Traditional Versus Hybrid Approaches of Comprehensive Peacebuilding

This study examines the evolving dynamics of peacebuilding in Mindanao, a region characterized by one of the longest-running intra-state conflicts in Southeast Asia. The persistence of violence, displacement, and socioeconomic marginalization underscores the urgency of reassessing existing peacebuilding paradigms, particularly in light of the ongoing transition in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao and emerging political developments. The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of traditional peacebuilding approaches, namely power political (coercive) and liberal paradigms, against hybrid strategies that integrate local, national, and international actors. Specifically, it seeks to analyze how these approaches address the root causes of conflict and contribute to sustainable peace. The central analytical question guiding the study is: How can sustainable peace be achieved in Mindanao through the integration of traditional and hybrid peacebuilding approaches? Methodologically, the study uses qualitative document analysis of peace agreements, policy frameworks, and secondary literature, complemented by a theoretical synthesis of realism, liberalism, and post-liberal/hybrid peacebuilding perspectives. It also examines empirical cases across different Philippine administrations to trace shifts in peace strategies. Preliminary findings suggest that while coercive and liberal approaches have contributed to conflict management and partial resolution, they remain insufficient in achieving long-term peace due to their top-down and often exclusionary nature. In contrast, hybrid peacebuilding—particularly those incorporating grassroots organizations, civil society, and international partners such as Japan—demonstrates greater potential for fostering legitimacy, inclusivity, and sustainable conflict transformation.