A View from the Field: Humanitarian Action and the Search for Peace Moving Beyond Protection?

Transcription

1 A View from the Field: Humanitarian Action and the Search for Peace Moving Beyond Protection? June 2010 Abstract Violence is prevalent in the lives and work of humanitarians. We witness grave violations, indignities, and abuses inflicted upon communities and individuals. With limited supplies, insufficient funding, and overstretched staff, we are limited in our ability to provide a comprehensive solution to violence, focusing instead on offering immediate relief and protection while leaving the work of finding peace to others. In short, our work is purportedly in providing relief and protection from, but not ending, violence. Some, furthermore, argue that in conflict settings, an agency may be able to address the underlying causes of conflict or to address the humanitarian consequences of it, but it is more challenging to do both at the same time i ; these critics thus caution against humanitarianism trying to take up such a role. They note, additionally, that in many conflicts, advocacy is required to address the causes of a conflict; at the same time, advocacy, including even-handed advocacy, may cost access to affected populations ii. This paper challenges the first assumption, that humanitarian agencies lack the resources and the capacity to address the root causes of conflicts, which are structural and political. This brief does not, however, challenge the second assumption, that a trade-off exists under certain circumstances between dealing with the causes and retaining access (and thus, providing relief). On the contrary, it provides an example of the risks that an agency may incur into when engaging with more political issues. The brief proposes that in many instances, humanitarians in the field can engage the causes and resolution of conflict. It demonstrates how peacebuilding can be mainstreamed into existing programs without significant additional effort. It also discusses how humanitarians can expand the scope of current Do No Harm and protection strategies from mitigating to actually resolving conflict. Case studies provide examples from the field of peacebuilding programs implemented in situations of violence. The thematic brief does not argue that peacebuilding must necessarily be incorporated into aid programs. In some instances, peacebuilding may not be possible; it could be too risky, or basic lifesaving needs may take precedence over longer-term peacebuilding goals. Rather, this brief suggests that agencies deployed in the field linked to local communities and with a certain degree of expertise should consider incorporating peacebuilding into their existing programs and potentially developing a more comprehensive aid and peacebuilding program. ATHA commissioned this paper from a humanitarian practitioner working in Southern Sudan in order to explore the interrelationships between humanitarian action and conflict resolution efforts. We hope that this paper inspires discussion and dialogue on this important issue. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ATHA or any of its partners. 1

2 Armed Conflict and Other Situations of Violence Conflict has been generally defined as the perceived incompatibility of interests between parties. 1 As such, conflict may arise where parties disagree over an issue, such as the distribution of resources, perceived economic inequality, social injustice, and political oppression. 2 Conflict threatens peace, security, relief, and development in many places where humanitarian actors are deployed. Armed Conflict In humanitarian emergencies, an emphasis is often placed on whether the context amounts to an armed conflict, where international humanitarian law (IHL) would apply, or to a situation of violence not arising to armed conflict, where IHL would not apply. The definition of armed conflict has been the subject of much debate. IHL expressly states that armed conflict does not include situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and other acts of a similar nature... 3 Determining whether an armed conflict exists under IHL, therefore, may depend on an assessment of the facts pertaining to the level of violence, parties organization, and the nature of the violence. Situations of Violence Short of Armed Conflict Other situations of violence, which are not armed conflicts per se, are often rampant in areas where humanitarian actors operate. Such violence may manifest itself in the form of banditry, communal or intercommunal attacks, cattle rustling, gang violence, human trafficking, gender-based violence, terrorism, abduction, and other violent acts. Violence may result in killing, physical, sexual or psychological harm, deprivation of liberty, destruction or loss of property, and other human rights, humanitarian, and criminal violations of the individual and his or her community. Armed conflict and other forms of violence often occur simultaneously with mutually reinforcing effects. 4 The many degrees of violence can lead to state failure, a collapse of peaceful means of dispute resolution, and acute social, political, and economic inequalities in society. i For a more detailed discussion of this critical position, see Walker, Peter and Daniel Maxwell, Shaping the Humanitarian World London, Routledge 2009, p ii For a more detailed discussion of this critical position, see Walker, Peter and Daniel Maxwell, Shaping the Humanitarian World London, Routledge 2009, p Causes of Conflict and Capacities for Peace (MSI 2008) p. 1. As discussed below, armed conflict is a legal term defined by specific criteria. In order to avoid confusion, the term situations of violence is used broadly throughout to denote periods where the level and intensity of violence may or may not arise to an armed conflict according to the legal definition. 2 Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to the statement adopted by the Summit Meeting of the Security Council on 31 January 1992, An Agenda for Peace Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping. U.N.G.A Res. A/47/277 - S/24111, para. 3 (June 17, 1992); Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment, Introduction, p. 3 (FEWER, International Alert, and Saferworld, 2003) available at 3 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non- International Armed Conflicts, 1125 U.N.T.S. 609, Art. 1, 2 (June 8, 1977). 4 Robin Geiss, Armed Violence in Fragile States: Low-intensity Conflicts, Spillover Conflicts, and Sporadic Law Enforcement Operations by Third Parties, 91 International Review of the Red Cross 873, p. 128 (March 2009). 2

