2017 Summer Peacebuilding Program

Participants Blog hosted by Center for Conflict Studies at MIIS

Page 5 of 17

Speaking from Faith

August 9, 2017 /

 

 

Tuesday morning sessions with Prof. Joe Bock addressed The Positive Role of Religion in Peacebuilding. During the class, Prof. Bock asked us in our small working groups what we saw as some of the positive impacts of religion on peacebuilding and the negative impacts. Several of the groups noted that Desmond Tutu was a religious person who had a positive impact. Some spoke of his work around naming apartheid as a heresy and others spoke of his work with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

I first encountered Desmond Tutu in books. In 1984 I read the book, Apartheid is a Heresy by John W. DeGruchy and Charles Villa-Vicencio. This book included a chapters written by Archbishop Tutu and other South African Christians and focused on the historical, theological, moral and practical aspects of apartheid. This book opened my eyes to the challenging situation in South Africa and introduced me to Desmond Tutu. Archbishop Desmond Tutu is an Anglican like me. He was the Archbishop of Cape Town and the Primate (head of the church) of the Anglican Church of South Africa.

Years later, I was introduced to his work again when I studied the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. As Prof. Bock noted today, it is important for some trauma survivors to be able to tell their stories and to feel heard. Tutu and his colleagues took this one step further in that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), a court-like body assembled in South Africa after the end of Apartheid, created space for anyone who felt they had been a victim of violence to come forward and have their stories heard by the TRC. I was in awe of the courage of the victims and perpetuators of violence to share their stories.

So many things inspire me about Desmond Tutu. He is an passionate activist that works for peace and justice in his local community and globally. And he led this witness clearly grounded in his faith in God. Other leaders who were named on Tuesday as religious leaders who have had a positive impact on peace work included Martin Luther King, Jr ( who we also spoke about Friday night when we spoke about Kingian Nonviolence) and Pope Francis ( I was reminded of his encyclical on the environment on Tuesday evening as we spoke about water justice). These two leaders in peace and justice work are also grounded in their faith in God. I also see this kind of witness in the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church. Presiding Bishop Micheal Curry grounds his peace and justice work clearly in what he calls The Jesus Movement. From this grounding he has spoken eloquently on the rights of immigrants and refugees in the United Sates and on the rights of transgender persons. He speaks from a place of seeking peace without compromising justice. His witness is inspiring!

I often look for role models who inspire me in my work. On Tuesday I was reminded of 4 men who I can look to as role models when I think of engaging in peacebuilding work from the faith tradition. I see one of my tasks going forward is to learn more about these men. My faith inspires and motivates me to be a peacebuilder. Knowing more about these leaders and there stories, their faith journeys, their challenges and their joys can be a touchstone for me to connect more deeply with this work.

 

Overcoming the fear of Bias in Trauma healing

August 8, 2017 /

Trauma is  a very difficult or unpleasant experience that causes someone to have mental or emotional problems.It is also a state of shock in the body or spirit.People inrespective of faith or any form of identity do experience trauma .Either as victims of conflicts,accidents or when something terrible happens..

Since people can be traumatized during and after every conflict,there is the need for trauma experts or counselors to help victims to overcome their shock.It is a known fact that human being by nature have a share of spirituality and many trauma victim yearn for spiritual healing after their experience but social workers concentrate more on providing food,clothing,medical and educational needs without doing something about their spiritual needs.

One reasons that do scare many of these groups from making efforts to provide spiritual trauma healing is the  fear of abused of religion which could be misinterpreted as a deliberate planed to convert  the victims especially where the trauma victims are not  of the same faith with the trauma counselors .And there has been  allegations that some social workers do turn their roles into doing evangelism by proselytization.

Participating in today’s session on The Positive Role of Religion in Peace Building led by Joseph G Bock and listening to the various arguments for and against the need to have spiritual trauma healing programs for victims of conflict  that are traumatized, I strongly  subscribe that development workers should not be afraid to carry out spiritual trauma counseling to victims as long as they do it in an interfaith manner and with counselors from both faiths.This will douse any form of  suspicion  associated with Spiritual trauma healing.Organisations that are working in conflicts areas should have as part of their team interfaith trauma counselors to help the victims overcome their spiritual trauma because spiritual trauma healing helps stabilize the victims faster  than many other provisions or assistance that they may get.Therefore Peace Builders must not be afraid to give this practice a trial for the benefit of the victims they are out to help.

