Peacebuilding in Burundi: ‘contre toute forme de violence’? : how (organisational) learning can fulfil a role in the connection of local peacebuilding knowledge, international peacebuilding aims and the needs of the Bur

(1)

Peacebuilding in Burundi:

‘contre toute forme de violence’?

1

‘How (organisational) learning can fulfil a role in the connection of local peacebuilding knowledge, international peacebuilding aims and the needs of the Burundian population’

by Laetitia Stuijt

Master thesis Conflict Resolution and Governance Graduate School of Social Sciences

University of Amsterdam

Supervisor: mr. dr. Martjin Dekker

Second reader: mw. dr. Michelle Parlevliet Student number: 11199210

Word Count: 239004

Date of submission: 28 June 2019

1_{Against all forms of violence}

(2)

(3)

Abstract

This research examines different levels of peacebuilding in Burundi, the international level and the local level. In order to do so, theory is used to lay out different dimensions of peace and debates concerning (liberal) peacebuilding are introduced. The distinction is made between ‘problem solver’ theory and ‘paradigm shifter’ theory. Furthermore, theory from organisational learning is provided. This theoretical framework is used to analyse the different dimensions of peace that are built in Burundi, by organisation Mi-PAREC and the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund. The theoretical framework also serves as a foundation to see how these different levels of peacebuilding are aligning in their goals and methods. Through analysing the accountability structures that shape international peacebuilding, differences between these levels of peacebuilding are explained. This research builds up to the answer the question to what extent (organisational) learning can play a role in a more coherent cooperation between international and local peacebuilding in Burundi? It is argued that learning can fulfil an important role in the linking of international and local peacebuilding in Burundi, as it can increase the importance of local informal accountability and formal peacebuilding accountability, that can make peacebuilder actors into peacebuilder learners. It is argued that when ‘upward’ and ‘downward’ accountability are more integrated and take the shape of ‘formal peacebuilding accountability’ and ‘informal local accountability’ the knowledge of local peacebuilding actors like Mi-PAREC’s members, the needs of the Burundian population and the aims of the PBF would be more coherent.

(6)

Acknowledgements

I would like to show my gratitude to all the members of Mi-PAREC, those who I was able to speak to through interviews and all the other members of the organisation, of the Local Peace Committees and the youth clubs. Without them I would have had no research and I have been very inspired by the work they are doing as individuals and collectively.

I would like to thank my supervisor dr. Martijn Dekker of the department of Political Science at the University of Amsterdam, for his guidance through the process of research and writing, his quick answers to all my questions and his encouraging advice.

Last, I would like to acknowledge my gratitude for Paul van Tongeren, founder of the International Civil Society Network on Infrastructure for peace. He inspired me to write on Local Peace Committees in Burundi and he has introduced me to the work of Mi-PAREC and its members. Without his work and efforts, I would not have been able to write this thesis. The work that Paul van Tongeren has done as peacebuilding has not only inspired me for this research, but also for my own ambitions in life.

(7)

List of figures

Figure 0.1: Map of Burundi ... 10

Figure 2.1: Different dimensions of peace (van Iterson Scholten, 2018) ... 17

Figure 5.1: Budget of the UN PPP I, II and III ... 45

Figure 5.2: UN PBF overview projects and budget ... 46

Figure 6.1: Liberal peace and everyday peace (van Iterson Scholten, 2018) ... 49

(8)

List of Burundian terms

Bashingantahe Nominated wise men, counsellors, elders, chosen from both ethnic groups within the society and with the responsibility to guard over traditions and good behaviour

Colline ‘Hill’ translated from French and used in Burundi to talk about community

level. Burundi is divided into 2639 collines.

(9)

List of Acronyms

ADC-Ikibiri: l’Alliance des Démocrates pour le Changement au Burundi AU: African Union

BINUB: Integrated UN Office in Burundi BNUB: Office of the UN in Burundi

CENI: National Independent Electoral Commission CNDD: Conseil National pour la Défence de la Démocratie - FDD: Forces pour la Défence de la Démocratie

EAC: East-African Community FRODEBU : Front Démocratique du Burundi HRW: Human Rights Watch

ICG: International Crisis Group IDP: Internal Displaced Persons

INGO: International Non-Governmental Organisation IO: International Organizations

Mi-PAREC: Ministère Paix et Réconciliation sous la Croix NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation

ONUB: United Nations Operation in Burundi PALIPHUTU: Parti pour la liberation du people Hutu - FNL: Forces Nationale de Liberation

RDExC: Refugees, Displaced and Ex-Combatants UPRONA: Unité pour les Porgrès National

UN: United Nations

- DAF: Development Assistance Framework - DP: Development Programme

- GYPI: Gender and Youth Promotion Initiative

- OCHA: Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - PBC: Peacebuilding Committee

- PBF: Peacebuilding Fund - PBSO: Peacebuilding Supporting Office - S.E.: Special Envoy

(10)

Map of Burundi

(11)

1 Introduction

“Where there is peace, a sickle can be used to shave your beard or cut your hear” (Burundian proverb)

1.1 Introduction

Burundi is a small landlocked country in the Central East of Africa. It has a population of around 11,7 million people, of which 85% is classified as Hutu, 14 % as Tutsi and 1% as Twa (Lemarchand, 1996). The country has been colonized by Germany and Belgium and since its independence it has seen several outbreaks of violence, among which a civil war, between Hutu and Tutsi. These periods of ethnic violence have claimed hundreds of thousands of deaths of both ethnic groups. The civil war was officially ended by the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement, that followed after internationally supported peace negotiations.

Compared to its neighbouring country Rwanda, that became ‘famous’ because of the genocide that happened in 1994, Burundi and its history remain relatively unknown to a big audience (Ndikumana, 1998).

At the same time, the ‘Burundi case’ became almost ‘famous’ among members of the international community, when the country was selected as one of the first two countries where the Peacebuilding Architecture of the United Nations would start a peacebuilding program in 2007 (UN PBC, 2007). Up until today, Burundi remains the largest recipient of funding from the Peacebuilding Architecture (UN PBF, 2019).

When Burundi’s President Nkruunziza showed his intentions to opt for a third term, contradicting the Arusha Peace Agreement and the constitution of Burundi unrest and violence followed and the country saw a political, economic and social crisis (Apuuli, 2017). Some view the crisis of 2015 as a limit of (international) peacebuilding efforts in Burundi, some see it as a failure and other see it as a reason to further increase these efforts (Apuuli 2017; Campbell, 2018; Grauvogel 2016; Reyntjens, 2016). The variety in views on peacebuilding in Burundi and the fact that Burundi has been the largest recipient of the UN’s peacebuilding efforts make a strong suggestion that this could be a very interesting topic of research.