3 Overlapping Situations of Violence In the field what may initially be perceived as a single armed conflict, may in fact comprise a collection of interrelated manifestations of violence. Some situations of violence may qualify as armed conflicts, while others do not amount to an armed conflict. For example, a close look at the 50-year war that led to the independence of South Sudan suggests that the fighting in the area encompasses multiple, overlapping noninternational armed conflicts and other situations of violence between several military factions and groups. 5 Likewise, the violence in Darfur can be attributed to a mix of intra-group violence, attacks on peacekeepers, violence between government forces and the Janjaweed militias, and widespread criminal violence. In Afghanistan there are several types of situations of violence: a purported armed conflict involving Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Coalition and government forces; organized armed violence among narco-traffickers; intercommunal violence among different ethnic groups; structural violence against women and children; and opportunistic criminal violence. For humanitarians, the diversity of situations of violence complicates the situation, but also provides opportunities to resolve individual manifestations of violence at the grassroots level. Conflict Sensitivity The diversity and complexity of the various situations of violence described above underscores the need for humanitarian actors to maintain high levels of conflict sensitivity. Conflict sensitivity is the ability of a humanitarian organization to understand the context in which it operates, understand the interaction between its interventions and the context, and act upon this understanding to: (1) not exacerbate the conflict (responding to the do no harm principle, developed by Mary Anderson and named after the Hippocratic oath 6 ); (2) mitigate the conflict; or (3) where appropriate, build peace. 7 Conflict sensitivity can decrease levels of violence and increase the sustainability of aid and development. Programs that are not sensitive to the situation of violence may aggravate it, thereby causing more harm than good. By adopting a conflictsensitive approach, actors may have a more positive impact on peace. Peacebuilding in Situations of Armed Conflict and Violence Historically, humanitarians have provided material aid and relief to victims of violence. More recently, they have developed increasingly sophisticated strategies to improve human security and protection for victims of violence. Through their presence on the ground, impartial character, and technical expertise, as well as their relationships with local communities, government authorities, and the international community, humanitarian agencies have made protection an integral component of relief operations today. 8 For example, humanitarian agencies provide immediate aid to victims of violence, pressure governments to restrain their forces, and support efforts of return, reintegration, reconciliation, and justice among communities affected by violence. These actions and countless others have improved and increased the level of protection of civilians. However, these and other assistance and protection activities often fail to foster lasting peace. 5 See, e.g., Douglas Johnson, The Root Causes of Sudan s Civil Wars, p. 127 (2003). 6 Mary B. Anderson. Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace Or War. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Publishers (1999). 7 Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment, Introduction at 3. 8 Inter-Agency Standing Committee, Growing the Sheltering Tree: Protecting Rights Through Humanitarian Action, p. 4 (2002). 3

