Berghof Foundation: 50 years of conflict transformation

Protest movements
have been very good
at mobilising large
social constituencies,
118
but encounter serious
limitations when it
comes to engaging
effectively in interparty
dialogue or
reform processes.
Peaceful protest movements
Key drivers of conflict
transformation
As witnessed across Latin America, in the
Middle East, Asia and Europe during the last two
years, there is a global resurgence of nonviolent
movements taking to the streets to protest against
autocratic or unaccountable governments.
‘People power’ campaigns for human rights, good
governance and social justice are often catalysts
for peace processes and democratic change.
Research has shown that political transitions
initiated by bottom-up nonviolent protest
movements are more lasting, more peaceful and
more democratic than other forms of transition.
Starting from these findings and complementing
Berghof’s longstanding work on all levels of
conflict transformation including grassroots
movements, we study and constructively engage
with social movements that pursue nonviolent
protest strategies — such as demonstrations,
strikes, boycotts or more symbolic forms of
resistance — as an alternative to violent resistance
or extremism.
We understand civil resistance and
peacebuilding strategies to be complementary
facets of conflict transformation. Protest
movements prioritise justice through the
empowerment of marginalised groups, while
peacebuilders prioritise peace by generating
mutually acceptable solutions, with the use of
dialogue, negotiation or reconciliation. When
conducted successfully, peaceful protests
can serve as effective violence prevention
mechanisms; as pre-negotiation tools pressuring
power-holders to engage in inclusive dialogue;
and as accountability instruments in the wake of
peace accords and democratic transitions, by
mobilising to oppose autocratic backlash or to
demand full implementation of progressive state
reform. These insights underline the importance of
understanding peaceful protest movements in the
context of conflict transformation work.
Working with protest
movements
Practical challenges
Often, protest movements fail to meet their
ambitious aspirations. Prominent cases such as
the Arab Spring revolutions in Egypt and Syria
and the 2014 Euromaidan revolution in Ukraine
show that bottom-up peaceful transitions can
lose momentum and ultimately result in a return to
authoritarianism or even outbreaks of civil war, due
to a severely repressive state forcing protesters
to leave the country or imprisoning them, as well
as diffuse protest leadership allowing sections
of a movement to change tactics and resort to
polarisation or violence.
Another challenge for nonviolent
movements is their marginalisation during formal
negotiations or political transitions, leading to
their exclusion from power or their co-optation
by former political allies. In a number of recent
or ongoing pro-democracy campaigns — e.g. in
Sudan, Algeria and Lebanon — protest movements
have been very good at mobilising large social
constituencies, but encounter serious limitations
when it comes to engaging effectively in interparty
dialogue or reform processes.
There are multiple factors contributing to
this gap, including movements’ lack of strategic
planning and readiness for inter-party dialogue.
Protesters might be sceptical about negotiations
and adopt uncompromising positions towards
their opponents. Moreover, movements are
often structured as heterogeneous coalitions
that unite around demands for change, but lack
a unified vision of what comes next. On the side
of power-holders, governments may refuse to
hold dialogues or may impose restrictions on
who can represent movements. International
peacebuilding agencies and mediators also often
lack understanding of grassroots movements and
fail to engage them proactively, preferring to work
with the formal political opposition or selected civil
society leaders.
119