At the height of the post-Cold War era, comprehensive peace agreements (CPAs) emerged as the dominant model for ending armed conflict and rebuilding fractured societies. From South Africa to Guatemala, Angola, Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Nepal and Colombia, these ambitious negotiated settlements sought not only to silence guns, but to transform political systems, address historical grievances, and lay the foundations for long-term peace, security and democratic coexistence. For a time, comprehensive peace talks became the gold standard of international peace-making — a reflection of optimism that negotiated political settlements could permanently resolve even the deepest conflicts.
But in today’s vastly different political and conflict landscape, is the model still viable or relevant?
Contemporary conflicts are more fragmented, transnational and geopolitically contested; armed groups are more diffuse; international mediation is weaker; and political polarization has eroded confidence in grand bargains and long implementation timelines. It has been over a decade since the last CPA was agreed and none is today on the political horizon. Can we still make peace today? Can we hope for more than “negative peace”, limited to stopping the bloodshed? Are we condemned to be caught in the present? In this podcast, Martha Maya, deputy Global director at IFIT discusses the new challenges of peace-making with three highly experienced experts, Monica McWilliams, a signatory of the 1998 Good Friday Peace Agreement in Ireland, Thania Paffenholz, a German political scientist and founder of Inclusive Peace, and Hesham Youssef, a former Egyptian ambassador and a senior advisor at the European Institute of Peace.