4 To bridge the gap from protection to peace, some humanitarian actors have begun peacebuilding programs in order to address the root causes of violence. Both peacebuilding and humanitarian protection are concerned with, among other things, keeping people safe from violence. Humanitarian protection strives to promote human rights, prevent or alleviate the immediate effects of violence, and restore dignity to victims through reparation, restitution, and rehabilitation. 9 Similarly, peacebuilding seeks to prevent, mitigate, resolve, and transform violence into peace. Thus, in situations of intense violence, peacebuilding and protection may complement each other. Because the two areas are so closely linked, it is worth exploring how humanitarian agencies can engage in peacebuilding while simultaneously carrying out protection and relief operations. Peacebuilding The term peacebuilding may be defined as activities intended to end violence or to create peaceful relationships. Peacebuilding includes broad goals such as enhancing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, promoting sustainable economic and social development, and reducing arms proliferation. 10 Peacebuilding may be incorporated into humanitarian relief, economic development, democracy and governance, civil society strengthening, and other programs. 11 Core components of peacebuilding include strengthening legal and human rights institutions; promoting reconciliation, justice and the rule of law; and supporting fair and effective traditional, informal, and formal processes of conflict resolution. 12 Peacebuilding is most effective when done in a strategic, participatory, and coordinated manner. Peacebuilding Strategies Peacebuilding develops capacity for peace through four broad strategies: conflict prevention; conflict mitigation; conflict resolution; and conflict transformation. The term conflict prevention refers to activities undertaken in vulnerable areas to identify and remove causes of violence before it may erupt. Conflict mitigation encompasses activities undertaken to reduce the negative effects of conflict or prevent the intensification of violence; many humanitarian protection activities could be classified under the rubric of conflict mitigation. Conflict resolution aims to create a status quo of peace and dignity for conflict-affected communities and individuals. Conflict transformation seeks to address the root causes of a conflict by making social, political, and economic relationships more equitable, just, and fair. Each of these strategies may contribute to the creation of a peaceful environment for sustainable relief and development. 9 Workshop on Protection for Human Rights and Humanitarian Organizations: Doing Something About It and Doing It Well. Report of the workshop held at the International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva, January 18-20, 1999, p Report of the Secretary-General, An Agenda for Peace Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping at para Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation, Glossary; Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment, Ch.1 at Catherine Morris, What Is Peacebuilding? One Definition, available at: See also: 4

5 Examples of Peacebuilding Strategies: Conflict Prevention Support early warning and response systems Support effective formal and informal dispute resolution processes Build civil society capacity Provide economic development assistance Promote social, economic, and political equality Support good governance Provide human rights and legal training Advocate for conflict prevention Conflict Mitigation Provide humanitarian relief and protection Disseminate humanitarian and human rights law Advocate for reduced violence and increased humanitarian aid Train community mediators in conflict resolution skills Establish community-based protection networks Incorporate concepts of peacebuilding, human rights, humanitarian law, social diversity, respect, and tolerance into capacity-building program Conflict Resolution Strengthen weakened formal and informal dispute resolution processes Mediate disputes Offer legal assistance and support to victims Promote reconciliation, justice, and reparation processes Facilitate inter-community dialogues and exchanges Advocate for a peaceful resolution to the conflict Conflict Transformation Provide technical advice on adopting international human rights norms Support the development of customary law consistent with international human rights norms Support the rule of law and administration of a fair system of justice Promote a culture consistent with human rights and humanitarian values Increase knowledge of human rights and humanitarian law Strengthen the rule of law, good governance and economic development Promote social equality, diversity, tolerance and respect Advocate for a social change from violence to peace 5

