Disaggregated mediation: the localisation of peace processes amid global and domestic fragmentation

Abstract

In recent years, comprehensive peace agreements have reduced in frequency, and international mediation initiatives have become ‘disaggregated’ focused on brokering localised, sub-state dialogue processes, with issue-specific discussions, alongside attempts at national-level processes. This article focuses on three aspects of this shift: it (a) proposes disaggregated mediation as a conceptual framework to understand these processes, (b) outlines drivers of disaggregated mediation and (c) considers implications for peace outcomes. In doing so, it contends that disaggregated mediation derives from at least two key dynamics. First, the rising fragmentation of conflicts, with multiple conflict actors, amid rising geopolitical competition, means that a single external mediator controlling a singular process is unlikely to be acceptable to all parties. Second, the increased number of external third parties with diverse motivations, interests and connections to conflict actors, who now compete in the mediation space, incentivises external actors to selectively seek to resolve discrete aspects of a broader conflict based on their geostrategic and economic interests. The article also highlights the potential of disaggregated mediation to create ‘islands of stability’ marked by temporary cessation of hostilities, which may shift the geography of conflict rather than resolving it. Empirically, the analysis draws on a comprehensive review of dialogue processes in Myanmar since the 2021 coup, 19 interviews and 12 study groups involving over 230 stakeholders. The new framework and the Myanmar analysis reveal the complexity of modern mediation, with implications for the feasibility of cohering all actors and issues into a single comprehensive framework for peace.