After initial research, it became clear that on a local level, there have also been very interesting developments with regards to peacebuilding in Burundi. During the civil war, in the city Kibimba, a peace committee was founded by community leaders, who started to meet on a regular basis, to move beyond the divisions in their community. After the success of the Kibimba peace committee, this strategy spread through the country and the Ministère Paix et Réconciliation Sous la Croix (Mi-PAREC) was founded in 1996. Since 1996, more than five-hundred local peace committees have been installed that have resolved many (community) conflicts, enabled community reconciliation and promoted peace

(12)

throughout communities, collines, communes and provinces in Burundi (Mi-PAREC 2012; Mi-PAREC 2013; Mi-PAREC 2019).

1.2 Scope of the research

“And now what may be needed to strengthened, is the capacity for local level to link upper levels. And also, the upper levels to be able to monitor and identify and link to those locals ... So it’s also a challenge for both the very local and the high UN and other levels to connect” (Patrick, Skype interview, 10 May, 2019).

There are thus multiple actors that are conducting peacebuilding efforts in Burundi, ranging from a very local community level to the top international level. As a member of Mi-PAREC points out, a ‘link’ between these levels could lead to interesting opportunities, but also poses challenges to actors of these different levels. The connection between different levels of research in Burundi is the scope of this research. Through collecting (different sets of) data on these different levels of peacebuilding, from grassroot peacebuilding organisation Mi-PAREC and UN Peacebuilding Fund, this research aims to find out more about this connection. Whether this connection is existent, and if so, what this can tell about peacebuilding in Burundi.

A connection has been made with members of Mi-PAREC, to learn about their organisation, the work they do, what they see as root causes of violence in Burundi and how they perceive international peacebuilding. From the UN, many documents, open to the public and official speeches, evaluation of projects and other sources have been collected. The research is focused on the most recent peacebuilding efforts of both organisations, while also taking into account historical developments of these organisations. Therefore, the scope of this research reaches from 2007, when the PBF started to work in Burundi until today, but the main focus is put of the work of these organisations since 2015 until 2018.

1.3 Research objective

As the quote in the previous paragraph shows, a link between different levels of peacebuilding is perceived as desirable, as well as challenging. The quote also suggest that this connection could be strengthened or built. This research aims to find out to what extent it is possible to speak of a link between local and international peacebuilding in Burundi and explores how a (more coherent) cooperation between international and local peacebuilding in Burundi can be met. Building on other research concerning these levels of peacebuilding, in combination with theory from organizational literature, (organisational) learning theory will be used in order to find what role this could play in connecting different levels of peacebuilding.

Taking into regards these objectives, this research’s ambition is to find an answer to the following research question:

(13)

“to what extent (organisational) learning can play a role in a more coherent cooperation between international and local peacebuilding in Burundi?”

As well as finding an answer to the following questions:

“whether the assimilation between overarching themes in projects of Mi-PAREC and the PBF can be interpreted as a hybrid form of peacebuilding?”

and

“ what the differences between local and international peacebuilding priorities say about the underlying structure that shapes peacebuilding in Burundi?”

By finding an answer to the research question, this research adds to the literature on Burundi and that of peacebuilding. The body of literature on peacebuilding is quite extensive, while the literature available on Burundi is less voluminous. Through inserting a component of ‘learning’ and by combining theory of critical peacebuilding scholars and that of organisational learning, this research will to be a resourceful addition to peacebuilding literature. Although there have been numerous studies on the link of local and international peacebuilding, this research is unique because it contains a case-study of Mi-PAREC, in combination with an examination of the UN PBF. There has been previous research that has combined these two organisations in one research. Additionally, this research is relevant, because it adds to the data and body of literature on Burundi, that remains limited until recent day (Lemarchand, 1996; Apuuli, 2017; Daley 2007; Ndikumana 2000)

Moreover, the connection of local and international peacebuilding is not just researched to add to the existing literature. As a connection has been made to Mi-PAREC for this research, the reality of local peacebuilding has really been revealed throughout the research process. Therefore, this research aims to conclude with some new insights and possible practical ways that could improve a future cooperation between local and international peacebuilding in Burundi.

1.4 Thesis outline

In order to find an answer to the research question, this thesis will be structured as follows: the first chapter will provide a theoretical framework that forms the foundation of this thesis. In the theoretical framework, different dimensions of peace will be explained. These dimensions will serve as theoretical tools throughout the rest of the research, to analyse results and to see similarities and differences between international and local peacebuilding efforts. The theoretical framework will then go into critical liberal peace debates that can be found in literature concerning peacebuilding. Different trends in peacebuilding literature will be explored. The main views of scholars that take part in these debates will be introduced, who can be divided between the ‘paradigm shifters’ and ‘problem solvers’. Both views are given

(14)

attention in the theoretical framework. Following ‘problem solving’ literature, the theory of organisational learning will be introduced in relation to success and failure of peacebuilding efforts. Chapter three will provide the methodology that has been used to collect the data used in this research and elaborate on the methods used to analyse this data. The last part of this chapter is made up by the ethics concerning this research. Chapter four will provide a historical context of Burundi, since it is impossible to understand conflicts without an embedded and comprehensive understanding of their background. This chapter will go into different interpretations of ethnicity and the role of ethnicity in various violent outbreaks in Burundi’s history. Throughout this chapter, several peacebuilding efforts of international community will be introduced. This chapter shows the developments that have culminated in a tense relationship between the Government of Burundi and ‘the international community’. Lastly, this chapter will introduce the peacebuilding actors of this research: the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund’ as representative of international peacebuilding; and the Ministère Paix et Réconciliation, as representative of local peacebuilding.

Chapter five, six and seven is where the results of the research are presented and analysed. This is done in the following order: chapter five will go into some similarities between the PBF and Mi-PAREC and aims to answer the question whether the assimilation between overarching themes in projects of Mi-PAREC and the PBF can be interpreted as a hybrid form of peacebuilding. This chapter links the first part of the theory chapter that goes into different dimensions of peace, as well as to theory on ‘hybrid peace’. Chapter six will cover differences in the work of Mi-PAREC and the PBF and aims to answer the question what the differences between local and international peacebuilding priorities say about the underlying structure that shapes peacebuilding in Burundi? This chapter is linked to the theory of both ‘paradigm-shifters’ and ‘problem-solvers’, and goes into the structures of accountability in peacebuilding. Having laid out a clear overview of these similarities and differences of local and international peacebuilding, chapter seven will show whether, and if so, how ‘learning’ can fulfil a role in connecting these different levels of peacebuilding in Burundi. In the conclusion, based on the previous chapters, an answer will be given to the research question stated in this introduction. As well as recommendations for further research.

