Strategic Coercion and International Mediation of Atrocity-related Conflict

10 June 2022, Version 2
This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed at the time of posting.


This article explains the role of coercion in international mediation of violent conflict involving atrocity crimes from the parties’ perspectives. It draws on coercion theory and expands the framework of atrocity mediation, examining the successful yet controversial African Union mediation in Kenya. Coercion theory aims to solve what this study reads as the agent-coercion problem in the international system: agents retain choice despite coercion by more powerful actors. The framework argues that conflict parties are rational, legitimate voluntary agents who always have choices. Strategy requires mediators to create ripeness using enticing mediation or settlement proposals. Then coercion’s role would be to build consensus on peace offers, persuading reluctant parties that compromise is the better choice than resistance. Coercion infuses a sense of urgency in the parties’ contemplation of the cost/benefit implications of their choices, accelerating decision-making. The study contributes to understanding the limits of power mediation in international relations.


international mediation
African Union


Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.