I recalled in May 2012.Prince Ghazi  Bin Mohammed of Jordan ,Chairman Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought and Rev Dr Olav Fyke Tveit,the General Secretary of the World  Council of Churches made a joint visit to kaduna Nigeria to meet with victims of Nigeria 2011 post elections violence.Their key message was the need for collaborations between different faiths when they want to visit and  Support victims of religious conflict.This kind of collaboration will challenge victims to appreciate religious collaboration.Similarly trauma healing programs for victims should be an interfaith approach.When victims of different faith coming out of conflict see that the peace organizations that came to help address their trauma challenges have interfaith composition, this will help and encourage them to appreciate and begin to work with people of other faiths .It is always clear that if Muslim come to a conflict zone and attend to only to Muslim,while Christians come to attend to only to christians ,the victims will not see and learn the beauty of living together.Trauma victims too will not overcome their trauma since they will still have fears and doubt about care givers that are not of their identity Group.

 

Since all victim of conflict suffer  some  forms of trauma,let us work together to remove anything that will constitute biased practice and help them overcome their trauma problems.

Focus on Peacebuilding

August 8, 2017 /

Today’s sessions were all really thought provoking and interesting, although I was particularly struck by a lot of what was discussed in Professor Bock’s sessions. We discussed the role of religion in both peace and conflict, of which there are many examples. I appreciated the overview of Clark McCauley’s theories:

Iniquity theory –> conflict is about maintaining honour and guarding that which is considered sacred and important.

Equity theory –> conflict is a result of unequal distribution of resources.

Humiliation theory –> the combination of anger and shame.

All of these theories attempt to address different sources of conflict, in order to best develop strategies for effective peace building. Professor Bock acknowledged that many conflicts are viewed as economic or cultural, but actually for many actors in the conflict, religion does actually play a role. He cautioned against glossing over the point that conflicts might actually be religious, as without accurately diagnosing the flashpoint of conflict, any attempt at peace building will be doomed. I appreciated his introduction of the term “coreligionists,” and his argument that these individuals who represent different religions need to play a more active role in discouraging violence and deconstructing any religious justifications which are being used to promote violence. We looked at the example of Daesh and which religious leaders could help counter the theological arguments made by militants for their actions. I agreed with the arguments that he was making about using individuals from within communities who have the authority and credibility to deflate an argument (such as Daesh using Islam as a justification for violence).

I thought his evaluation of terminology was also really important – by dissecting what tolerance means when contrasted with celebrating diversity. I agreed with his analysis of the term ‘tolerance’ as something which does not have the most positive connotations.

Gender, Feminism and the UN

August 8, 2017 /

Monday morning’s session focused on Gender, Feminism, and the UN and the afternoon looked at Understanding Challenges of Gender and Feminism and the UN. Both were led by Sujata Mortimer.

Today’s sessions offered to me a variety of lenses by which to consider gender and sex. Some of it was very new to me and some of it I had heard before but I realized I had not incorporated into my language or ways of thinking. We learned it is limiting to think of gender as binary. We can think of gender in different ways, either by adding categories to the list or by naming gender as continuum. We also learned that one of the effects of colonialism was to have an impact on how cultures view gender. This awareness will help me listen globally.

Monday morning during one of the breaks I also received an email from The Episcopal Church Representative to the United Nations calling for Episcopal Women to apply to be chosen as Episcopal delegates to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. “The provincial delegate and the church-wide delegates will be able to attend the official UNCSW proceedings at the United Nations and will represent the Episcopal Church/Anglican Communion in their advocacy at the UN, including joint advocacy with the group Ecumenical Women.”

The email noted that the “sixty-second session of the Commission on the Status of Women will take place at the United Nations Headquarters in New York from 12 to 23 March 2018. Representatives of Member States, UN entities, and ECOSOC-accredited non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from all regions of the world are welcome to attend the session.”

We also learned the theme of this year’s meeting. The theme is Challenges and opportunities in achieving gender equality and the empowerment of rural women and girls. As I reflected on the topic, I was curious about what lens would they adopt. Would they hold onto a 1970’s model of Development or would they embrace 1990’s Gender and Development model? I would imagine the later but I chuckled to myself that I was even thinking that way.