(15)

2 Theoretical framework

2.1 Introduction

“So yeah, that’s why they say there is peace right now in Burundi, but I would say it’s called a repressive peace or in peacebuilding we call it negative peace. Now there is peace, but there are no conditions of peace… those conditions are not present.” (Jasmine, Skype interview, 3 May 2019).

Since this research evolves around peace and peacebuilding, it is important to ground these concepts and the debates concerning them in academia into a clear theoretical framework. To do so, this chapter will start with an introduction of peace and the different theoretical interpretations and dimensions of peace that are relevant for this research. Secondly, the liberal peace and the critical liberal peace debates will be covered. Scholars in these debates can be divided into the ‘paradigm shifters’, who are arguing for a post-liberal peace and hybrid forms of peacebuilding and the ‘problem solvers’ who believe that liberal peace can succeed and examine the conditions under which this happens. These two perspectives of the critical liberal peace debates are important for this research and form a theoretical framework for comparison of ‘local peacebuilding’ and ‘international peacebuilding’. Lastly, following certain views of ‘problem solving’ authors, organizational learning theory will be explained to connect ‘learning’ and ‘accountability’ to the effectiveness of international peacebuilders and their relation to local actors.

2.2 Different dimensions of peace

When peace is described in peacebuilding literature, it is rarely mentioned without connecting it to Galtung and his distinction between ‘positive peace’ and ‘negative peace’ (Galtung, 1969). Negative peace is the “cessation of direct violence” or the absence of physical violence. Positive peace is the “overcoming of structural and cultural violence as well” (Ramsbotham 2011: p. 11; Galtung 1969). Structural violence manifests itself in the unequal distribution of power and resources within a social system, as well as unequal opportunities and living conditions experienced by people within a social system. When positive peace is met, there are no structural limitations on the fulfilment of human potential (Galtung 1969, 168). However, another way of interpreting positive peace is to see it as the presence of social justice (Galtung, 1969: 171). Up until today, peace scholars cannot agree on the meaning of positive peace, and with an exception of liberal peace scholars, most peace scholars focus on peace as the absence of armed conflict. Positive peace is difficult to achieve and depends on the efforts aimed at ending social injustice (van Iterson Scholten, 2018, p. 45, Daley, 2007).

Van Iterson Scholten has identified six other dimensions of what peace is, which will be explained below. These different perceptions of peace allow us to see what kind of ‘peaces’ are built, in different peacebuilding efforts that come forward in this research (van Iterson Scholten, 2018). First, van Iterson Scholten distinguishes the sustainability of peace, which determines the “timeframe” of

(16)

peace. Both in academia and policy documents, sustainable peace has become a dominant concept. This comes from the distinction between unstable and stable peace, made by Boulding (Boulding, 1978). Unstable peace is found when a threat of resumption of war is still present, while in stable peace (later sustainable) “even the possibility of war with the former adversary is no longer considered to be realistic”, war has become “unthinkable” (van Iterson Scholten, 2018 p. 45; Boulding 1978: 13). This view is supported by Lederach, who sees the “primary goal with regard to resources is to find ways to support, implement, and sustain the building of an infrastructure for peace over the long term” through a “holistic transformation approach” to achieve sustainable peace. (Lederach 1997: p. 38-43, 83). Sustainable peace is thus seen as a long-term goal, while in peacebuilding it is often easier to give examples of short-term goals or results.

Secondly, van Iterson Scholten points to the distinction of peace as a static goal or a dynamic process. Instead of seeing ‘peace’ as a long-term goal, it becomes a never-ending process and peace means that conflicts are fought out with non-violent means. The actors involved in the peace process have to continuously invest in the processes supporting the peace, otherwise the peace ceases to exists (van Iterson Scholten, 2018, Lederach 1997, Galtung 1969). The third distinction van Iterson Scholten makes is the level on which peace is interpreted. Is the individual perception of peace dominant, or is a national or international level dominant. Fourth, van Iterson Scholten distinguishes the domain where peace is located, like economic, legal, political and psychological domain. This is also very relevant when examining peacebuilding efforts in this research, since the perception of the most important domain of peace, is very crucial in the kind of peacebuilding efforts that are executed. As the fifth distinction of the different interpretations of peace identified in academia, van Iterson Scholten sees the value-dimensions connected to peace, like peace-as-harmony, where people live in peaceful coexistence with each other, or peace-as-justice, where the notion of justice is considered a more important value than others. These “different value-preferences” lead to a various perceptions of what makes up peace (van Iterson Scholten, 2018, p. 63). The differences in what peace consists of, will be used as a tool to compare differences in the efforts of peacebuilding by the UN and by Mi-PAREC. The next part of this chapter will focus on prominent views expressed in the critical liberal peace debates. Another dimension will come forward, that became dominant in academia with the rise of ‘liberal peace’. The different dimensions of peace will be used to explain different alternatives to liberal peace that result from the critical liberal peace debates dominant in academia.

(17)

2.3 Critical liberal peacebuilding debates

After the Cold War, a “liberal triumphalism” became dominant in academic and popular publications and a belief that a “rapid [democratic and economic] liberalisation would create conditions for stable and lasting peace in countries emerging from civil conflict” (Paris, 2010, p. 342). As more civil wars were emerging, the number of liberal peacebuilding operations increased and peacebuilding operations became a popular subject in peace studies (Paris, 2005, Richmond, 2005).

