Abstract
This thesis studies the role histories of colonialism and authoritarianism had in effecting the types of peacebuilding processes that developed in Serbia and Rwanda after their conflicts in the 1990s. It contends that while Serbia’s history developed into a society that depended on civil society networks to act as a bridge between the population and the government, Rwanda’s created a society where the population depended on central authority. As a result, in the wake of conflict Serbian society depended on that history of civil society to foster healing and reconciliation, but Rwanda fell upon its history of central authority involving itself in culture and cultural institutions. As a result, Serbia’s civil society forms the vast majority of peacebuilding programs, but in Rwanda the government focuses on legal procedures and national programs. This thesis concludes that while both models of peacebuilding have benefits, one without the other cannot bring true reconciliation.