6 Hybrid Peacebuilding Approaches Hybrid peacebuilding strategies integrate traditional forms of justice and reconciliation with contemporary human rights and humanitarian law norms. Such strategies have been proven to be more effective than solely working with local systems or importing foreign ones. For example, traditional forms of justice and reconciliation coupled with modern demobilization programs have proven effective in reintegrating former combatants, including child soldiers, into society. 13 Long-term conflict transformation may result from wellintegrated justice systems that combine traditional values with international human rights standards. Multi-level Aspects of Peacebuilding Peacebuilding may occur at many levels, from high-level bilateral peace negotiations to grassroots dispute resolution processes. Many actors are involved in peacebuilding as well, from heads of state, diplomats, and United Nations (UN) leaders to community leaders, youth, women, and humanitarian aid workers in the field. Each level of peacebuilding should be coordinated with other levels to find a comprehensive resolution to the conflict. This brief focuses on peacebuilding activities carried by humanitarian actors: humanitarians have access to key individuals across the different levels of peacebuilding, including community leaders, youth, and women in the field, as well as government officials or members of the diplomatic community. Risks Associated with Peacebuilding Peacebuilding, like all work in complex environments, carries significant potential risks. These risks can adversely affect the individuals and communities that an agency seeks to support, as well as other third parties. Some of the risks involved in peacebuilding include the following: 14 Outside involvement in conflicts can stifle local leadership and complicate power relations essential to conflict resolution. Peacebuilding activities may raise expectations or revive old disputes, thereby exacerbating a conflict. Victims of violence may be subjected to further harm by associating with conflict resolution efforts that threaten the perpetrator s impunity. Despite their levels of access, peacebuilders may find they exert leverage only at one particular level; humanitarians in the field may influence donors but have little persuasion over community leaders or host governments. Where there is no accountability in the peacebuilding process, perpetrators of violence may gain legitimacy and political recognition as peace brokers, thereby allowing them to act with impunity. In trying to resolve a conflict, impartial, neutral agencies may be perceived as biased to one party or another. The loss of a neutral character may threaten other programs, such as the provision of material aid or essential services. In turn, such loss may lead, in the most severe cases, to the loss of access to the populations in need, as exemplified by the Darfur case. Donors may fund peacebuilding programs in lieu of exerting diplomatic pressure to address violent conflict. 13 Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment, Ch. 1 at The points in the following list are derived from Protection: An Alnap Guide for Humanitarian Agencies at or from Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment, Ch. 1 at 10. 6

7 Donor funding for peacebuilding may divert funding away from basic humanitarian assistance, such as food, shelter, water, and healthcare. To mitigate these risks, humanitarian actors engaged in peacebuilding should maintain a high level of conflict sensitivity to ensure they do not exacerbate an already volatile situation. Case Studies Five case studies of intentional peacebuilding programs implemented by humanitarian agencies in situations of armed conflicts and overlapping situations of violence are presented here. Each program represents different approaches adopted by each agency in light of the local context and the agencies own capacity. These case studies represent more advanced peacebuilding strategies and are not necessarily strategies that should be implemented without prior experience and reflection. Legal Aid in Southern Sudan 15 Following the capture of Yei in Southern Sudan (now the Republic of South Sudan) in 1997, members of the Sudanese People s Liberation Army (SPLA) reportedly began encroaching on and confiscating land belonging to civilians. Victims did not seek redress for these property rights violations out of fear of reprisal by the soldiers or the army. In 2008, the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) began providing assistance to civilians with property claims through the Information, Counseling and Legal Assistance (ICLA) program, still ongoing as of Depending on the nature of the dispute, NRC refers claimants to the appropriate venue: the customary authority, county administrative authority, or county court. In addition to advising and referring claimants, NRC also provides institutional capacity building to the different authorities to enhance their ability to adjudicate cases fairly, consistently, and lawfully. The program has bolstered the confidence of victims to bring cases against military personnel. About one-quarter of the cases handled by NRC were against military personnel, thereby reducing the impunity with which soldiers seized land from civilians. Engaging the soldiers and the army through these processes has also led to improved relations between the groups. For example, in 2008 NRC staff received death threats from military personnel, but by 2009 such threats had stopped after NRC developed a working relationship with the SPLA and emphasized the importance of respecting the law. Soldiers who continue to violate the law such as a soldier who physically attacked a judge in a land case have faced sanctions. Afghan Facilitators In Afghanistan, the United States Institute for Peace (USIP) established in 2009 the Network of Afghan Facilitators (NAF) comprised of local humanitarian and development organizations working to prevent violence 15 The section of the paper draws on NRC ICLA Capacity-Building for Land Adjudicators in Southern Sudan, Norwegian Refugee Council Case Study, p. 1-2 (NRC, 2009). 16 NRC notes, however, that the Information, Counselling and Legal Assistance (ICLA) program is primarily an Information and Legal Aid Program that contributes to peacebuilding, conflict resolution and conflict management. ICLA is not in most instances a peacebuilding program because its main objective is to assist displaced persons or returnees with accessing their rights. However, the ICLA program may in some instances be considered peacebuilding in light of its dispute resolution approach; that is, where it works to instill non-violent means of conflict resolution within the community. However, in states where the government has the capacity to provide adequate dispute resolution fora and protections, ICLA serves more of a human rights function, advocating more for justice for certain groups rather than for peace in society. 7

