The Oslo Accords (1993) are widely held to have been a failure, and their collapse in 2001 is uncontested by scholars and politicians alike. In negotiations, Israel had the clear upper hand, and Palestinians were expected to make equal if not greater concessions from a starting point that was stacked against them. Palestinians refused to concede more of their territory and rights to Israel, and many use these reasons to explain the failure of the negotiations without seeking to understand the wider circumstances. Alternatively, the deleterious effects of the Good Friday Agreement (1998) are often covered up by its advertised success. Though the agreement was signed by the conflicting parties, it failed to reconcile or reverse over 400 years of British settler colonialism in Ireland, while also exacerbating inequalities. The British occupation of Northern Ireland was fortified, and to this day the civil rights of the native Irish remain under assault.

This paper compares the Oslo Accords and the Good Friday Agreement and is based upon an analysis of unequal power relationships during peace processes. It details the impact of such inequalities in negotiations on life after they end. Additionally, it provides a comparative lens through which to view the Oslo process and advances a fresh perspective on the 1990s era of peace processes. In doing so, it emphasizes the similar lived experiences of people who witnessed different formal outcomes.