A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration: social reintegration approach

Transcription

1 Conflict, Security & Development ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration: social reintegration approach Alpaslan Özerdem To cite this article: Alpaslan Özerdem (2012) A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration: social reintegration approach, Conflict, Security & Development, 12:1, 51-73, DOI: / To link to this article: Published online: 15 Mar Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1059 View related articles Citing articles: 6 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at Download by: [Lanchester Library] Date: 26 April 2017, At: 03:28

2 Conflict, Security & Development 12:1 March 2012 Analysis A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration: social reintegration approach Alpaslan Özerdem The social reintegration of former combatants is the most important aspect of the disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) process, but there is a paucity of literature providing a clear understanding of its challenges and what it actually constitutes, and, more importantly, how it could be planned and implemented in peace-building environments. In order to respond to the lack of theory, the paper will use the desistance theory which outlines assistance models for ex-offenders re-entry into society and addresses the question of how social reintegration can be perceived and structured effectively in the overall DDR operational landscape. The proposed approach is presented through a matrix of relationships between the elements of emphasis on the combatant and emphasis on the community in terms of low and high levels, resulting in the four main models for community re-entry: selfdemobilisation, reinsertion, communitylocated reintegration and social reintegration. Having explored what they constitute in the practice of DDR in the second part of the analysis section, the social reintegration approach, which is structured over the dimensions of family and community, sustainable employment and civic responsibilities, will be elaborated in the final part. Professor Alpaslan Özerdem is at the Centre for Peace and Reconciliation Studies, Coventry University, UK. He is the author of Post-war Recovery: Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (I.B. Tauris, 2008), co-editor of Participatory Research Methodologies in Development and Post Disaster/Conflict Reconstruction (Ashgate, 2010) and co-editor of Child Soldiers: From Recruitment to Reintegration (Palgrave, 2011). ISSN print/issn online/12/ q 2012 Conflict, Security and Development Group

3 52 Alpaslan Özerdem Introduction This paper attempts to present a re-conceptualisation of social reintegration of former combatants by using the approach of re-entry assistance for ex-offenders. In the disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) literature, the focus has so far primarily been the economic reintegration of former combatants, but other significant aspects such as political and social reintegration have received only a limited exploration. Although the importance of social reintegration is underlined by many researchers, there has not been a comprehensive attempt to draw up a particular model for the social reintegration process. 1 However, there is also now a growing momentum in support of a more community centred approach to DDR, the second generation DDR as defined by DPKO, 2 recognising that the roots of conflict often stem from problems at the societal level and therefore identifying the role of the community for effective reintegration should be a priority. 3 On the other hand, although the need for community centred approaches to DDR is acknowledged there is a limited understanding of how this translates into practice. The lack of case study evidence to evaluate the success or failure of community based programmes has contributed to this gap further. In order to respond to the lack of an analytical approach in understanding the challenges of social reintegration and present a critique of how such an undertaking is perceived and structured in the overall DDR theoretical and operational landscape, the paper will use the ex-offender re-entry theory which outlines the assistance models for ex-offenders re-entry into society. However, before going any further with the use of such a conceptualisation, it is important to underline here that the reason for this choice is not because the paper perceives former combatants from a criminality or security risk perspective. In fact, it is necessary to acknowledge that there would be major differences between why people commit crime and why they join an armed group. A combination of push and pull factors, ranging from structural violence, poverty, politics and ideology to culture and tradition, family and friends, education and employment opportunities and coercion would all play a role in the recruitment of combatants, which would not necessarily be the reasons for committing crimes. There would also be differences in the motivations and opportunities for recidivism between ex-offenders and former combatants in terms of the overall context such experiences would be taking place in and what benefits they could expect from such transformation experiences. However, having borne in mind such differences it would still be possible to justify the use of the ex-offender re-entry approach for the

