Whether between countries or among rebel groups, peace agreements are the international instruments that aim to bring an end to conflict. They vary in their scope and formality, as well as how they address root causes of conflict.
The most comprehensive type of peace agreement is a peace treaty, which seeks to address the political level sources of conflict by codifying tradeoffs in the form of legally binding provisions that must be implemented through a negotiated process. These instruments are rare, and they typically require long and contentious negotiations before their conclusion.
If a full-fledged peace treaty is unattainable in the short term, parties may opt for an interim peace agreement, such as an armistice or cessation of hostilities agreement. While these instruments may not fully address the root causes of conflict, they can provide an opportunity for deeper negotiations and peacebuilding in the future, while bringing a lasting stop to fighting.
Bounded peace agreements are less comprehensive and often deal with specific issues that may be fueling conflict. Examples include territorial disputes or a truce during a war. These agreements may also be referred to as a ceasefire or a truce agreement, and they are frequently accompanied by a declaration or joint communique laying out the intended intentions of the parties to the conflict.
In post-conflict reconstruction, building the social fabric of a state or country is one of the most difficult tasks. This is especially true in cases where there are lingering grievances and deep divisions. The Kroc Institute’s Peace Accords Matrix (PAM) offers the first continuous, whole-of-agreement implementation monitoring capacity, which is designed to complement official peace mechanisms.