ABSTRACT
An important critique of contemporary peacebuilding interventions that focus on the strengthening of local civil society is that they fail to take proper account of the politics involved; they shy away from taking positions on whose interests to support and what societal transformation to envision, yet implicitly promote particular (e.g. neo-liberal) development agendas, or unwittingly take sides in conflict. This chapter underscores the fact that peacebuilding through civil society strengthening is indeed a highly political exercise. Yet, rather than blaming the organizations concerned for being blind about the politics involved in their interventions, it seeks to explore how peacebuilding interventions actually come about and become political in everyday organizing practices, and in practices of ordering and framing conflict and defining interventions. Insofar as this (de-)politicization is intentional, it not only relates to the conflicts in which organizations operate, but is also part of the organizational politics of legitimization. The findings underscore the fact that, despite increasing attention to the politics involved in peacebuilding, intervening agencies indeed lack analytical capacities. Yet, rather than falling short in analysing social and political processes, they fail to analyse their own practices of interpreting conflict and peace and the simplifications involved in this, as well as the role played by their own organizational dynamics and politics.
