Mainstreaming the non-state in bottom-up state-building: linkages between rebel governance and post-conflict legitimacy

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mainstreaming the non-state in bottom-up state-building: linkages between rebel governance and post-conflict legitimacy

AU - Podder, Sukanya

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - This article explores the potential for mainstreaming wartime rebel governance structures into post-conflict state-building efforts. Through a study of the Sudan People's Liberation Army/Movement's (SPLA/M) efforts at state-building in South Sudan (1994–2011), it examines the oft-neglected linkages between rebel governance and post-conflict legitimacy. Findings highlight three pitfalls of mainstreaming non-state roles without sufficient analysis of the sources of legitimacy underlying rebel governance frameworks. First, by drawing upon the functions and legitimacy of other non-state actors rather than the rebel group itself, an artificial image of state-building can be projected. Second, due to the fragmented and dispersed nature of legitimacy, the ‘bottom-up’ logic of state-building can prove dubious. Third, weak capacity in governance, and subcontracted sources of legitimacy, are likely to undermine the ability to develop independent structures and functions. Conclusions offer four case specific insights that can assist policy-makers in applying a more critical framework to the legitimacy of armed groups, before incorporating them into post-war governance arrangements.

AB - This article explores the potential for mainstreaming wartime rebel governance structures into post-conflict state-building efforts. Through a study of the Sudan People's Liberation Army/Movement's (SPLA/M) efforts at state-building in South Sudan (1994–2011), it examines the oft-neglected linkages between rebel governance and post-conflict legitimacy. Findings highlight three pitfalls of mainstreaming non-state roles without sufficient analysis of the sources of legitimacy underlying rebel governance frameworks. First, by drawing upon the functions and legitimacy of other non-state actors rather than the rebel group itself, an artificial image of state-building can be projected. Second, due to the fragmented and dispersed nature of legitimacy, the ‘bottom-up’ logic of state-building can prove dubious. Third, weak capacity in governance, and subcontracted sources of legitimacy, are likely to undermine the ability to develop independent structures and functions. Conclusions offer four case specific insights that can assist policy-makers in applying a more critical framework to the legitimacy of armed groups, before incorporating them into post-war governance arrangements.

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2014.889878

DO - https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2014.889878

M3 - Article

SN - 1467-8802

VL - 14

SP - 213

JO - Conflict, Security & Development

JF - Conflict, Security & Development

IS - 2

ER -