4 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 53 reintegration of former combatants as long as it is considered as an analytical framework for discussion. Overall, there is a wealth of knowledge and experience in responding to the challenges related to ex-offenders, some of which this paper considers to be highly relevant in a possible re-conceptualisation of social reintegration approaches for former combatants. Consequently, the first section will start by justifying the use of community re-entry literature for DDR as the main theoretical conceptualisation of this paper. In the analysis part, the proposed model for community re-entry by former combatants will be presented by using a matrix of relationships between the elements of emphasis on the combatant and emphasis on the community in terms of them being at the low and high levels. Hence, the four main approaches for community re-entry as self-demobilisation, reinsertion, community-located reintegration and social reintegration will form the main focus of discussions. The paper will argue that the social reintegration approach with its three dimensions of family and community, sustainable employment and civic responsibilities would be the most effective model for ex-combatant reintegration, especially in the context of war-to-peace scenarios which are characterised with the need of responding to deep and widespread societal divisions after protracted armed conflicts. Rather than separating the tasks of social, political and economic reintegration for excombatants, the paper concludes that they should all be considered as part and parcel of the proposed social reintegration approach. Analytical framework: ex-offender re-entry In the way social forces inform individual s acts and as succinctly explored by Durkheim, even in the act of taking one s own life, the main decisive factor would be based on the relationship between the individual and society. 4 In fact, the theory of suicide has been applied to a number of social control theories such as the way that deviant behaviour is socially constructed. 5 Notably, crime is described as a violation of societal rules of behaviour. 6 Subsequently, the role of the community is central to regulating deviant behaviour, and therefore cannot be ignored in theories of crime and crime prevention. Another critical area in which the role of community plays a significant role is the community re-entry of ex-offenders. The overarching aim of prisoner re-entry assistance is to enhance public safety by reducing the likelihood of re-offending. 7 Debates over the best method and techniques for prisoner re-entry date back to the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. 8 Notably, early rehabilitation strategies were

5 54 Alpaslan Özerdem coined in the late 1890s, in which it was argued that sentences should reflect the specific needs of the offender, and allow time for reform. Community models gained further popularity in the late 1960s and 1970s, where crime was blamed on failings in the community, rather than the offender. 9 Programmes therefore focussed on addressing the political, economic and social causes of crime, targeting known and potential criminals in the community. However, rising levels of crime in the 1980s, coupled with the support for right-wing policies in both the UK and US, led to a return to the more punitive aspects of social control. 10 Subsequently, re-entry assistance and parole work became more centred on surveillance and punishment, rather than social work. 11 This developed into the notion of probation and, more recently, the approach has changed towards restorative justice, recognising the need to hold offenders accountable, but at the same time providing assistance to enable them to become productive members of society. 12 Desistance theory offender versus community The principles of re-entry assistance are derived from the theory of desistance as an overarching concept. Desistance from crime refers to the process in which a former deviant becomes a non-offender. 13 This can either be a natural process, in which the former offender consciously decides to stop offending, or the result of intervention assistance. 14 In general, the literature on desistance and effective re-entry deviates between the level of attention focussed on the community and specific assistance provided to the offender. As shown in Figure 1, O Leary and Duffee offer a clearly-defined framework for determining various re-entry models and the level of emphasis placed either on the community or offender. 15 In this conceptualisation, the restraint approach places low emphasis on both the offender and the community, 16 and is based on the basic premise that you rehabilitate yourself, 17 removing the need for re-entry assistance. It, therefore, advocates less Emphasis on the community Emphasis on the Offender LOW HIGH LOW Restraint Reform HIGH Rehabilitation Reintegration Figure 1. Models for community re-entry Source: O Leary and Duffee, 1971.

6 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 55 interference in the process of desistance and assumes it is up to the individual offender to change or not. On the other hand, the rehabilitation model, or the treatment aspect of reentry assistance, places emphasis on psycho-social support to the ex-offender. 18 This is usually conducted during the prison sentence. Treatments include counselling and group therapy programmes, designed to provide life training assistance and, in the case of violent crime, encourage the development of non-violent attitudes. 19 In particular, rehabilitation measures focus on the re-learning of social skills, or cognitive behavioural development, to reinforce social norms and ease the re-entry process. 20 Under this model, violence is treated as a learned behaviour, which can be changed with the necessary intervention. 21 Meanwhile, the reform approach focuses on structural aspects of the community, which prevent the likelihood of re-offending. Evidence suggests that reform assistance, located in the community, improves the sustainability of the re-entry process. 22 Finally, the reintegration assistance in the bottom right quadrant in Figure 1 advocates the need for re-establishing social ties between the ex-offender and the community by focusing on both the specific needs of the offender in the re-entry process and the potential impact of the reentry on community life. 23 This view argues that simply focussing on the individual fails to address the wider social context in which the re-entry process takes place, such as reestablishing family relations, access to employment and civic reintegration. 24 Overall, this demonstrates the symbiotic nature of reintegration assistance which enhances both individual human capacity and the development of social capital to prevent criminal behaviour. As far as the first aspect of the interaction family relations is concerned, it is argued that commitment to spouse and children would reduce the time available to commit crimes. 25 In addition, taking responsibility for family is often central to the development of a citizen identity, 26 and investing in the role of family could therefore reduce incentives to return to crime. In the ex-offender re-entry process, Taxman et al. suggest that the family is an untapped resource, 27 but it is also pointed out by Breese et al. that placing too much pressure on the family, as a support structure, can increase problems if the ex-offender does not live up to expectations of reform. 28 Subsequently, the reintegration process must focus on enhancing the capacity of these natural helpers to assist former offenders. 29 The strong link between crime and unemployment is noted in a number of studies related to the re-entry of former offenders into society. Employment is generally seen as critical to the success of the re-entry process, 30 as it not only provides a way out of economic hardship, but also allows ex-offenders to resume productive responsibilities for

