This paper addresses the issue of what happens after a civil war ends. In particular it traces the development of political authoritarianism from an initial multi-party democracy and military integration following a civil war through to one-party control and the breakdown of civil security following the rise of an alternative opposition. The question of what happens to former combatants has become increasingly pertinent as decisive military victory has become rarer within African conflicts (Licklider, 2008). At the same time, it is also clear that the nature of contemporary peace settlements at the end of wars may leave a risk to further violence as there are always losers in these processes (Licklider, 1995; Stedman, 1993). This creates a danger that loser groups may return to violence, but also that the coalition of the winners may be unable to create benefits that will eventually placate rejectionists of any peace agreements. At the same time, Licklider and Atlas (1999) put forward the view that whilst post-settlement tensions are often present, these frequently arise between former allies who disagree on the shares of the spoils following victory rather than between former protagonists. In particular, where one faction within the former allies believes that they have not received their due this is likely to lead to rising tensions and then violence.