Throughout the 1990s, some challenges of post-conflict reconstruction and “the limitations of rapid liberalisation strategies” became visible and some scholars raised questions with regard to the positive correlation between rapid liberalisation and sustainable peace (Paris, 2010, p. 342, Richmond, 2010). The UN, one of the major peacebuilding agencies, also acknowledged the need for a more comprehensive and sustainable approach to peacebuilding. Rather than only focusing on elections and a free market system, more attention was payed to building or strengthening government institutions in new peace operations. This ‘statebuilding’ was a means of consolidation post-war political and economic reform (Paris, 2010). New operations would include efforts of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration, establishing functional judicial and administrate structures and promoting the growth of civil society groups (Paris, 2010). Currently, the main values and elements of liberal peacebuilding

(18)

operations are democracy and elections; security; the rule of law, including the constitution, right and law enforcement; development and marked-oriented economic adjustments; and institution building (Paris, 2010; Richmond & Mitchell, 2011, p. 7). These elements were incorporated in the UN’s standard formula for peace operations (Paris, 2010, 346)

Liberal peace thus became an important topic of study within peace literature, but with the decline of liberal triumphalism and proof of its limited successes, it became subject to several forms of criticism. Authors like Mac Ginty and Richmond saw liberal peace as the dominant model for peacebuilding favoured by powerful actors from the global North, imposing Western-style government arrangements on non-Western populations (Mac Ginty 2010, Richmond 2005; Mac Ginty 2008, Richmond and Mac Ginty 2015). Authors who agree with this view, can be seen as the ‘paradigm shifters’, who want to move to a ‘post-liberal’ peacebuilding (van Iterson Scholten 2018, Paris 2010, Richmond 2011). On the other hand, there are authors who believe that liberal peacebuilding has to be modified and they are seen as the ‘problem solvers’ (Autesserre, 2010; Autesserre, 2014; Campbell, 2018; Paris, 2010). Central in this debate is the question of how peace is being built, whether this should be top-down or bottom-up (Autesserre, 2010, Mac Ginty 2010, Charbonneau and Parend, 2013, Mac Ginty and Firchow, 2016) and what role local actors should play in international peacebuilding missions (Richmond and Mitchell, 2012; van Iterson Scholten, 2018, p. 53). The question of how peace is built is what van Iterson Scholten recognizes as the sixth dimension that determines what peace constitutes, that is whether peace is embedded through in institutions or through individuals (van Iterson Scholten, 2018).

2.4 Paradigm shifters critique and the hybrid turn

From the paradigm shifters, four main lines of criticism can be distinguished. The first critique is that liberal peace is too hegemonic; hardliner critiques condemn the practice of international peacebuilding as neo-imperialist, that promotes Western interest in (post-)conflict areas (Chandler, 2006). They argue that liberal peace should be more emancipatory with an inclusion of locally grounded concepts of peace and argue for ‘local peace’ or ‘hybrid peace’, with attention for local conflict resolution (Mac Ginty, 2011). The second critique views liberal peace as technocratic; it is inherently political and conflictual and therefore, conflicts should be transformed into non-violent conflicts, rather than resolved (Galtung, 2007) This criticism calls for ‘agonistic peace’, where peace is a fundamentally political phenomenon. Following Mouffe’s agonism, conflicts are inherent in society and the essence of the political (Mouffe, 2013). Instead of reaching an ultimate goal of consensus in debates or conflicts, agonistic peace calls for the removal of conflicts out of the antagonistic friend/enemy distinction and into ‘agonsitic’ where the ‘other is treated as (political) adversary rather than (military) enemy (Rambothsam, 2010; van Iterson Scholten, 2018). From an economic critique, liberal peace promotes a neoliberal economic order, that fosters inequality and exploitation on the international and national level and banishes conflict from the

(19)

political to the economic sphere (van Iterson Scholten, 2018). Lastly, authors argue that liberal peace does not affect the lives of ordinary citizens and argue that peace should be seen as an experience rather than an abstract state of affairs. Thus, instead of focusing on elite- and national-level processes, international peacebuilding should focus on everyday peace (Autesserre, 2010: 15; van Iterson 2018). These critiques are why authors call for a ‘post-liberal peace’ that is ‘hybrid’, ‘emancipatory’, ‘agonistic’ and ‘everyday’ (Richmond 2009a).

These critiques have resulted in the ‘local turn’ and later the ‘hybrid turn’ in literature. The main focus of the local turn has been on:

“critically analysing international peacebuilding […]interventions and the interaction with local communities; hybrid forms of peace and governance structures mixing local and international norms and procedures; and local infrastructures for peace” (Paffenholz, 2015, p. 859).

The local turn is grounded in postcolonial theory and local peacebuilding efforts are seen as a “resistance against the dominant discourse and practice of international (hegemonic) peacebuilding” (Paffenholz, 2015, p. 860; Bhabha 1994; Scott 1996; Mac Ginty & Richmond, 2016). At the same time, these scholars underline that, hybrid peace should be seen as a dynamic process, in contrast to liberal peace that sees peace as a goal (van Iterson Scholten, 2018, p. 66; Richmond, 2005: 214, Mac Ginty and Richmond, 2016). Mac Ginty and Richmond, among other scholars, believe that hybrid peace is a part of a ‘post-liberal order’, which can be achieved through an analysis of structure of power, domination and forms of resistance (Mac Ginty and Richmond, 2016). In this view, hybrid peacebuilding is:

“the result of an interplay of […] the compliance powers of liberal peace agents, networks and structures; the incentivizing powers of liberal powers of liberal peace agents, networks and structure’ the ability of local actors to resist, ignore or adapt liberal peace interventions; and the ability of local actors, networks and structures to present and maintain alternative forms of peacemaking (Mac Ginty, 2010, p. 391)

The local is defined as opposed to the international and “local agency as [everyday] resistance to liberal peacebuilding” (Paffenholz, 2015, p. 861). Paffenholz argues that this opposition of ‘the local’ and ‘the international’ has led to a “binary understanding with weak conceptualisation of the international and the local” (Paffenholz, 2015, p. 862). It forgets to take into account the agency of actors on both local and international level. These levels should not be seen as homogenous levels, but the diversity of the actors across these levels could lead to a more nuanced and diverse understanding of these levels. Therefore, a detailed analysis of both levels, in order to get a more comprehensive understanding of peacebuilding, the ‘hybrid turn’ and local and international actors needs more grounding in empirical realties as a means to unpack power and dominance. Paffenholz suggests that for future research, a move away from this binary understanding should be made, in combination with

(20)

empirical evidence, to see the variety of actors on both levels and to understand the fluid dynamics that shape peace processes (Paffenholz, 2015). The next part of this chapter will go into problem solving literature in critical liberal peace debates, and builds on this recommendations of Paffenholz to see the heterogeneity among actors in the peacebuilding field.