7 56 Alpaslan Özerdem families, and gain the necessary life skills to re-establish their attachment to normal society. As a result, according to Uggen et al., it is usually the first step in the transformation from criminal to citizen behaviour. 31 In addition, the labour market often provides access to a wider range of social activities and employment is, therefore, seen as a fundamental source of social capital that increases attachment to the community. 32 However, former prisoners often lack marketable skills to access the employment sector, and the provision of education/vocational skills is often promoted in re-entry programmes. 33 Even where ex-offenders have the skills to take on new opportunities they often face barriers to work because of the stigma attached to having a criminal record. 34 Thus, programmes should aim to target employers as well as offenders, to encourage sustainable employment and reduce negative labelling. In particular, local employers should be made aware of the needs of ex-offenders and provided with support mechanisms to increase the sustainability of employment. 35 Alongside familial and employment support networks, re-establishing civic responsibilities, such as voting in elections, is considered to be a positive contributor to attachment to society and confirms the citizen identity. 36 It is argued that some exposure to social capital is likely to foster greater interest in civic responsibilities which, in turn, encourages further social cohesion and the development of citizen values. Moreover, the extent to which the individual is committed to achieving societal goals by legitimate means therefore encourages the reform process. 37 Subsequently, fostering social capital, by reestablishing these family, work and civic bonds, reinforces social cohesion and the individual ties to society, which subsequently acts as a means for desisting. 38 This recognises the fundamental role of the community in setting the norms and values which are likely to affect the behaviour of the ex-offender. 39 Adaptation of the ex-offender re-entry theory to reintegration of former combatants The preceding review of ex-offender re-entry literature demonstrates a number of strong links with the process of DDR, as former combatants also go through similar challenges in their transformation from a combatant to a civilian in a war-to-peace scenario. In conventional one-man-one-weapon type DDR programmes, demobilisation is a planned process by which the armed forces of the government and/or opposition or factional forces either downsize or completely disband. Having been demobilised and transported to their

8 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 57 community of choice, the former combatants and their families must establish themselves in a civilian environment. Therefore, demobilisation is considered as the phase between disarmament the collection, control and disposal of small arms and light weapons and reintegration the process whereby former combatants and their families are integrated into the social, economic and political life of civilian communities. 40 However, a number of DDR terms such as reinsertion assistance, reintegration, community-centred reintegration and community-based reintegration are often used interchangeably without a clear understanding of what they mean and how they are supposed to take place after disarmament and demobilisation phases. Therefore, these challenges and the way they could be addressed from the perspective of a relationship between combatants and receiving communities will be the main focus of this section. In order to achieve this objective the ex-offender re-entry approach will be adapted as a possible framework for a comprehensive exploration of social reintegration. The ex-offender re-entry types as shown in Figure 1 will be used to investigate what they would mean in the context of DDR. Similar to the restraint conceptualisation for ex-offender re-entry in Figure 1, some combatants in certain war-to-peace transition environments might prefer to return home without going through such a formal DDR process, which is often termed selfdemobilisation. Such an approach represents no particular targeting of former combatants in the process of transformation and it is up to them to deal with the reintegration challenges through their own means and capacities. After the Bosnian war, for example, thousands of combatants returned home without any formal assistance. Selfdemobilisation might also happen after registering as a former combatant by handing in weapons and ammunitions set by disarmament criteria, but, due to various sociocultural, political or economic reasons, the combatant would not participate in the remaining parts of DDR. Reasons such as avoiding the social stigma attached to being a former combatant for a woman, the need to return to communities as soon as possible for an approaching agricultural season or the fear of possible political repercussions for being part of a particular group during the conflict can all play a significant role in opting for self-demobilisation. 41 One of the key components of conventional DDR programmes is the provision of reinsertion assistance, which is intended to ameliorate the reintegration process, and often includes post-discharge orientation, food assistance, health and educational support and a cash allowance. 42 In other words, reinsertion assistance is considered to be bridging that critical period for former combatants between being demobilised and starting to benefit

