Mozambique: A Classic Case of Mediation in Modern Times
Mozambique: A Classic Case of Mediation in Modern Times
Key points
- Mozambique’s journey towards definitive peace has been paved with challenges. The 1992 peace agreement and attempts at mediation and implementing agreements between 2012-2016 failed to end persistent low-level violence or produce tangible results.
- In late 2016 the president of Mozambique, Filipe Jacinto Nyusi, and the then leader of Renamo, Afonso Dhlakama, made the decision to focus on national efforts and engage in direct negotiations. The subsequent mediation and negotiation process, which was based on peace listening, culminated in the signing of the Maputo Accord in 2019.
- The work of mediators should be informed by discretion, should create a bespoke process design characterised by agility and flexibility, and should focus on facilitating a conducive environment for dialogue to allow national actors to find solutions through dialogue and building trust.
- Mozambique’s peace process demonstrates that the traditional mediation approach, which places political parties at its centre and embraces innovative approaches relevant to a specific context, continues to be relevant in modern times.
Neha Sanghrajka, Kenyan of Indian descent, is a negotiator, mediator and author with a track record of successfully delivering positive outcomes in high-stakes negotiations. She has over 16 years of experience in conflict prevention, resolution, and mediation, including with Kofi Annan in Kenya on the 2007 electoral crisis, and most recently as Senior Advisor to the Mozambique Peace Process with the Personal Envoy of the UN Secretary-General for Mozambique. She is a Digital Executive-in-Residence Fellow at the GCSP, a member of the Board of Trustees at the Berghof Foundation, and a Senior Conflict Sensitivity Advisor at the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS).
Disclamer: The views, information and opinions expressed in this publication are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect those of the GCSP or the members of its Foundation Council. The GCSP is not responsible for the accuracy of the information.