2.5 Problem solvers in peacebuilding

‘Problem solving’ literature examines the conditions under which international peacebuilding may or may not work. They are still highly critical of liberal peace, but believe that core elements of liberal peace like security and stabilization, reinforcing state institutions, democratic governance and marketization could bring the ability to emancipate people (Paris 2010; Mac Ginty 2010). Autesserre refers to peacebuilding as ‘actions aimed at creating, strengthening, and solidifying peace. At a minimum, it involves re-establishing a measure of security’ (Autesserre, 2014: 20). Different authors have variating criteria to evaluate whether an intervention has been a success or failure. However, according to Autesserre, there is a relative consensus “that external interventions tend to increase changes of establishing a durable peace” (Autesserre, 2014: p. 22). Autesserre developed a view that if peacebuilding is to reach a level of everyday peace, an experience of peace that affects the lives of ordinary citizens, it requires an engagement in different domains than the political and economic (Autesserre, 2010, van Iterson Scholten, 2018). Autessere came up with a definition that a peacebuilding operation has been successful when it: “reflects a general consensus among the people involved in or affected by a given initiative that it has advanced, one way or another, the establishment of peace” (Autesserre 2014, p. 22). This view is of a ‘bottom-up’ alternative (in addition) to top-down liberal peacebuilding (, in which people’s agency plays an important role (van Iterson Scholten, 2018). In this view, the efforts of international peacebuilding are perceived as contributing to sustainable peace, but it should take into account the everyday realities and agency of local actors. Everyday peace is something that should be felt on a day-to-day base, can be found in the social and psychological domain and is embedded by individuals (van Iterson Scholten, 2018; Mac Ginty, 2013). This ‘bottom-up’ alternative is both an alternative to top-down liberal peacebuilding, as an addition, in which people’s agency plays an important role (Autesserre 2010; Mac Ginty and Firchow, 2016; van Iterson Scholten, 2018). Following Auteserre, an everyday perception of peace that is incorporated in liberal peacebuilding efforts, could contribute to a more successful perception of these efforts by the people who it affects (Autesserre, 2010).

Problem solving authors thus see local actors and their agency as crucial in determining the success or failure of liberal peacebuilding operations. These authors argue that when local actors are involved in designing and evaluation peacebuilding efforts that concern them, their effectiveness will increase (Campbell, 2018, Verkoren, 2008). The ‘local knowledge’ of communities structures, experience in grassroots work, ways of applying peacebuilding methods developed elsewhere in a

(21)

context of (post-)conflict and combining Western and traditional methods and access to local information, can fulfil a key role improving international designed peacebuilding operations to the local context. This will enable actors who are implementing these ‘global goals’ that shape international peacebuilding, to adjust accordingly to local realities and can result in a combination of liberal and everyday peace (Campbell, 2018).

Campbell argues that the organizational performance of country offices is an essential link between international peacebuilding and ‘local peace’ (Campbell, 2018). A country office is a local office of an international organisation, international NGO or bilateral donor, that has the authority to implement and oversee most of the peacebuilding activities in a country (Campbell, 2018; Autesserre, 2014). A country office thus finds itself between the headquarter of an organisation, that is often located in the global North and designs general peacebuilding objectives and programs and the local reality of implementing programs. Country offices are often treated as a monolithic unit in peacebuilding literature, but Campbell argues that a huge variation exists in the successes of country offices in implementing their peacebuilding aims (Campbell, 2018). Therefore it is interesting to see when these country offices are perceived to perform successfully.

Following theory from organizational literature, Campbell argues that an country office is most successful when it can apply organizational learning to reconcile an organization’s aims and its outcomes (Campbell 2018, Schön and Argyris, 1996). The following part of this chapter will give a broader understanding of learning in organizational literature and how this relates to international and local peacebuilding.

2.6 ‘Learning’ and ‘accountability’

Learning can refer to many things and following organizational literature, it may involve: discovery (of the problem), inventing a solution, producing the invention, and generalizing what one has learned to other settings (Argyris, 1976, 642). For organizational learning, an organization should not only acquire new knowledge, but this new information would be embedded in the organizational memory (Schön and Argyris, 1996). In this research, learning refers to:

“the conscious or unconscious acquisition of new knowledge that makes possible more effective action and/or better result… interaction with other plays an important role in learning. The process of learning includes not only knowledge acquisition, but also implementation: changing behaviour for better results” (Verkoren, 2008 p. 111).

Following organizational learning theory, learning plays an vital role in the survival of country offices, as they are operating in a rapidly changing (post-conflict) context: “in situations affected by conflict, the need to learn in high… what seemed like common sense yesterday may no longer apply today”

(22)

(Verkoren, 2008, p. 112). As peacebuilding actors are working to create change in a fast changing (post-)conflict context, they need a good understanding of the local (changing) needs. In order to get a comprehensive understanding of this context and what is needed, they need to listen to local feedback. Local feedback can identify whether the efforts undertaken by an organization are linking in to the circumstantial demands. However, Campbell argues that this ‘feedback loop’ is broken, because at the moment global governors (e.g. people working in the country offices) are accountable to their global bosses and lack the need to listen to local feedback. She sees a role for informal local accountability and

formal peacebuilding accountability. Before these concepts will be explained with regards to country

offices performance, first theory on accountability, in relation to non-governmental organisations will be explained. This will be used to show how a complexity of accountability exist in the peacebuilding field, since peacebuilding actors have accountability towards multiple actors.

Accountability is a term that is often used in literature concerning the performance of NGOs, and following Ebrahim, it is defined “not only as a means through which individuals and organizations are held responsible for their actions, but also as a means by which organisations and individuals take internal responsibility for shaping their organizational mission and values, for opening themselves to public or external scrutiny, and for assessing performance in relation to goals” (Ebrahim, 2003). For an NGO can be held accountable by different actors: by their patrons, which results in upward

accountability and refers to the relationship with donors and is focuses on the spending of designated

money for designated purposes. NGOs also have an accountability to clients through downward

accountability, which refers to the “group to whom NGOs provide services”, and this can include

communities and regions impacted by the programs (Ebrahim 2003, Edwards & Hulme 1996. P 967). Lastly, NGOs are accountable to themselves, an internal accountability, which is a responsibility to its mission and staff. (Ebrahim, 2003). These different ‘accountabilities’, upward, downward and internal, are applicable to performance peacebuilding in Burundi and both the UN Peacebuilding Fund as to Mi-PAREC, as these organisations are concerned with the same triangle.

Campbell argues that, due to a growing global (upward) accountability in peacebuilding, the product (peacebuilding efforts) is being assessed by the producer (the headquarters that designs the projects), whereas it should be reviewed by the consumer (the local population that should benefit from these efforts) (Campbell, 2018). To make these global programs more relevant for the context in which they are implemented, organizational learning should take into account local feedback and downward accountability towards clients (Campbell, 2018, Ebrahim, 2003). To fix the broken feedback loop and improve peacebuilding performances, country offices would perform the most successful when they integrate informal local accountability and formal peacebuilding accountability:

“informal local accountability gives a country office the local-level feedback necessary to identify actions that may reduce the gap between its global peacebuilding aims and local peacebuilding outcomes. Whereas formal accountability that prioritizes peacebuilding above other aims incentivizes

(23)

the country offices to take actions. Over time, these feedback loops are likely to build local buy-in for peacebuilding activity and possible even “local ownership”, a constant and elusive goal of international intervention” (Campbell 2018: p. 4).

