China’s focus on economic development as part of its peacebuilding approach could con- tribute to the debate around the re-definition of peacebuilding. Although the Western ap- proach to peacebuilding also takes into account economic development as a key feature for peacebuilding, it is less prominent than in the Chinese approach. Conflict, violence and peace both shape and are shaped by the economy. Underdevelopment, unequal access to resources and poverty are causes of conflict and are drivers of violence. Absence of liveli- hoods and social economic deprivation, particular when coupled with a sense of historical marginalisation animate grievances in populations. The need and desire for access to and control over resources has always been a cause of conflict, especially when resources are
92 or are perceived to be scarce, or where the rules and norms of access and control are poorly institutionalised. But when well-managed, natural resources can be a source of economic progress, wealth and stability for a country. When mismanaged or misappropriated, they can have severely negative economic, social and environmental effects and constitute a massive loss for peacebuilding and development. A prominent UN study has suggested that since 1990 there have been at least 18 violent conflicts strongly fuelled by natural resources exploitation and that natural resources related conflicts experience an earlier and higher probability of relapse than others (Jolliffe, 2014a). Therefore, progress in economic devel- opment is critical to prevent relapses into conflict and to achieve durable solutions and sus- tainable peacebuilding. According to Saferworld boosting employment and promoting eco- nomic development in post-conflict states has significant dividends for maintaining peace, creating occupations for young, unemployed men who have little other experience beyond war (Saferworld, 2011). Supporting economic development after a conflict has provided pos- itive results in the past. For instance, the Marshall Plan was a successful example of using economic means to speed up the process of post-conflict reconstruction, which had far- reaching consequences for Europe, both East and West. The aim of the Marshall Plan was to actively revive the German economy as quickly as possible in order to provide the means of survival for the refugees and the homeless. This was further strengthen by currency and fiscal reforms of the first post-war German government, which is regarded by many as the reason why Germany’s economy recovery was faster than any other European country’s despite receiving less aid per capita under the Marshall plan than its European neighbours (Ashdown, 2007). Economic development can also support and ensure sustainability cease- fire or any type of peace agreements. For instance, in the context of the ceasefires in Kachin, almost 20 years since return and resettlement was attempted, the majority of the population remain displaced, or have become so for a second time. The fragility of ceasefires, and their inability to ensure displaced populations’ protection in the long term, appear to be the main factors hindering a durable solution (Jolliffe, 2014a). Smart economic policy will be crucial to future reintegration efforts and could be supported by international agencies. Effective reintegration programmes should include robust economic policies and ensure local owner- ship and participation of all stakeholders in order to ensure sustainability. Also, making pro- gress on the economy is probably the best exit strategy for an international peacebuilding or statebuilding mission in a post-conflict setting.
93 While China has the potential to contribute to post-conflict economic development, there are equally serious questions surrounding an approach that is purely economic. There is no doubt that in some conflict-affected states China is an important source of economic support for post-conflict reconstruction. However, any intervention by an external actor will affect the distribution of power and resources in that context. Depending upon how and to whom it is delivered, development assistance can increase inequalities and divisions between commu- nities, at local and national levels. The risk is that over time the flow of Chinese (or other country’s) resources into conflict-affected states may fuel existing inequalities and exclusion, thus strengthening drivers of conflict. Therefore, economic development can have negative impacts on peacebuilding processes, as economic activity is not neutral which can be unfa- vourable for peace. An economy that excludes certain identity groups can create frustration and grievances. For instance, wealth generated from primary exports is easily captured by narrow groups who enrich themselves; this can be linked to corruption, which also fuels grievances (International Alert, 2015). Also not all the countries have favourable settings for economic development as in many countries large-scale investment into indigenous re- sources may be the answer, but many post-conflict countries do not have the wealth or the natural resources that can immediately attract large-scale investment.
As seen in the case studies, despite some of the achievements in terms of economic pro- gress seen in the examples of Tibet and Xinjiang, economic development on its own may not resolve unrest or address the root causes of the conflict as the source of grievances is not only related to economic power. More understanding on the causes of the conflict as well as a better context-sensitive approach are needed for China to have a more successful peacebuilding policy. The Kachin and Xinjiang case studies also illustrated that if the nature of the investment and infrastructure projects is purely extractive and there are limited bene- fits for the local communities and population, frustration and resentment against China and Chinese investments could be exacerbated. China should acknowledge that economic de- velopment on its own is not sufficient to build inclusive and sustainable peace; and that economic co-operation and other forms of assistance can exacerbate conflict dynamics. Therefore, economic development in conflict-affected countries must take into account the local context in order for it to be designed to strengthen sustainable peace.
94