This article builds upon recent scholarship in critical peace studies that focuses on the role of civil society actors in formal peacemaking processes, in short, peace talks, and post-conflict peacebuilding. The article specifically explores the role of civil society actors in the Guatemalan peace process. The research addresses the possible tensions and potential complementarities in processes where civil society enjoys a mandated role in centralised, formal peace negotiations carried out between the state and armed actors in talks levied within the liberal peace framework. In the case of Guatemala, non-state actors participated to an unprecedented extent in the peace negotiations, and Guatemala has not relapsed into armed conflict. However, post-conflict Guatemala is a violent and unstable country. Consequently, the study challenges the assumption that peacemaking is necessarily more successful in those instances where provisions have been established to guarantee the participation of civil society.
BobbioN.1989, Democracy and Dictatorship, trans. by KennealyPeter, Cambridge: Polity Press.
2.
BrettR.2008, Social Movements, Indigenous Politics and Democratisation in Guatemala, 1985–1996, Boston, MA: Brill.
3.
BrettR.2013, ‘Peace Stillborn? Guatemala's Liberal Peace and the Indigenous Movement’ in Peacebuilding1: 2: 222–238.
4.
BrettR.2016, The Origins and Dynamics of Genocide: Political Violence in Guatemala, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
5.
BrinkerhoffD.2007, Governance in Post-Conflict Societies: Rebuilding Fragile States, New York, NY: SAGE PublicationsSage CA: Los Angeles, CA
6.
BriscoeI. & Rodríguez PellecerM.2010, A State Under Siege: Elites, Criminal Networks and Institutional Reform in Guatemala, Amsterdam: Netherlands Institute of International Relations.
7.
BryskA.1994, The Politics of Human Rights in Argentina: Protest, Change and Democratization, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
8.
CallC.2012, Why Peace Fails: The Causes and Prevention of Civil War Recurrence, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
9.
CEH1999, Guatemala: Nunca Mas, Guatemala: UN.
10.
ChandlerD.2000, Bosnia: Faking Democracy after Dayton, London: Pluto Press.
11.
ChenowethE. & StephanM.J.2011, Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
12.
EhrenbergJ.1999, Civil Society: The Critical History of an Idea, New York, NY: New York University Press.
13.
GreenL.1998, Fear as a Way of Life: Mayan Widows in Rural Guatemala, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
JonasS.2000, Of Centaurs and Doves: Guatemala's Peace Process, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
16.
KarlT.2005, ‘From Democracy to Democratization and Back: Before Transitions from Authoritarian Rule’, CDDRL Working Papers, Stanford University.
17.
KeaneJ.1998, Civil Society: Old Images, New Visions, Cambridge: Polity Press.
18.
KeckM. & SikkinkK.1999, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks in International and Regional Politics’ in International Social Science Journal51: 159: 89–101.
19.
KruijtD. & KooningsK.1999, Societies of Fear: The Legacy of Civil War, Violence and Terror in Latin America, London: Zed Press.
20.
KrznaricR.1999, ‘Civil and Uncivil Actors in the Guatemalan Peace Process’ in Bulletin of Latin American Research18: 1: 1–16.
21.
LederachJ.P.1997, Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies, Washington, DC: USIP.
22.
Mac GintyR.2008, ‘Indigenous Peace-Making versus the Liberal Peace’ in Cooperation and Conflict43: 2: 139–163.
23.
Mac GintyR.2010, ‘Hybrid Peace: The Interaction between Top-Down and Bottom-Up Peace’ in Security Dialogue41: 4: 391–412.
24.
Mac GintyR.2011, International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
Mac GintyR.2012, ‘Routine Peace: Technocracy and Peacebuilding’ in Cooperation and Conflict47: 3: 287–308.
26.
Mac GintyR. & RichmondO.2013, ‘The Local Turn in Peace Building: A Critical Agenda for Peace’ in Third World Quarterly34: 5: 763–783.
O'DonnellG.1993, ‘On the State, Democratization and Some Conceptual Problems: A Latin American View with Glances at Some Postcommunist Countries’ in World Development21: 8: 1355–1369.
29.
O'DonnellG. & SchmitterP.2013, Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies, Washington, DC: Johns Hopkins University Press.
PaffenholzT.2014, ‘Civil Society and Peace Negotiations: Beyond the Inclusion-Exclusion Dichotomy’ in Negotiation Journal30: 1: 69–91.
32.
PoulignyB.2005, ‘Civil Society and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: Ambiguities of International Programmes Aimed at Building “New” Societies’ in Security Dialogue36: 4: 495–510.
SteenkampC.2011, ‘In the Shadows of War and Peace: Making Sense of Violence after Peace Accords in Conflict’ in Security & Development11: 3: 357–383.
39.
Torres-RivasE.2007, La Piel de Centroamérica: una visión epidérmica de setenta y cinco años de su historia, Costa Rica: FLACSO.
40.
United Nations1992, An Agenda for Peace. Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping. New York, NY: United Nations: http://www.un-documents.net/a47-277.htm, accessed 17 February 2017.
41.
Van TongerenP.2013, ‘Potential Cornerstone of Infrastructures for Peace? How Local Peace Committees Can Make a Difference’ in Peacebuilding1: 1: 39–60.
42.
VogelB.2016, ‘Civil Society Capture: Top-Down Interventions from Below?’ in Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding10: 4: 472–489.
43.
Wanis-St. JohnA. & KewD.2008, ‘Civil Society and Peace Negotiations: Confronting Exclusion’ in International Negotiation13: 11–36.
