The author tries to explain why intra-state conflicts are less likely to be successfully concluded by peaceful settlements than inter-state conflicts. The author affirms that his main hypothesis is that those peace processes fail because they insist on building states as the only possible political space. The author argues that the missing link in the existing literature on conflict resolution is the social construction of identities involved in such conflicts. He discusses how different authors deal with identity construction before he settles for a position defended by Habermas, which relies on new ideas on communication, politics and the state. The author concludes his argument by evaluating the Dayton agreement in Bosnia. According to the author, the Dayton agreement cannot be evaluated as a failure since they managed to cease the hostilities and to begin the construction of a new political process that does not necessarily coincide with the state. The author presents the Bosnian evolution as a model to what might happen in Iraq after the US invasion in 2003.
Peace Building Processes; International Relations Theory; State Building; Bosnia; Iraq