APCJ_1528_Win2010_00i_122_4 12/30/10 3:22 PM Page 71 Rediscovering Indigenous Peacebuilding Techniques 71 In Rwanda, the gacaca courts were remodeled in response to a problem they were never equipped to handle. The results have been mixed, with the new version of the customary court being more coercive and prosecutorial than its original voluntary and socially backed original.52 Uganda continues to struggle with the conflict in the north while employing various peacebuilding methods, including mato oput, although the conflict finally seems to be coming to a close. Mozambique appears to be the only country that has dealt with its conflict in a somewhat successful manner by employing indigenous techniques from the ground up. Regardless, discussions continue on whether peace will continue to prevail. From a western perspective, the various nuances of these customary systems are perceived as weaknesses. They largely depend on the knowledge and wisdom of community elders, often to the exclusion of women; there is little consistency; the majority of agreements reached are verbal and dependent on a variety of variables; and these traditions are often confined to a certain tribe and do not extend to others, whereas the modern wars in which many of these countries are engaged may affect a number of tribes. At the same time, these indigenous methods have significant strengths, some of which have already been mentioned, including the tradition of dialogue and community involvement, the openness of the processes, legitimacy and trustworthiness derived from deep roots in the culture, and fulfillment of the majority of the agreements reached (as the perpetrators are accountable to their whole community and so are unlikely to be able to avoid upholding their part of the compact). In the cases examined above, the hybrid methods of peacebuilding, such as the remodeled gacaca courts, remain far from ideal. The transformation of such indigenous mechanisms is always a delicate balance between introducing a completely new method under the guise of a familiar name and maintaining the spirit of the traditional institutions while adapting them to a new, much broader and violent type of conflict. In general, relying on custom as a legitimating device for artificially establishing certain new structures will not result in the desired acknowledgment and trust of the people. Yet traditional values and customs are comforting in times of conflict, so Africa, as a continent, is also taking steps to provide contemporary options modeled from African culture, such as the Council of the Wise, which is based on the traditional respect held for elders of a tribe.53 The members of this council are revered elders continent-wide and can intervene and mediate in large-scale conflicts in which local elders may not have the required recognition or legitimacy. Despite the establishment of the Council of the Wise and similar institutions,‘African solutions to African problems’ have yet to come to fruition, with the majority of peacekeeping activities promoted by the African Union based on western templates.54 As a 52. Alexander Betts, ‘Should approaches to post-conflict justice and reconciliation be determined globally, nationally, or locally?’ European Journal of Development Research, 17:4 (2005), 735–52. 53. The Council of the Wise was created in 1999 by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Similar institutions have been created since, including the African Union’s Panel of the Wise adopted in 2002. See O. Onwuka ‘The ECOWAS Council of the Wise: An indigenous framework for conflict resolution’, Africa Peace and Conflict Journal, 2:1 (2009), 55–62; and African Union, Protocol relating to the establishment of the peace and security council of the African Union, Article 11, Durban, 9 July 2002. 54. Mac Ginty, ‘Indigenous peace-making’.