Many scholars have researched on the effects of individual mediation strategy following the categorization by Touval and Zartman (1985), and Bercovitch (1991). Despite the growing recognition of the potential synergetic effects among different strategies, not many systematic studies have been done on that aspect. This thesis contributes to this understudied aspect of mediation approach by asking What is the impact of mediation strategy on quality peace after civil war? The study adopts the method of structured, focused comparison along with the detailed process tracing on four cases of peace agreements and their mediation process from Northern Ireland, Mindanao, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Niger. The study aims to test a theoretical argument linking combined-application of mediation strategies with high quality peace. The empirical findings provide a modest support to hypothesis and a weak support to the causal mechanism, as not all cases, having applied all three strategies, have achieved high quality peace and have promoted third-party guarantee and inclusivity. While the empirical findings point to other contextual factors that may affect the peace agreement implementation, the findings also indicate a potential promising mediation approach that combines directive strategy either with communicative-facilitative or procedural strategy putting more weight on the latter strategy.