9 58 Alpaslan Özerdem reintegration assistance. However, the main assumption here is that the assistance package of reintegration would be meaningful enough to ensure their proper reintegration into society. This is rarely the case and the main reason for this is the way post-demobilisation assistance is often provided in a combatant-centred way, which can be described as a minimalist approach to DDR, as opposed to a maximalist approach in which the target caseload would be considered as part of their family and community within the wider framework of development challenges in the peace-building context. 43 According to the minimalist approach to DDR, insecurity may increase in the aftermath of an armed conflict if the demobilised combatants are not placed in employment as lack of skills, except in the use of weapons, is considered a potential risk for leading them to criminal activities, or they might be tempted to return to arms if their grievances and frustration continues to be neglected in peace-building processes. In other words, reintegration assistance is seen as a way of contributing to the establishment of postconflict security. Therefore, the assistance package often incorporates mainly economic rehabilitation and skills training programmes. Such activities are normally considered as reintegration through employment packages in the contemporary understanding of DDR practice. 44 Vocational training and micro-enterprise development, for example, are some of the main methods used in economic regeneration, but the problem is that they are often affected by a number of macro-economic factors such as structural adjustment programmes, economic reforms, economic stagnation, a narrow industrial base, labour market saturation, high inflation and high military expenditure. In other words, the demand side of employment and services from such newly created businesses and gained skills would be highly decisive in whether former combatants could actually end up in meaningful employment at the end of their training courses or whether their businesses could last in the medium to long term. 45 Moreover, the so called reintegration, through the provision of a three six month vocational training opportunity on a subject which the former combatant might not have had much interest in, often remains an ideal. It is important to recognise that calling such undertakings reintegration could only be considered as an assumption in its best form, but often it is misleading as thousands of former combatants are left unemployed with no opportunities for meaningful livelihoods, as was the case in Kosovo and Afghanistan. 46 Therefore, this paper categorises all these one-man-one-weapon type so-called economic reintegration activities under the umbrella of the reinsertion approach. With a low emphasis on the community, the attempt to support former combatants by limited means

10 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 59 of economic reintegration can provide only an opportunity of re-initiating their postconflict lives, so calling this reintegration, as the term itself demands, would be an exaggeration. DDR is a politically highly sensitive process as it is concerned with dismantling the machinery of war and reintegrating those who took up arms back into civilian society. 47 However, as pointed out earlier, this also means that DDR programmes tend to prioritise the needs of former combatants over other vulnerable groups. 48 Such a perspective also fails to recognise that the roots of conflict often stem from problems at the societal level. Subsequently, many suggest that the entire DDR process should focus on broader community development, engendering a balance between helping combatants and helping communities. 49 With such a conceptualisation in mind, the community-located reintegration model puts an emphasis on structural aspects of the community and addressing the needs of the community in the absorption of former combatants. This is based on the argument that by simply focussing on the individual combatant, the challenges related to the wider social context where reintegration is taking place cannot be addressed. Nübler asserts that the long-term objective of reintegration should be to enhance economic and human development and to foster and sustain political stability, security and peace. 50 It is also crucial that the reintegration process recognises and reinforces local reconciliation processes, since reintegrating former combatants in society can contribute to the overall strengthening of peace and to reconciliation in the long term through growing interaction among different groups and former warring factions. 51 In other words, successful reintegration helps in building mutual confidence among former belligerent groups, thereby reducing the risk of renewed hostilities. 52 However, the current practice of community focussed programmes is often planned, led and financed by external actors, while communities tend to participate in a limited way which is often no more than being beneficiaries of such undertakings. In other words, what is considered as community-centred reintegration in contemporary undertakings can be described as a community-located approach which carries out such projects for communities and former combatants without any significant involvement of beneficiaries in their planning and implementation processes. For example, the literacy programmes for former combatants in Afghanistan were opened to other illiterate groups in their receiving communities, and in Sierra Leone and Liberia there were ad hoc reconstruction initiatives of schools and health clinics for communities, which centred on the needs of communities as well as former combatants. 53 However, they were all responses from