Informal local accountability takes place when a country office delegates authority to local stakeholders who represent the diversity of local interest in the country office’s peacebuilding interventions. When their feedback is used for organizational learning, and the country office thus not only takes into account this new knowledge, but also implements it, their behaviour may result in better local peacebuilding outcomes.

On top of informal local accountability, country offices should also prioritize peacebuilding, instead of humanitarian or development work, to be as successful as possible in their peacebuilding aims. When a country office possesses these accountability structures, it will be a peacebuilder learner. Informal local accountability and formal peacebuilding accountability will be further discussed in chapter seven, in relation to peacebuilding in Burundi.

2.7 Conclusion

In conclusion, the scholarship concerning peace and peacebuilding is very diverse and divided. When talking about peacebuilding, the perception of what peace constitutes is the first reason for division among scholars. Is peace established when there is an absence of physical violence (negative peace), or should there be social justice (positive peace)? This theoretical framework, following van Iterson Scholten, laid out six different dimensions that distinguish variating interpretations of peace. The timeframe of peace; whether peace is seen as a goal or dynamic process; the level of peace, ranging from individual to international; the domain to establish peace in, like political or psychological; the values that shape the interpretation of peace; and whether embedding is done by individuals or institutions. These dimensions will be used in this research in order to explain what kind of peace is being built and how different dimensions of peace shape local and international peacebuilding.

This theoretical framework has shown how liberal triumphalism has dominated the academic field, but how liberal peace is now subjected to various critiques and source for academic debates. Liberal peace is a combination of democracy and free market capitalism and after some adjustments, liberal peacebuilding mainly focused on statebuilding efforts and sees peace as being embedded through institutions. The debates concerning peacebuilding are mainly between the ‘paradigm-shifters’ that want to a post-liberal form of peacebuilding. In this post-liberal peacebuilding, local peacebuilding efforts alter or resist international peacebuilding efforts and result in a hybridized form of peace. Other alternatives or additions to liberal peace were introduced, like hybrid peace, agonistic peace and everyday peace. This research uses the theory of hybrid peacebuilding to identify similarities in the peacebuilding efforts on community level and on the UN level, but also takes into account these critical

(24)

notes of Paffenholz to move beyond a binary understanding of local versus international and bears in mind the diversity of actors in the different peacebuilding efforts.

Another point of view from critical liberal peacebuilding debates, is the ‘problem solving’ literature. This literature examines the conditions under which international peacebuilding may or may not work. In this research, the theory of organizational learning is used with regards to the performance of country offices in international peacebuilding operations. This theory suggests that through informal

local accountability and formal peacebuilding accountability, country offices can incorporate local

actors in both evaluation and design of their programs, to can improve their performance.

In the chapter four, the contextual background of this research, Burundi’s history will be laid out, with regards to causes of violence and different peacebuilding efforts. In this chapter, it is possible to see how peace has been interpreted by international peacebuilders, what this meant for the peace operations in the country and how different dimensions of peace became dominant throughout the history.

(25)

3 Methodology

3.1 Research design

This research evolves around different levels of peacebuilding in Burundi. To examine these different levels of peacebuilding, different sets data have been collected, through varying methods. On the one hand, the UN Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) has been chosen as a peacebuilding actor that works on an international level. The data collected on the work of the PBF thus represents international peacebuilding. On the other hand, Mi-PAREC has been chosen to get an understanding of local peacebuilding in Burundi. I have chosen for qualitative data, through semi-structured interviews with members of Mi-PAREC and a historical discourse analysis of the documents of the PBF.

The data collection through different methods has allowed me to make a comparison between the different levels of peacebuilding and to see a general development of peacebuilding efforts of the UN in Burundi, while also increasing an understanding of the realities of local peacebuilding and the perception of international peacebuilding. The original goal stated in my research design was to collect different types of data, in order to analyse two different levels of peacebuilding in Burundi and to enable myself to come to an interesting insight. In reflection, although some complications have occurred, I have met this goal. In the next paragraph I will elaborate on the methods used, the complications that have occurred, what kind of data I have collected and how this was analysed and the ethical issues raised by the research.

3.2 Methods

As this research concerns different levels of peacebuilding, I have also structured the collection of data along these different levels. For the ‘local level’, I collected data in small case-study, which resulted in data in the form of semi-interviews, reports and other primary sources like program manuals. I have coded the interviews and made an overview of the reports and other documents. These different sets of data were combined in a collection of qualitative results, that were then used for analysis.

For the international level, I have collected various primary sources of international peacebuilding efforts implemented by the UN Peacebuilding Fund. This data consisted of project plans, project evaluations, UN speeches, UN official documents, UN resolutions and independent reports by organisations like the Human Rights Watch. The collection of this data was then used to do a discourse analysis, and identify changes of the UN PBF priorities, based on the language used and the way of structuring evaluations.

By combining the information gathered from this data with my theoretical framework, I was able to compare the work of the UN PBF and that of Mi-PAREC. In combination with my theoretical framework, the historical background and secondary literature, I was able to analyse my data, which enabled me to find answers to my sub-questions and that led to the answer of my research question.

(26)

3.2.1 Local level research

To collect data on local peacebuilding, a small case-study of the work of Mi-PAREC has been done. After first hearing about the organisation through a lecture, I became very impressed by the work of Mi-PAREC. Through personal relations, I got in touch with the organisation. The organisation works on a community peacebuilding in thirteen out of eighteen provinces of Burundi and is connected with more than five hundred ‘local peace committees’. In order to get an understanding of the work of Mi-PAREC and its connection to other levels of peacebuilding, I have conducted eight interviews with (former) members of the organisation. These were semi-structured interviews, conducted through Skype in both English and French.

3.2.1.1 Data collection

Because of the way Mi-PAREC is structured and its connection to hundreds of people from different LPCs, the views expressed by respondents thus go beyond the work of Mi-PAREC but also represent challenges and opportunities for local peacebuilding in Burundi. Furthermore, to expand my comprehension of the organisation, I have analysed (available) annual reports of the organisation, publications of the organisation, descriptions of Mi-PARECs projects by (international) partners and the literature available on the organisation. I have done a combination of desk-research with ‘field work’, because through technology, the boundaries of desk research are becoming less and it is possible to talk to people all over the world. In the collection of this data, I followed the following steps:

1. I first collected general information about Mi-PAREC, through their website, personal contacts, reports and literature and came up with a set of topics that caught my interest.

