The destabilizing effects of rushed democracy in a post conflict country: A case study of the aftermath of election in Angola in 1992

As a country that experienced numerous long-lasting conflicts in the last century, Angola's warring parties were able to sign a ceasefire agreement and promptly hold a democratic election. However, instead of contributing to peacebuilding, the election triggered the resurgence of civil war. This raises an important question: why did an election, which was intended to restore peace, instead lead to the rekindling of war? By analyzing United Nations military reports, testimonies from relevant peacebuilders and election observers, as well as election data, the article employs process tracing to examine the relationship between the election and the conflict. The main findings suggest that the rushed nature of the election was the core problem. Due to the very short interval between the end of the conflict and the election, Angola was unable to develop and strengthen the essential institutional mechanisms and social consensus necessary for a smooth transition into a democratic society. This ultimately led both former warring parties to resume armed conflict. This case serves as a reminder to Western peacebuilders that they must avoid assuming that democratic values will automatically take root in developing countries. Instead, they bear a critical responsibility to assess a society's readiness for elections, thereby enhancing the prospects for sustainable peace.   Key words: Angola, civil war recurrence, ethnic divisions, international intervention, post-conflict elections, power-sharing, rushed elections, winner-takes-all system.