11 60 Alpaslan Özerdem international and national actors rather than being initiatives which originated from the decision-making of communities and the mobilisation of their resources and capacities, which could be defined as a community-based approach. 54 Therefore, it is important to make the distinction between community-located and community-based reintegration programmes. Where the reintegration quadrant of Figure 1 is concerned, the three main areas of intervention in community-based reintegration can be identified as family (role of family in recruitment and reintegration), employment (social capital support to potential employers; a comprehensive approach to employment, dealing with both the supply and demand sides of issues related to employment and livelihoods) and civic responsibility (participation in political life and decision-making processes; taking part in civil society activities). In other words, the community-based reintegration process is influenced both by the characteristics of the former combatant and the social world they would inhabit. The re-establishment of social ties between the former combatant and the community, which is often termed social reintegration, would probably be the main guarantee for the sustainability of reintegration experiences, as often what formal DDR programmes could provide is only an opportunity of re-entry into communities. However, once these programmes come to an end, the receiving communities find themselves dealing with the day-to-day post-ddr reintegration needs of former combatants. In other words, DDR programmes would also need to consider the absorption capacity of the community. For example, in Liberia, the widespread existence of poverty and the destruction of infrastructure as a result of the war, continues to hamper the reintegration process. 55 Moreover, encouraging engagement in community structures can mobilise participation in local governance structures and the development of civil society. This reinforces the development of a new social contract and contributes to the wider post-war recovery process and the transition from government for to governance with. 56 With all of these preceding issues in mind, as shown in Figure 2, this paper, therefore, conceptualises the models for former combatant re-entry into communities through the approaches of self-demobilisation, reinsertion, community-located reintegration and social reintegration. Such an alternative conceptualisation provides clearer boundaries for the different types of reintegration activities; and, to summarise, while self-demobilisation represents no formal reintegration activity, the reinsertion model encapsulates typical one-man-oneweapon type reintegration activities undertaken in most DDR programmes. By using the

12 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 61 Targeting on the community Targeting on the combatant LOW LOW Self-demobilisation HIGH Community-located reintegration HIGH Reinsertion Social reintegration Figure 2. Models for community re-entry for former combatants Source: O Leary and Duffee, term reinsertion the objective is to indicate that what is undertaken in the name of reintegration is in fact often no more than an opportunity of reinserting former combatants into civilian life. 57 With the term community-located reintegration, the purpose is to indicate that such an approach understands the importance of community involvement in reintegration but, to a large extent, the role of community remains as a recipient of reintegration provisions. Finally, based on the concept of community-based reintegration, the paper proposes social reintegration as an approach in which the needs and capacities of both former combatants and their receiving communities are considered. Furthermore, communities with former combatants act as active agents in the planning and implementation of reintegration programmes. Overall, the above mentioned four possible approaches provide a practical taxonomy for the reintegration of former combatants and, as far as this paper is concerned, the social reintegration approach would be the most effective option, particularly in the complex, arduous and demanding contexts of war-to-peace scenarios. It could be argued that the more there had been an impact on societal relationships due to the violence during the war, the more need there would likely be for such a social reintegration approach. For example, if ex-combatants are returning home after a relatively short period of armed conflict as war heroes, the self-demobilisation or reinsertion assistance models might be effective enough for their reintegration into the society. However, if the receiving social context is highly divided and physically and economically torn apart by a protracted armed conflict, then the approach of social reintegration would become an imperative for effective reintegration. On the other hand, the critical question to ask here would be how the social reintegration approach could be undertaken and how it differs from the other three approaches in terms of its operationalisation. Therefore, the social reintegration process will be investigated further in the next section in order to explore these issues further.

