Drawing on a year of original research in nine cities in Côte d'Ivoire, this thesis explores the relationship between demobilisation, disarmament and reintegration (DDR) and transitional justice in the Ivoirian post-conflict period. Academics writing about DDR and transitional justice have increasingly argued in favour of greater levels of coordination between them. In a technical sense, it has been suggested that coordinating planning, resources and personnel might streamline the implementation of national DDR and transitional justice programmes. Equally, substantive coordination -- harmonising the political, economic and social aims, activities and thinking of both mechanisms -- would allow peacebuilders to re-emphasise the role of transitional justice, and by implication, victims in post-war society. Technical and substantive coordination have both been seen as a potential means of improving the success of DDR and transitional justice. Policy guidance tends to concur. The United Nation's Integrated DDR Standards (IDDRS) argues that coordinating DDR and transitional justice is crucial to ensuring the establishment of durable peace. Yet many post-war governments, from Côte d'Ivoire to Afghanistan and Sierra Leone, have opted to keep DDR and transitional justice largely separate from one another. Additionally, some dissenting authors and individual policymakers have argued that there is little value in coordination. They contend that it is too complicated to implement, and that DDR and transitional justice may be successful in isolation from one another anyway. This dissertation asks why such a discrepancy exists between these two strands of literature, as well as between the policy guidance and praxis. Its overarching line of enquiry is an exploration of why Côte d'Ivoire did not coordinate DDR and transitional justice in the aftermath of its conflict. But this raises several other sub-questions: what does it really mean to coordinate these programmes? Are the aims of DDR and transitional justice compatible? Is coordination a necessary policy? Are post-conflict governments not achieving their peacebuilding objectives when they implement these programmes in isolation? For politicians, policymakers and ordinary civilians would coordination be a desirable and feasible policy to implement? This thesis explores what the case of Côte d'Ivoire can ultimately tell us about the policy of coordination and the wisdom and viability of linking these mechanisms. The research findings demonstrate that Ivoirians predominantly found their country's siloed DDR and transitional justice programmes to be deeply disappointing and there was much room for improvement in both initiatives. Moreover, there were many ways in which the failings of DDR and transitional justice were interrelated, indicating some complementarities between them that - if accounted for in practice -- might have been able to enhance both mechanisms. However, Côte d'Ivoire also illustrates that the obstacles to implementing coordination can be great, particularly when the underexplored political element of coordination is considered. Indeed, three major challenges existed to undertaking a policy of greater coordination, all of which related to the post-war political context: 1) the risk of destabilisation; 2) the absence of political will; 3) technical difficulties, which were exacerbated by the political context. This dissertation's findings show that to a certain extent, scholars who favour coordination and those who oppose it are both correct. There are failings within DDR and transitional justice that need to be addressed and stand to be ameliorated through greater coordination. But there are also overwhelming obstacles to coordination that diminish the options to implement it as well as the desirability of doing so. This indicates that coordination should neither be wholeheartedly pursued nor eschewed, but rather should be approached with caution and moderation. There is much room for expanding our understanding of what it means to coordinate DDR and transitional justice to accommodate a more moderate approach to linking these programmes. Whereas coordination is largely considered to be a national-level endeavour, the thesis demonstrates the potential value in considering a more localised approach to coordination. This would diminish the political risks associated with such programmes, as well as being more practicable in a technical sense. Additionally, the dissertation will argue that we should break down DDR and transitional justice into their constituent parts and calculate the specific compatibility of different aspects of these processes, as opposed to attempting to link the entirety of these complex post-war mechanisms to one another. To this end, the thesis proposes a new model for coordination, focusing on local level connections between social reintegration and transitional justice processes that target personal reconciliation.