8 and mediate community-level conflicts. 17 USIP provided mediation and conflict-resolution training to members of the peacebuilding network. As a result, Afghan facilitators have been successful a number of areas: preventing violence through community-level mediations on issues related to internally displaced persons (IDPs) and access to water; resolving tribal disputes that previously led to violence against women; providing training to government officials, lawyers, religious leaders, and community leaders on conflict management; and strengthening community councils to resolve future conflicts. While armed conflict continues to undermine long-term peace in Afghanistan, efforts such as NAF provide some degree of peace and stability at the community level. Mediation in Colombia In Colombia in the late 1990s, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was operating in a complex environment characterized by petty and organized crime, including major drug cartels, contract killings and abductions, political violence, and a protracted armed conflict between the government, paramilitaries, and rebels from the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC). 18 Violence was attributed to social, political and economic inequalities, corruption, and the State s failure to provide a deterrent or resolve conflict through institutional channels. The ICRC estimated that 15% of the total number of victims of violence in the country could be attributed to the armed conflict; however, this number may be misleadingly low, as there was a strong causal link between the armed conflict and other forms of violence, which created a vicious spiral of bloodshed in Colombian society. In this context, ICRC worked to mediate peaceful outcomes to situations of violence. In situations of unrest in prisons, both the prisoners and the government called on the ICRC as a neutral party to resolve the conflict and prevent further violence. The ICRC was also involved in negotiating the safe return of IDPs to their homes. Working through the Committee s network in the field, delegates obtained guarantees from armed groups for the safety of the returnees. The process was not always successful, however, as guarantees by armed groups were either insincere or the returnees did not trust the guarantors. Thus, in some instances potential conflict was prevented from escalating to violence due to the early involvement of delegates, while other efforts were not as successful. A key lesson learned from the experience in Colombia that can be applied to other contexts is that obtaining a successful outcome requires commitment, contextual knowledge, trust of the parties, neutrality, and effective mediation skills. Justice and Confidence Centers in Darfur The situation in Darfur, since the eruption of the conflict in 2003, has been characterized by numerous situations of large- and small-scale violence that have reportedly led to the death of more than 200,000 and the displacement of some 2 million individuals. To prevent further violence within IDP camps and host communities, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the International Rescue Committee (IRC), and local organizations and individuals launched the Strengthening Rule of Law and Sustainable Protection 17 United States Institute of Peace, In the Field: Network of Afghan Facilitators: Resolving Conflict Province by Province (USIP, 2009), available at: accessed on March 15th, This section of the paper draws on Thomas Jenatsch, The ICRC as a Humanitarian Mediator in the Colombian Conflict: Possibilities and Limits, 323 International Review of the Red Cross, p (1998). 8