13 62 Alpaslan Özerdem Social reintegration approach Social reintegration is the process through which the ex-combatant and his or her family feel part of, and are accepted by, the community. 58 The degree to which former combatants and their families are, therefore, absorbed into and welcomed by the communities is what makes social reintegration a critical element for peace-building. However, at the same time, as well as the extent of acceptance on the part of communities, the willingness of former combatants to reintegrate would also be a critical factor for this process. 59 Nevertheless, war-affected communities are often fragmented along religious, ethnic and other socio-cultural lines, and receiving communities may have a negative perception and attitude towards former combatants due to their participation and role in the instigation of violence. According to Colletta et al., the reintegration process is far more complex in societies that have suffered from the disintegration of social capital, or where ethnic or regional tensions prevail. 60 Hence, making them socially accepted is often a key undertaking in reconciling fragmented communities. 61 Based on this argument and the way former combatant re-entry into communities is elaborated in the preceding section, it would be possible to identify two main factors that would play a determinant role in successful social reintegration on the one hand, the community s interaction with former combatants at the three dimensions of reintegration as family and community, employment and civic responsibilities and, on the other hand, the individual characteristics of former combatants. Therefore, before exploring the three dimensions of social reintegration in detail, 62 for the individual characteristics of the combatant it is important to remember that even in relatively small caseloads there tend to be large variations based on gender, age, disability, ethnicity, military ranking, education and vocational skills. 63 In other words, former combatants are likely to have a wide range of needs, capacities and expectations, depending on these characteristics. Based on these demographic, social and cultural variations among former combatants, the opportunities and challenges that they might experience in the context of formal demobilisation and reintegration programmes would also be different. It is also necessary to bear in mind the duration of the combat period and combatants particular roles and tactics in combat. For example, child soldiers and female combatants tend to have different roles in combat from male adult combatants; the impact of a short period of fighting is likely to be less problematic for reintegration than after a combat period of a couple of decades; and the ways and various means of fighting, such as forcing

14 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 63 combatants to commit atrocities against their own communities or use of drugs, violence and brain-washing for obedience would all be significant for the way former combatants and communities would relate to each other in a post-conflict environment. 64 In other words, the way that the conflict was fought and specific roles and experiences of the individual combatants would have serious implications on their social reintegration. Such variations would also have an impact on the way different combatants can benefit from reintegration packages and their prospects for successful social reintegration. For example, during the demobilisation and reintegration phases, specific needs of such groups as the disabled, female and child combatants or those combatants from ethnic minority groups would be quite different from adult male combatants; such groups might face certain difficulties based on socio-cultural, institutional and economic aspects of their reintegration environment. Female combatants may be expected to return to their traditional family roles as wives and carers of children. 65 Young ex-combatants may be prevented from accessing local decision-making mechanisms. Disabled ex-combatants might face more difficulties in finding meaningful employment. 66 In short, the key issue here is to recognise what significance individual combatants would have and would bring to each aspect of social reintegration in terms of their capacities and weaknesses and how they would relate to the overall objectives of social reintegration in a continuum. Dimension 1: family and community In the social reintegration of former combatants, the role of the receiving family and community is imperative, and there would be a number of key issues in the way that the re-connection between former combatants and the context that receives them could be reestablished. The first issue to be borne in mind is the level of mistrust and fear that may be present between former combatants and receiving communities in certain war-to-peace transition environments, as was the case in Sierra Leone and Liberia. In Cambodia, many Khmer Rouge combatants were often not accepted back into society and were afraid of revenge. 67 The way intra-state armed conflicts disintegrate societal structures poses a serious challenge for the acceptance of former combatants by communities as often there is the us and them dichotomy. The experience of armed conflict and its impacts in terms of fear, resentment or hatred would need to be addressed by building bridges between these two war-affected groups. It is therefore essential that such a mistrust dimension is effectively addressed through the encouragement of community-based reintegration

15 64 Alpaslan Özerdem programmes which would bring communities and former combatants together for the satisfaction of their common physical, socio-political and economic needs. 68 Therefore, the key issue that should be noted here is the possibility of returning home not being a completely positive and welcoming experience for former combatants, as conflict-affected communities are often characterised by fragmentation and polarisation in which the fighter has grown apart from civilian society. 69 On the other hand, Kingma asserts that the history of the war in question and its impact on society, and the degree to which warring factions have managed to reconcile with each other, plays a significant role in the outcome of reintegration programmes. 70 In Angola, for example, Porto et al. note that the longer ex combatants spent away from home and family [...] the less likely they were to consider themselves as civilians. 71 According to Colletta, et al., former combatants will continue to feel stigmatised for as long as they are considered as returnees or former combatants. 72 However, when the community stops considering them as outsiders this provides a high level of psychological support to them. The involvement of the community and ensuring their support in the reintegration process also offers greater opportunities for self-sufficiency, and it may help initiate new opportunities which pave the way for fighting factions to co-operate in achieving common goals. 73 Furthermore, the DDR process is dependent on the particular context in which the reintegration takes place. For example, in some post-conflict environments combatants may be welcomed back into the community as war heroes, as was the case in Kosovo. 74 This subsequently affects the ease of the reintegration process and the particular methods adopted to support this process. It has also been noted that reintegration is usually more successful in rural areas, where social networks tend to be stronger and the distance from paramilitaries prevents recruitment. 75 Overall, the key issues to consider in retuning home are whether or not there is such a home for former combatants to go back to, and what kind of reception they are likely to receive from their families and communities. In such war-to-peace scenarios where former combatants are going back to their communities as heroes, the challenges of social reintegration would be much less of an issue than in such contexts where former combatants had committed atrocities against their own communities. Therefore, the issues related to trust, fear, resentment, anger, revenge and other socio-cultural dynamics would all be factors to consider in social reintegration programmes. 76 It is also important to note that even family members and communities might not have negative feelings towards returning combatants; the way economic reintegration benefits

