How “Muscular Mediation” Ended Liberia’s Long-Running Civil War

• In Event: Third Parties and Conflict Actors

Abstract

Recent research has shown that “Muscular Mediation” by powerful intervening countries can coerce the end of civil wars and thereby end violence against noncombatants, but also may backfire by exacerbating civilian victimization. Muscular Mediation is defined as a mediator pursuing a mutual compromise, which it formulates, by initially coercing the stronger side and then the opposing one, so that both sides come to believe they cannot escalate to victory and therefore accept the compromise. This study examines the successful intervention in Liberia that culminated in 2003, ending 13 years of atrocity-filled civil war and facilitating a transition to stable democracy. Questions addressed include the following: (1) How was the mediation strategy formulated? (2) Why did interveners favor compromise rather than rebel victory over the notorious Liberian autocrat Charles Taylor? (3) How were both sides coerced to compromise? (4) Why did neither side react to mediator coercion by escalating violence against civilians as in several prior cases? (5) Why did counter-interveners not undermine the strategy? The paper concludes with lessons for the theory and practice of Muscular Mediation.

Author

• Alan J. Kuperman, University of Texas, Austin