provide for<br />

combatants worsen the commitment problem. We can call it, instead, a “commitment tragedy.”<br />

The Walter hypothesis assumes that all combatants are “defensive,” i.e. that their priority is to<br />

defend themselves from opponents after civil wars end. However, the empirical results reveal that we<br />

should assume that all combatants are “offensive,” i.e. that their priority is to alter the power balance<br />

in their favor at the cost of humane lives. As we saw in the case study section, although Assad<br />

administration and rebel groups reached ceasefire agreements mediated by third parties in 2016, both<br />

sides later attacked in order to shift the power balance after the civil war. Third parties should take<br />

proper measures on the basis of this assumption in order to better terminate civil wars.<br />

<strong>JPI</strong> Fall 2017, pg. 47

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!