16 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 65 tend to target them specifically can easily cause resentment and social divisions too. The preferential treatment of former combatants by providing quotas for their recruitment in post-conflict security apparatuses and other economic reintegration programmes is often a source of resentment among other war-affected communities, such as internally displaced persons, returnees and stayees. 77 Therefore, by putting emphasis on both combatants and receiving communities through the social reintegration approach proposed in this paper, there is a possibility of using reintegration assistance as a bridge between these two groups. Dimension 2: sustainable employment Without any doubt there is a clear recognition of the need for employment opportunities for former combatants successful reintegration, but they often fall short in the provision of meaningful and sustainable livelihoods. This is partly because in the conventional DDR programmes, the way that economic reintegration projects are planned and implemented often takes place in isolation from social reintegration issues. In other words, the issues, challenges and parameters of social and economic reintegration are viewed separately from each other. Therefore, in the re-conceptualisation exercise of this paper, economic reintegration in terms of providing opportunities for sustainable employment is, in fact, considered as part of social reintegration. In other words, rather than compartmentalising them as separate undertakings, the attempt here is to merge them in a way that economic reintegration projects, such as vocational training and income generation activities, are considered as a means of social reintegration. From such a perspective it would be possible to address some of the key shortcomings of conventional economic reintegration projects. For example, vocational training programmes are often concerned with keeping them [former combatants] off the streets, 78 rather than addressing long-term livelihood strategies. 79 One of the reasons for this is that livelihood programmes are often planned and implemented in isolation of the needs of receiving communities and are therefore less likely to be sustainable. 80 Inclusion of the community as a stakeholder in the process can therefore make employment generation more sustainable. In economic reintegration programmes, which can vary from the provision of access to land and education to vocational training and micro-enterprise development projects, former combatants tend to have limited information about their society and the opportunities available to them when they return home. If this task has not been covered as part of the demobilisation phase, then information, counselling and referral services

17 66 Alpaslan Özerdem should be established in order to provide the vital link between former combatants and the services planned for them. The social reintegration of former combatants would also need to consider a number of basic needs such as housing, infrastructure and services. 81 For the reintegration of former combatants in rural areas, access to land is probably the most important consideration for sustainable livelihoods. It is argued that such agriculture focussed programmes serve as the main vehicle for reintegration of those caught up with conflict into a productive life. 82 The legal status of other returnees, such as refugees and internally displaced persons, and their land rights may lead to a resurgence of community tension. In Nicaragua, the core reintegration incentive for former combatants was land, however, the distribution of land promised was either delayed or never took place. In addition to this obstacle, the resettlement of former combatants can also be problematic because of landmines, due to possible negative impacts in the re-initiation of farming and agricultural works. 83 Reintegration activities in urban areas need to be more diverse and of longer duration and, bearing in mind challenging socio-economic characteristics and the likelihood of high unemployment rates in a post-conflict environment, the utilisation of large public works programmes in the short term is recommended. In addition to Employment Intensive Works Programmes (EIWP) as an economic stimulator and mass employment creation tool, International Labour Organisation (ILO) recommends skills training and enterprise development as two key approaches to employment creation for former combatants and their receiving communities. It was stated that healthy civilian identity can be encouraged through vocational training and constructive work that contributes to individual and community well-being. 84 This is particularly important as, unfortunately, the demobilised combatants often enter an economy which is unstable and dependent on international assistance, quickly thereafter becoming members of the growing numbers of unemployed. Therefore, it is imperative that the economic reintegration issues are considered within wider social characteristics and dynamics of the society. After all, reintegration should not only be about providing former combatants with a possibility of generating an income, but also enabling reconciliation between them and their receiving communities. 85 Dimension 3: civic responsibilities Similar to the separation of economic reintegration from social reintegration in conventional DDR programmes, political reintegration is also conceptualised as a separate