9 project in Darfur. 19 During the course of the program, the implementing agencies succeeded in establishing a legal aid network of some sixty Sudanese lawyers to provide legal aid services to vulnerable groups in all three Darfur states. The network resolved 550 cases, including the release of persons arbitrarily detained and securing the conviction of government officials for murder and rape. The program also established Justice and Confidence Centers staffed by trained local paralegals who evaluated and referred victims to the proper forum, whether that be the courts, local authorities or traditional leaders. The paralegals helped clients with complaints ranging from family disputes, petty theft, and neighborhood quarrels to more serious cases of disappearance, armed robbery, torture, assault, murder, slavery, and gender-based violence. The program provided training in Sudanese and human rights law to community members, police, military personnel, government officials, the Attorney General s office, and the Judiciary, which raised awareness of the rights and duties of citizens and those in positions of power. All of these activities were conducted while the violence between the government, rebels, and paramilitaries continued. This example, however, while stressing the utility and effectiveness of peacebuilding activities carried as a complement to relief, also illustrates some of the potentially negative consequences resulting from this type of engagement. Notably, the local communities, IDPs and some rebel groups were supportive of the program, while other actors close to the program actively sought to undermine progress. For example, several IRC Justice and Confidence Centers were destroyed, lawsuits were brought against the organization, staff was harassed, and the program was at times greatly restricted. Finally, in 2008 the IRC and twelve other organizations were expelled from Darfur, effectively ending the program in that part of Sudan 20. While the reasons for the expulsion remain unclear, the lack of perceived neutrality on the part of IRC may have played a role in causing the expulsion of the organization. Analysis These case studies demonstrate that humanitarian aid organizations can do more than provide protection and assistance to victims of violence; they can support lasting solutions. As violence spreads throughout society, aid agencies can counter it in their area of operations by acting as neutral intermediaries and champions of peace. They can leverage their connections to support peace initiatives. They can expand their protection programs and do no harm strategies to include conflict prevention, mitigation, resolution, and transformation activities. Cumulatively, peacebuilding efforts in complex emergencies can have a wider social impact, leading to social transformation of the situation from one of violence to one of peace. Neutral Intermediaries 19 This section of the paper draws on United Nations Development Programme Sudan, Strengthening Rule of Law and Sustainable Protection in Darfur (UNDP, 2010), available at: accessed on March 10th, On the 4 th of March, 2009 the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for president al- Bashir. On the same day, following ICC arrest warrant but claiming the two phenomena to be unrelated, the Government of Sudan expelled 12 international NGOs and one consulting firm and revoked the licenses of three national NGOs. In all, 7,610 aid workers 308 internationals and 7,302 nationals were directly affected in Northern Sudan (including Darfur), where these agencies accounted for 40% of aid workers, delivering more than half the total amount of aid 20. Several millions dollar worth of assets belonging to the expelled NGOs were seized 20. Some of the expelled NGOs are now in the process of being readmitted under a different name, according to many mainly thanks to the pressures of the international community. This expulsion, while generally perceived as a form of political retaliation for ICC indictment, represents nonetheless the epitome of the tense relationship between the aid community and the Government of Sudan. (source: Overseas Development Institute, ALNP, Where to Now? Agency Expulsions in Sudan: Consequences and Next Steps, p. 6.) 9

