Post-war democratization may therefore – at least in the short run –have less to do with building institutions and political parties than with making
“warlords” into “peacelords”.
But what do we see when we start analysing the actions and choices of WDs as they maneuver within the context of electoral politics? Do we see leaders that embrace democratic norms, refrain from sponsoring violence and function as agents of change? A recurring theme in the literature on conflict resolution is the centrality of good leadership (see e.g. Gormley-Heenan 2006). According to this perspective, peace becomes possible only when military leaders come to the conclusion that war is no longer in their or their movements’ interest (Zartman 1989; Stedman 1991). Not only does this realization push wartime leaders to agree to peace, but frequently also to commit themselves to building democratic institutions and holding regular elections.