Negotiating Peace With Non-State Armed Groups: A Case Study on the Taliban and the Formulation of the Doha Peace Agreement

Non-state armed groups have increasingly become active participants in the international realm, impacting international peace and security. This reality has compelled states to enter into peace agreements with such groups. However, the ability of non-state armed groups to conclude binding international agreements remains a grey area in international law, which has traditionally reserved treaty-making powers to states.This LL.M. thesis addresses the following research question: Do non-state armed groups have the capacity to enter legally binding peace agreements under international law? The significance of this question lies in determining the legal effect and enforceability of such agreements within the international legal framework.To explore this issue in practice, this LL.M. thesis examines the case of the Taliban as a non-state armed group involved in the Doha Peace Agreement. This case study serves to test the theoretical foundations of the first research question through real-world application and addresses a second research question: How did the legal status of the Taliban influence the negotiation, formulation, and implementation of the Doha Peace Agreement? This question focuses on areas where the Taliban’s legal status may affect compliance with the agreement, particularly given that certain international legal norms, such as enforcement mechanisms, may not fully apply to non-state actors.This thesis relies on the analysis of academic literature and the international legal framework to answer the research questions. The findings aim to contribute valuable insights toward reassessing the legal standards applicable to non-state armed groups in peace processes, ultimately supporting the development of more effective and enforceable peace agreements.