Third party intervention in management of Electoral Conflict: A case Study of Kenya 2007 - 2008.

Abstract

Whenever there is a conflict there is never a shortage of third parties willing to help the parties directly involved in the conflict to find a' mutual and non violent outcome. It is now acknowledged that third parties involvement is not motivated by altruistic concerns, their Involvement aims at securing interests which are of value to them. The one derived from the conflict itself regional and international environment of the conflict and the parties directly involved in conflict. The interest based involvement means that third parties transform the structure of negotiation from dyadic to triadic. Importantly they bring on board issues which are of their concern but not necessarily of concern to the parties directly involved in conflict. Consequently, mediation process involves not only addressing the head of the disputants but also those interested third parties. More so third parties being with them recourses which they believe can influence the relationship of the disputants and make them commit to the mediation process and its outcome. The study has looked into the role of third parties in Kenya post-election mediation process. It has adopted a power-based approach to mediation. The approach focuses on the role of leverage by the third parties in order to make parties directly involved in conflict reach an agreement. The use of power means that parties are not given an opportunity to discuss the disagreement between them in a non-coercive atmosphere. Rather they are subjected to intense pressure by third parties with interests in the conflict. Ultimately the outcome is a settlement instead of a resolution. Data for the study have been collected using content analysis methodology. This involves collecting of data from secondary sources such as mass media, books on mediation process and internet sources. The methodology has been appropriate for the study because the mediation process was conducted openly and much of what took place was relayed to the media. Data generated has been qualitatively analysed and inferences made against the studies objectives and hypotheses. The study has established that two parties played an important role in making the parties agree to negotiate and commit to the process. This was more so with powerful third parties. It is improbable that a mutual outcome was possible in their absence. They provided the mediator with leverage to enable him ase directive strategy which involved suggesting and pushing for solutions and using threats to make the parties make concessions. In addition third parties did expand the agenda of the conflict. The conflict was about disagreement on the presidential poll results. This was expanded to include long term solutions to the conflict, making the process outsider heavy and undermining its sustainability in the absence of sustained pressure from them. On the strength of the findings the study argues that though the role of third parties is important in mediation process, their involvement should be tempered by the fact that the conflict is in important ways between the disputants. It is they who should talk it out and find a mutual solution which they can live with. Failure to acknowledge this leads to expansion of issues and ultimately peace agreement which lack the commitment of some or all parties and whose implementation is largely dependent on continued pressure' from third partie-s..