SUB-NATIONAL PEACEBUILDING IN SRI LANKA: ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN DE- RADICALIZATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL

Sri Lanka's post-war peacebuilding efforts remain hindered by persistent ethnic divisions, political marginalization, and economic disparities, particularly in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Despite the formal end of the civil conflict in 2009, radicalization and social fragmentation persist, driven by unresolved grievances over land, identity, and power-sharing, as well as inter-communal distrust (De Silva, 2021; Uyangoda, 2020). Nationally driven de-radicalization programs, such as the 6+1 Rehabilitation Model, have achieved limited success in addressing root causes like unemployment and exclusion, underscoring the limitations of centralized, top-down approaches (Ministry of Defence, 2022; Jayasundara, 2023). This study examines the critical gap between national peacebuilding frameworks and the lived realities of conflict-affected communities, emphasizing the untapped potential of local governments in fostering sustainable peace. The research conceptualizes sub-national peacebuilding and evaluates Sri Lanka's existing frameworks through three objectives: defining the role of local governments in de-radicalization, assessing the effectiveness of current sub-national mechanisms, and proposing strategies to enhance local governance capacity. Key questions explore why local governments are better positioned than national authorities to address radicalization, how they can operationalize context-sensitive interventions, and what reforms are needed to empower them. Employing qualitative desk research and comparative analysis, the study situates Sri Lanka's challenges within global debates on liberal versus illiberal peacebuilding and hybrid governance (Rampton & Nadarajah, 2017; Höglund & Orjuela, 2019). Findings demonstrate that local governments, with their proximity to communities and contextual knowledge, are uniquely positioned to design tailored interventions that address drivers of radicalization, such as economic despair and historical grievances. Case studies from conflict-affected districts reveal that community-led initiatives, including interfaith dialogues and localized land dispute resolution, have reduced radicalization risks and fostered social cohesion. However, legal constraints, resource shortages, and centralized governance structures-exemplified by the underperforming 13th Amendment-continue to undermine local efforts (Gunasekara, 2024; Karunasundera, 2018). The study concludes that sustainable peace requires legal reforms to devolve power, capacity-building for local councils, and inclusive governance models. By bridging national policies with grassroots realities, Sri Lanka can empower local governments as key actors in preventing violent extremism and achieving lasting reconciliation.