10 The neutral and impartial character of humanitarian organizations is invaluable for peacebuilding efforts. As a neutral third party, the agency is in a position to gain trust from all parties to the conflict. Such trust offers the parties a safe medium to communicate their grievances, positions, and interests, which, can help deepen understanding between the parties to the conflict. The ICRC example demonstrates how a trusted third party can act as an arbiter for peace between groups such as prisoners and the government or between non-state forces and the government. Likewise, training of local mediators, such as those in Afghanistan, South Sudan, and Darfur, to act as third-party neutrals in dispute resolution serves as an extension of an agency s impartial character down to the grassroots level. At the same time, by engaging different parties to the conflict in discussing the conflict, neutral organizations may be perceived by others as partial to one side or another. Such perceived biases could affect other programs, including the provision of humanitarian aid and services. The case of the Justice and Confidence Centers in Darfur demonstrate that peacebuilding can strain relations with the parties to the conflict and, together with other factors, lead to staff being harassed, program facilities destroyed, or being expelled from the country. Applying a methodical, transparent, and participatory process can build trust between the parties and the organization, thereby reducing the risk of misperception. Advocacy Humanitarian actors are often engaged in advocacy for peace and conflict resolution at the local, national, and international levels. By strengthening conflict analysis capacities, thereby deepening understanding of the conflict, advocacy efforts can become more insightful and persuasive. By implementing peacebuilding activities in the field, humanitarian organizations can offer concrete examples to policy makers and disputants of what works and what does not work in terms of conflict resolution. Thus, by engaging in peacebuilding, organizations increase their knowledge and experience, thereby becoming more effective advocates for change. From Do No Harm to Peacebuilding A peacebuilding strategy goes further than a do no harm approach. Do no harm seeks to mitigate how people in conflicts use assistance to pursue a political or military advantage, while peacebuilding extends this concept in its attempt to use aid to build peace, rather than merely to mitigate its negative consequences. Whereas Do No Harm sees strengthening connectors as an ancillary objective to aid with residual benefits for peace and conflict mitigation, peacebuilding intends to create a peaceful, non-violent society. The legal aid programs, NAF programs underscore the intentional purpose of peacebuilding. Such programs were designed and implemented with the express purpose of resolving local conflicts and transforming violence into peace. This approach is distinct from programs that deliver aid in a conflict-sensitive manner - that is, provide aid without exacerbating the conflict or with residual peace dividends, rather than with the express purpose of resolving and transforming situations of violence. Nonetheless, programs implemented with a do no harm strategy are important in ensuring that humanitarian relief does not aggravate the conflict, and they provide an established entry point for future peacebuilding activities. Conflict Transformation through Social Impact Given their proximity to local communities, governments, and non-state actors, humanitarian agencies engaged in peacebuilding may have a broader social impact on violence in society. By acting as champions for 10

11 peace and opponents to violence, humanitarian actors promote values of peaceful dispute resolution, consensus building, respect, tolerance, and non-violence. Coordinating peace programs with other actors and across several levels increases the scope and impact of peacebuilding on society. Thus, peacebuilding in emergencies can lay the foundation for long-term conflict transformation through future development. How? Working in a context of violence (whether armed conflict or other situations of violence and insecurity) presents many challenges and difficulties. It is tough enough trying to move supplies, train staff, negotiate access, and obtain funding all while keeping the organization personnel safe and secure. To incorporate peacebuilding activities into an already overstretched relief operation may seem challenging to say the least; however, there are some initiatives that can be adopted quickly, easily, and with little risk. To begin, humanitarian organizations seeking to engage in peacebuilding activities can increase conflict sensitivity among their staff and partners. As a good practice for do no harm programming, some form of conflict analysis that accounts for the dynamics, relationships, and root causes of conflict as well as the local capacities for peace should already be incorporated into ongoing context assessments. Agencies should use conflict analysis to better understand the political meaning and perceptions that humanitarian assistance has for donors, parties to the conflict, and aid recipients, as well as to understand how their programs are or can be manipulated by parties for political or military gain. 21 Upon completing the conflict analysis, organizations can decide to develop peacebuilding program strategies that: (1) mitigate the immediate effects of situations of violence; (2) support local capacities for resolving current conflicts and preventing future ones; and (3) transform social, political and economic systems that underpin the root causes of conflict. Most aid and protection programs already fall within the first category of mitigation. Some protection programs also address the second and third categories of conflict resolution, prevention, and transformation. Humanitarian actors should consider if and how they can leverage their resources, expertise, presence, and connections to support each aspect of peacebuilding. During implementation, agencies can incorporate conflict prevention, mitigation, resolution, and transformation strategies into existing aid and protection programs. Such strategies should not only be conflict-sensitive, but also culturally relevant by incorporating a mix of traditional and contemporary conflictresolution methods. A commitment to capacity building is essential; therefore, staff and partners should receive training, mentoring, and support to develop their expertise in peacebuilding strategies appropriate to the local context. During monitoring and evaluation phases, the impact of aid, protection, and peacebuilding should be measured in regards to the positive or negative impact on the violence. To widen the impact, aid programs with a peacebuilding focus should be coordinated with other actors, including peace organizations, development agencies, donors, non-state actors, and governments at all levels (as much as practicable). These strategies and others can provide immediate relief and protection while reducing violence and promoting peace. It should be noted that it is not necessary to start peacebuilding programs from scratch. Peacebuilding, like protection or gender, can also be mainstreamed across other sectors while more formal activities are developed. For example, in a water supply program, community volunteers can be trained in basic dispute resolution skills to help calm tensions and prevent fights around access to a hand pump. Food distribution 21 Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment, Ch.1 at 8. 11