18 A re-conceptualisation of ex-combatant reintegration 67 type of undertaking from those in social and economic spheres. Kingma defines political reintegration as the process through which the ex-combatant and his or her family become a full part of decision-making processes. 86 However, even from a narrow perspective of political participation in terms of taking part in electoral system or transformation of armed groups into mainstream political parties, there would likely to be strong connections with socio-cultural dynamics of that particular society. From the tradition of forming civil society groups to formal and informal decision-making structures in governance would all, to some extent, be a reflection of social characteristics of that society. Therefore, the reconceptualisation of social reintegration in this paper views political reintegration from a wider perspective under the umbrella of civic responsibilities. With such a perspective, the justice challenge would be one of the key priorities to be addressed in order to achieve the goal of social reintegration. This would have two main dimensions, as the issue of how to deal with crimes committed by combatants during the conflict and how they would relate to the challenge of law and order in post-conflict contexts. The former is a highly controversial issue as while not dealing with it can cause serious resentment in communities, the objective of bringing justice to crimes committed by former combatants can also result in the breakdown of peace-building process. 87 The option of a universal amnesty for former combatants is sometimes used as a measure of reintegration and reconciliation, as was the case in Uganda, but for those who experienced such atrocities it is a highly unjust measure. In terms of respecting the rule of law and order, whether former combatants were involved in crime would be a decisive factor for their acceptance by communities and overall social reintegration. The identity of being a former combatant can be rather problematic as they seem to be the first group of people to be suspected of crimes committed in a post-conflict environment. For example, former combatants in Liberia often make reference to not being a troublemaker in order to describe their intentions of good relations with communities. 88 Finally, the third consideration with civic responsibilities would be the way former combatants could have access to decision-making mechanisms of community, institutional and political structures. As part of transforming their identity from a combatant to citizen, former combatants should be able to take an active role in such decision-making mechanisms, which would create significant opportunities for social cohesion and reintegration. This would vary from voting in elections to taking an active role in the representation of communities in local institutional structures and wider political activities. 89

19 68 Alpaslan Özerdem Conclusions This paper has drawn up an alternative approach for the understanding of social reintegration of former combatants by using the desistance and ex-offender s re-entry to community theories. By focussing on the emphasis on the community and emphasis on the combatant as the main elements in its matrix of community combatant relationships, the paper identified four possible approaches for reintegration: self-demobilisation, reinsertion, community-located reintegration and social reintegration. It is important to note that most contemporary reintegration initiatives do not go any further than the provision of reinsertion opportunities for the community re-entry of former combatants. Therefore, the paper argued that contemporary economic reintegration programmes present a very limited scope of opportunities for successful reintegration and it is misleading to consider the output as reintegration. The most significant shortcoming of this model is the way it considers DDR programmes from a one-man-one-weapon approach and addressing the needs of former combatants exclusively. The paper also showed that what is considered as a more progressive alternative for such a combatant-centred approach, reintegration programmes with an emphasis on the needs of the wider community, are often only community-located, presenting a minimum level of input in planning and implementation from receiving communities. Compared with the conventional combatant-centred programmes, such an approach is obviously an important step forward in DDR practice. However, it is essential to note that it could only ensure a limited contribution to the actual reintegration of former combatants. It might make the reintegration of former combatants a more acceptable challenge for communities, but without having the ownership of what those programmes are they can only have a limited impact on social cohesion. Therefore, this paper showed that for an effective reintegration, particularly in the postconflict contexts with deep and wide societal divisions, the social reintegration approach would be the most comprehensive way of addressing for ex-combatants needs and aspirations. The first two approaches self-demobilisation and reinsertion are often what takes place in the name of reintegration in the contemporary practice and the third approach community-located reintegration is what the international community seems to be aspiring to and aiming for in order to improve the practice of reintegration. However, as the analysis of this paper showed, even such an approach would remain inadequate to respond to the challenges of ex-combatant reintegration in war-to-peace scenarios and there is a clear need for the social reintegration approach as proposed in this paper.