Cost of wrong strategies in internal conflicts

PUBLISHED below are extracts of a presentation titled ‘Three questions on conflict resolution’ by Sir Adam Roberts, Emeritus Professor of International Relations at Balliol College, University of Oxford, to commemorate the 20th death anniversary of former Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar (Sunday Times, 10 August 2025).

- By Neville Ladduwahetty

The three questions are:

1.Are ceasefire agreements necessarily the right approach?

Quoting from the extract: “Calls for ceasefire agreements (CFA) have become an almost standard response of the international community to ongoing armed conflicts... However, there is a question about whether calls for ceasefires are always the right approach. Have they sometimes been adopted more out of habit than from a realistic appraisal of a particular situation? ... Kadirgamar, who was on the opposition benches in Parliament... gradually came to see it structurally flawed, as vulnerable to violations by the LTTE, and as failing to lead on to any broader measures of conflict resolution. His critique of the CFA in his speech in Parliament in Colombo on 8 May 2003 presents a uniquely coherent, even forensic criticism of this agreement. He did not spell out exactly what the alternatives to the CFA might be, but that was evident enough: it was a continuation of the war involving the application of relentless military, economic, and political pressure on the LTTE.”

2.Are external roles in internal conflicts bound to run into difficulties?

Continuing, the extract states: “In the Sri Lankan conflict, there were broadly speaking three types of external involvement and/or assisting the hard-pressed population of conflict areas. All three ran into difficulties”.