12 programs can incorporate a complaint and appeal system for individual beneficiaries to claim their full entitlement, thereby reducing conflicts arising from the unequal distribution of food aid. To prevent conflict over land, shelter programs can involve local or traditional land planning councils in establishing new IDP or refugee camps, thereby reducing the risk of land disputes in the future. Protection programs can incorporate conflict resolution and prevention concepts into current human rights and humanitarian law dissemination programs. Education programs can include traditional values consistent with peace and conflict transformation into existing school curriculums as well as train children and youth on negotiation skills to use in school, at home, or in the community. These and other entry points provide opportunities to mainstream peacebuilding activities into humanitarian aid programs. Once a few components of peacebuilding have been incorporated into an aid program, agencies should reflect on their past experiences to gather lessons learned, make adjustments, and decide whether they believe that their mandate and organizational capacity are compatible with aid programs serve the dual purpose of providing immediate relief while supporting the peaceful transformation of armed conflicts and other forms of violence. To help develop program strategies, a wide range of technical assistance is available from other agencies, research institutes, consultants, and donors. A list of recommended resources is attached at the end of this article for further reading. Conclusion Humanitarians should consider engaging in peacebuilding in both armed conflicts and other situations of violence where it is feasible. Whether to engage in peacebuilding turns on a number of factors, not the least of which are community support, the operating environment, funding, and technical capacity. As with other programs, peacebuilding requires a participatory approach, conflict sensitivity, proper planning, coordination, and expertise. If these and other elements conducive to peacebuilding are present, agencies may begin by mainstreaming conflict mitigation and resolution into existing programs, laying the foundation for a more comprehensive peacebuilding program in the future. 12

13 Further Reading Anderson, Mary B. Do No Harm: How Aid Can Support Peace Or War. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reinner Publishers (1999). Berghof Handbook for Conflict Transformation (Beatrix Schmelzle, Dr. Martina Fischer, Prof. Hans J. Giessmann, eds., 2004), available at: Collaborative Learning Projects (Do No Harm): Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peace Building: Tools for Peace and Conflict Impact Assessment (International Alert, 2003), available at: Growing the Sheltering Tree: Protecting Rights through Humanitarian Action (Inter-Agency Standing Committee, 2002), available at: International Non-Governmental Organizations and Peacebuilding: Perspectives from Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution (Center for Conflict Resolution, Working Paper 3, 1999): Protection: An Alnap Guide for Humanitarian Agencies, Hugo Slim and Andrew Bonwick (Overseas Development Institute 2005), available at: Overseas Development Institute, ALNAP, Where to Now? Agency Expulsions in Sudan: Consequences and Next Steps (2009) Websites Accord: Search for Common Ground: The United States Institute for Peace: 13

14 14