Successfully reintegrating former rebels into civil society is a crucial task in postconflict countries. In the aftermath of a decade-long conflict (1996-2006) in Nepal, management of arms and armies became a major issue in the domain of post-conflict peacebuilding. “From Combatants to Peacemakers” was an initiative to promote peace and harmony among the former ex-combatants and host communities. In this context, this article highlights the role of social dialogue, which proved effective in promoting social harmony, peace, and reconciliation among ex-combatants and community members in Nepal. Also, the article explicates the worth of social dialogue that may be used in other parts of the world to successfully reconcile former antagonist groups into the same communities.

Liberal missteps have paved the way for the local turn in post-conflict peacebuilding. However, localized peacebuilding does not always produce peaceful outcomes. Several scholars have previously demonstrated that unresolved tensions from international-local encounters result in a negative hybrid peace in which political and social hierarchies are preserved and conflict and violence persist. To add to existing analyses on the local turn in peacebuilding, this article analyzes some of the causes and consequences of negative hybrid peace using the case of Timor-Leste. Exclusive and superficial local involvement, political cleavages within the local leadership, and unresolved tensions from international-local encounters were roadblocks in Timor-Leste’s post-conflict peacebuilding. These characteristics prelude a return to a status quo dominated by the local elite and plagued with governance and socio-economic issues.

Nepal is in a long political transition. This article focuses on the complex practices and concepts of political consensus in Nepal, and an effort is made to capture the political dynamics of different stakeholders of consensus politics with insights into the complex political reality. This article argues that the practice of consensus has contributed to easy resource distribution, containing overt violence, and accommodating diverse political parties, and made more progress in consolidating peace than in promoting democracy. Established democratic norms were monopolized by a few leaders in the name of consensus, sometimes even leading to political tensions. Thus, the consociation model falters in Nepal and the proper adoption of a democratic contestation model may be a solution for ongoing socio-political tensions.