Yes, I can quickly add to that. I suppose I see two reasons that go back to the way that the conflicts ended. The way peace settlements were created and, perhaps, imposed, favoured a particular political elite, who got into power, captured power and retained power for a long time. I think there was some [Inaudible—Editor] between the form of intervention that was taking place and the interests of local elites.
There was an interest in stability in the EU, in the western part. These local strongmen provided that, and so, for a long time, there was a trade-off of democracy and emancipatory or progressive voices in favour of more conservative nationalist forces, which provided stability and reliability when it came to implementing international missions. This led to power dependence, whereby codependency—created as a result of interventions—created special ties that linked the need for international intervention, presence and investment with the disobedience and peacebreaking dynamics of local elites. There's something inherent, when it comes to international interventions, state-building and peacebuilding, that is reproducing instability.