ABSTRACT

Despite a rapid proliferation of conflict-sensitivity approaches and tools over more than two decades, a key question is largely unanswered: Why does conflict sensitivity remain a resisted concept in post-conflict peacebuilding? Regardless of socio-political contexts of armed-conflict termination, authorities in post-conflict countries, such as Nepal and Sri Lanka, often deny the existence of conflict, despite situations in which social division and polarisation continue to threaten peace and stability. This conflict denialism at the political level often engenders a type of conflict-sensitivity dilemma. This article highlights two types of conflict-sensitivity dilemma: operational dilemma and thematic dilemma. It argues that implementing conflict sensitivity requires peacebuilding and development actors to overcome these dilemmas and enhance their engagement with political elites, with consideration of the political settlement framework that shapes peacebuilding and the dynamics of conflict denialism.

摘要

尽管二十多年来冲突敏感性方法和工具迅速扩散，但一个关键问题基本上没有得到解答：为什么冲突敏感性在冲突后建设和平中仍然是一个受到抵制的概念？无论结束武装冲突的社会政治背景如何，尼泊尔和斯里兰卡等冲突后国家当局往往否认冲突的存在，尽管社会分裂和两极分化继续威胁和平与稳定。这种政治层面的冲突否认主义常常会引发一种冲突敏感性困境。本文重点介绍了两种类型的冲突敏感性困境：操作困境和主题困境。