2. After this preparational phase, I came up with general questions and themes for the first interview. These questions formed the topic of my first interview, conducted with one of the founding members of Mi-PAREC. In this interview, I have explained my research objectives, and collected first set of data about the functioning of the organisation. Through this interview, I got in touch with other members of the organisation. The insights that I gained from this initial interview, allowed me to slightly adjust my question for the other interviews I conducted. 3. After getting in touch with other members of the organisation, I was able to conduct

semi-structured interviews with several members of the organisation through Skype. Although I aimed at more interviews, several contacts did not respond or did not have time for an interview. However, the people I did interview were working on different programs, in different (geographic) areas and in different hierarchical positions. The major themes discussed in these interviews concerned organisational structure of Mi-PAREC, the challenges and opportunities presented in peacebuilding work of the respondents, the work of LPCs, the role of the Arusha

(27)

Accord, the perception of the international community, (possible) ways to connect top-down peacebuilding and bottom-up peacebuilding in Burundi.

4. After I collected all the interviews and information out of reports and literature, I transcribed the interviews, coded them according to themes like links of different levels of peacebuilding, perception of root causes of conflict, the role of the government, perception towards the international community, the methods of working of the organisation, the role of youth and peace education, among others.

3.2.1.2 Limitations

Throughout the interview I have come across several implications for data collection. The first was the (presumed) difficulty to obtain a visa for Burundi. Although it might have theoretically been possible to go on ‘field work’ to Burundi, I was informed by several members of Dutch NGOs working in Burundi, that it is currently very difficult to get access to Burundi. Therefore, I decided not to aim all my efforts at getting this visa, but to put this energy into getting in touch with Mi-PAREC, and through regular contact with its members, build a trust relationship. I thus performed interviews through desk-research. This led to a next challenge, because even though communication is improving world-wide, the quality of my research partly depended on the quality of the internet connection during interviews. During some interviews, the connection did not cause any significant problems, while for others the failing of the connection resulted in a lower quality of the research, as the respondents answers fell away due to noise or a delay caused a miscommunication. Another disadvantage of Skype interviews is the lack of real human interaction. In some cases I was able to see expressions of respondent, but in other cases the connection did not allowed for video-conversations. However, I noted that sometimes not being able to see someone also made it easier for respondents to open up, as it is sometimes easier to tell a confident story to someone you don’t know than to a close connection.

3.2.2 International level research

To gain insight on the international level of peacebuilding that is carried out in Burundi, I chose to collect data on the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund. However, prior to this decision, I have first conducted research on the structure of the UN, to see how it channels peacebuilding efforts. I have chosen the PBF, because it is an organ of the UN Peacebuilding Architecture, which allocates money to projects implemented by other UN organs like the UN Development Programme, as well as to international NGOs. So all the projects connected to peacebuilding that are implemented by the UN, have been approved by the PBF. Therefore, the PBF was chosen as representative of international peacebuilding.

(28)

3.2.2.1 Data collection

I have collected data on the UN’s peacebuilding efforts by first collecting information on the structure of the UN, through the organisations own resolutions and official documents as well as from literature. I then started to collect data on the project funded by the PBF since 2007 until 2018. This consisted of three overarching programs, with a total of 42 projects. I have gathered information on the allocated budget of the projects, their main goal, the organisations implementing the projects, the partners, the area where the projects were implemented, the ‘domain’ in which these projects fell, whether the projects were closed or ongoing, the beneficiaries of the project and the level on which the projects took place. I gathered this data from the project plans, annual plans and evaluations of the projects. Furthermore, I compared this data to resolutions, speeches, resolutions and official documents of the UN Secretary General, representatives of the UN Peacebuilding Commission, ambassadorial meetings, confidential reports of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and external evaluations. This allowed me to draw analyses of developments of different priorities within the PBF in Burundi throughout the years and to see these developments in line with more general developments within the UN and in peacebuilding in general. By connecting this data to my theoretical framework and in combination with secondary literature, I gained insights in the international peacebuilding field.

3.2.2.2 Limitations and choices

There is a very large body of documents regarding the work of the UN in general, the work of the UN in Burundi, the peacebuilding efforts of the UN in Burundi. One limitations I came across, due to the multitude of documents, was the selection of documents. Although I have tried to take into account as many as possible, I had to make a choice in the selection, for the quality of analysing the data. I have been able to process all general information the projects of the UN PBF, but it was not possible to go into detail of every report made available of these projects. Therefore, I have chosen tonmake a thorough analysis of the most recent project plans and evaluations, the original plans and the three overarching Peacebuilding Priority Plans for Burundi by the PBF. For other projects, I have collected more general information, in order to make an analysis.

3.3 Ethics

Because this research has been conducted in a context of a country where “there is no freedom of expression… there is fear and trauma… there are no conditions where you can really feel safe and open to discuss things” (Jasmine, Skype interview, 3 May, 2019) where there is still occurrence of direct violence and because this research has involved respondents that live in this reality, the ethics with regards to the safety of people involved in this research has been very important.

(29)

From the beginning of the research, I have been open towards my respondents about my aim of the research, I have informed them about their role and at the beginning of every interview I have explicitly asked whether it was possible to record the interviews and asked whether they would like to stay anonymous or not. The importance of confidentiality was the first statement I have made for every interview. Some of the respondents indicated that they would rather be anonymous. As Mi-PAREC is not an enormous organisation, working in specific areas and because there is a possibility that by naming one person, other persons could be identified as well, I have chosen to make everyone anonymous in this research. I have chosen pseudonyms from names that are common in Burundi. Because of confidentiality, anonymity and the size of Mi-PAREC, it is thus also not possible to give a detailed description of the people interviewed. However, I have been in touch with people working on various programs, covering the main fields of work, of the organisation. These people were working in various parts of the country, which also makes the analysis made upon these interviews more generalizable.

As this research has been conducted in a context where there is “no freedom of expression”, I have in the first place tried to avoid direct questions to topics that I identified as sensitive, for example towards the role of the government. Being aware that Burundi has an active secret service and keeping in mind the safety of the respondents. However I was still able to collect some information with regards to ‘sensitive topics’, because they were brought forward by the respondents themselves. When this occurred, I tried to engage as much as possible.

