The mandate, or terms of reference, applicable to a state-building mission should clearly articulate the activities and actions of the intervention in order to maintain progress and to provide a clear outline for those undertaking the programmes. Often this is not the case, due in part to the blurry boundaries that surround definitions of state and nation-building, and secondly to the growing necessity of limiting activities to priorities that meet the interests of the donors, which are inherently political in nature, require tangible and assessable measurements to determine success. This paper will demonstrate that it is often the least visible elements of a state-building mission that matter the most when truly localising and contextualising the activities of state-building