In the interviews, some experiences with regards to the violent past of Burundi were shared. At the beginning of every interview, I have clearly stated that the respondents do not have any obligation to answer any question and that they should only share the information that they feel comfortable about. Since I have no experiences that are comparable to that of the respondents, I have been very aware of my own position. When designing the questions for interviews, I have been very critical towards the scope of the questions. Questions that might have seen ‘easy to answer’ to me, could have a bigger emotional impact on the respondents. In the end, I believe I was able to avoid such a (negative) impact through being very understanding in interviews. I have always tried to give the respondents enough room to answer, I have provided them with some information about myself as well, being aware that I was asking a lot from them. During and after every interview, I have asked whether there were any things the respondents wanted to share with me, even when this was not answering my questions. Furthermore, I have tried to be as transparent as possible towards all the respondents. During these interviews, I have also been very aware of my own position as European based researcher, trying to gain an understanding of the realities in Burundi, and trying to be as unbiased as possible.

Lastly, I have been very grateful for all the respondents of Mi-PAREC that were able to make time for interviews and who have expressed interest in my research. Therefore, I hope that through this research I will be able to give back to them, because my research has been very dependent of them.

(30)

4 Historical context

4.1 Introduction

“We need to have all Burundians coming together in the dialogue. Because you cannot separate people from their history… In our context, we know since independence there has been a real struggle for power. Between Hutu and Tutsi. Whereby like, Tutsi has been in power in 1993, and again now Hutu’s, after that. That has been really part of our history. Who is in power, what is his tribe, where does he come from.” (Olivier, Skype interview, 2 May, 2019)

In this quote, it is brought forward that Burundi’s history, its people and the current context are closely connected. In order to get a comprehensive understanding of this connection and the current state of peace and peacebuilding in Burundi, this chapter outlines certain aspects of Burundi’s history. The first part of this chapter shortly lays out several outburst of violence in Burundi, after the country gained independence. This paragraph goes into the role of ethnicity in Burundian conflicts. Various interpretations of scholars are brought forward, since there is no consensus within academia about the origin of ethnicity in Burundi. This paragraph thus leaves the question of whether ethnicity existed before colonial rule unanswered and instead focusses on the creation of ‘ethnic antagonism’ during the colonial and post-colonial period. Following Burundian Professor Ndikumana, it is argued that this antagonism emerged from biased distribution of economic resources and political power (Ndikumana 2007). The understanding of ‘ethnic antagonism’ is important to understand the following sequence of violence in Burundi.

The second part of this chapter focusses on the civil war that took place in Burundi and the peace negotiations that went along with it. These negotiations led to the Arusha Agreement in 2000 and in this paragraph it is possible to see how the international community started to interfere in Burundi. The main argument of this paragraph, is that by institutionalized ethnic proportions in the Arusha Agreement, the agreement fails to move beyond the ethnic categorization.

The third part of this chapter will outline the developments in Burundi, since the instalment of the current government. This period started with an optimism of the international community towards the Burundian process of peace consolidation, but laid out in this chapter is how the government of Burundi started to move away from the Arusha Agreement. The next paragraph lays out how the relationship between the Burundian government and actors from the international community became very tense. Against this general context, the last part of this chapter will go in on the creation and efforts of the UN PBF and Mi-PAREC, the two organisations that represent international and local peacebuilding in this research.

In this chapter, references will be made to concepts from the theoretical framework like liberal peace, everyday peace and local needs. By creating an understanding of the historical developments of

(31)

ethnicity, power-sharing and the role of the international community in the Burundian, this chapter lays out a contextual foundation for the rest of the research.

4.2 Ethnic antagonism

In the Burundian context, ethnic identities have played a major role in the violence that has occurred. However, the origins of these ethnic identities, the Hutu and the Tutsi, are subject of a lot of debate in Burundi, as well as in literature. Nowadays, the Tutsi make up 14% of the population, the Hutu 85% and a third group, the Twa, 1%.

Some scholars argue that the different ethnic groups already existed in the pre-colonial era (Ngaruko, 2003), while others use the argument that cultural homogeneity across the ethnic groups, suggest that different ethnic groups started to exist later on (Lemarchand, 1996; Daley, 2006a). Whether the different categorizations already existed in the pre-colonial, the colonial system used racial and ethnic hierarchy for their administrative and social policies. The German and Belgian colonizers interpreted the pre-colonial social hierarchy with entrenched ideas of racial superiority. The herdsman, with European-like features, were seen as natural leaders and racially superior to the peasants, and hunters and gatherers (Sanders, 1969). The herdsmen, or Tutsi, became part of the colonialist administration of indirect rule, while the Hutu, the label that became incorporated for peasants, became marginalized in politics (Daley, 2006a, Lemarchand, 1996). ‘With the population classified into racially defined ethnic groups, racist ideology ensured that notions of superiority and inferiority became associated with Tutsi and Hutu’ (Daley 2006a, p. 665).

When Burundi became independent in 1962, the Tutsi minority stayed in political power and remained politically and economic privileged over Hutu. In the years to come, many outbreaks of violence would occur. A returning cycle of violence can be identified in outbreaks in 1972, 1988 and 1991: the Hutu would try to overcome the Tutsi rule, through insurgency or coup d’états, resulting in deaths and wounded on the Tutsi side, followed by a large-scale reprisal from Tutsi against Hutu (Piombo, 2010, p. 246). One example of these reprisal acts, would be to banish or execute Hutu from the military, which resulted in an ‘ethnically exclusive military that operated to protect the interest of the power elite’ (Apuuli , 2018, p. 59). After such an outbreak of violence, the Tutsi would strengthen their grip on power, institutionalizing the minority rule a bit more (Piombo, 2010).

Burundian Professor of Economic and specialist in African economy development Léonce Ndikumana connects pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial ethnic violence to each other by stating that ethnic groups may have existed before the colonial rule, whereas an ethnical antagonism between Hutu and Tutsi is a phenomenon that emerged from the biased distribution of economic resources and political power (Ndikumana, 2000, Ndikumana, 2007, p. 414). This can be seen as ‘horizontal inequalities’, which are defined as “inequalities in economic, political, or social dimensions or cultural status between culturally defined groups” (Stewart 2008, p. 3). Her assumption is that if one groups identifies the other as more privileged than its own, this grievance can result in tensions and eventually

Peacebuilding in Burundi: ‘contre toute forme de violence’? : how (organisational) learning can fulfil a role in the connection of local peacebuilding knowledge, international peacebuilding aims and the needs of the Bur