I find myself more curious about the UN meeting after Monday’s session. THe CSW is exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women. How will / could this conversation in March impact Connecticut? Monday evening I looked up the rural communities in my diocese. I learned that “The Connecticut Office of Rural Health (CT-ORH) definition of rural, adopted by the CT-ORH Advisory Board November 2014, uses the 2010 U.S. Census Data. All towns with a population census of 10,000 or less and a population density of 500 or less people per square mile are designated as rural (http://www.ruralhealthct.org/towns.htm)” Using this definition, the total number of rural Connecticut towns is 68. These towns are Sherman, Redding, Easton, Burlington, East Granby, Hartland, Marlborough,Chester, Deep River, Durham, East Haddam, Haddam, Killingworth, Middlefield, Portland, Westbrook, Bethany, Middlebury, Woodbridge, Bozrah, Franklin, Lebanon, Lisbon, Lyme, North Stonington, Old Lyme, Preston, Salem, Sprague, Voluntown, Andover, Bolton, Columbia, Hebron, Union, Willington. And, all the towns in Litchfield County are considered rural except the following towns: New Milford, Torrington, Watertown, Thomaston, Plymouth, & Winchester. All of the towns in Windham County are considered rural except Killingly, Plainfield & Windham.

68 is a significant number of towns in Connecticut and this list includes towns that are very diverse socio-economically. I’m curious how the UN Commissions session could impact our local conversations as well as connecting us to very important conversations globally. Today’s conversation connected me to all of these conversations in a new way.

My eyes have been opened as have my ears. There is much I still need to learn and I have a new frame by which to think about things. I’m excited about learning more and continuing this conversation.

 

 

Freedom of Speech and Constructive Dialogue

August 7, 2017 /

We have frequently discussed what the challenges of peacebuilding are and how we, as peacebuilders, need to build an empathetic, compassionate community where we can work together despite disagreements. To me, that includes taking responsibility for one’s words, holding oneself accountable for opinions expressed and really practicing what one preaches. The wider conversations happening across the United States on academic freedom and freedom of speech are relevant and important to have; in order to move forward critical debate and constructive dialogue are fundamental and should not be silenced. Whether that manifests as classroom discussions, or interpersonal conversations among friends, or even online – we are in a global moment with lots of positive potential for social transformation, one that is not limited to this program. As peacebuilders, we ought to capitalize (and not in a monetary sense) on the tools and diversity we have to really engage in a deep conversation that centers our shared goal instead of allowing the baggage we all carry to get in the way of that. There is space for resistance, protest and resilience, and standing up for what one believes in, and then perhaps there is the potential to restructure that space into a constructive arena for ideas and critiques. But in my opinion, that space cannot be created if things other than a commitment to peacebuilding take precedence. For me there is no difference between activism and peacebuilding. If something is problematic, I feel a personal and professional obligation to call it out – respectfully, and acknowledging the subjectivity that comes with it. I will take responsibility for my words, just as I will not shy away from defending my academic integrity. At the end of the day, if all of us – from all walks of life – are not willing to walk the walk, our work seems to become nothing more than a meaningless exercise in self-validation.

Gender, Peace and Conflict

August 7, 2017 /

Todays session on Gender, Peace and Conflict was deeply informative and transformative. From starting the session with Mrs. Moorti asking us to introduce ourselves using our preferred gender pronoun to getting a better understanding of the third gender and how that is different from sex and the various associations and notions that our context and the environment in which we grow up in. The concept of how “sex mapped onto gender” and how historically traits of what it means to be masculine and feminine have been associated with male and female and how we need to view gender as a continuum spectrum was very interesting for me to learn.

The conversations we had about consumer culture and having to accept and deal with the consequences of the assumptions and associations with how we feed into and find ourselves falling victim as consumers engaging with the various products that we buy and why we buy them shows how media as industries cannibalize us.  We need to be aware of and understand how we are under larger institutions and how we as consumers are guided in particular ways because of how the media feeds into certain stereotypes but also creates images perpetrating certain behaviors and ways of being and dressing as norms which needs to be address and questioned before they become deep rooted within us.

Thinking of words other than equality and replacing the notions we expect equality to bring with more effective ways of thinking about how to make affirmative actions to truly uplift women and other marginalized sections of society and not serve as a shock to the system where it completely backfires and promotes further disparity rather than gain and benefit for the intended population.

The idea of how what we see as individual choices and how we need to be aware of what role we are playing in the larger context of how gender and sex plays into how the created and constructed patriarchy further enhances misogynist feminism and the fact that it is women who further become victims because of women and not men who actually feed into the expected rules and regulations that women in certain societies need to follow.

Furthermore it was fascinating to hear Dr. Moorti talk about how historically speaking certain cultures had men dressing in certain ways (like wearing heels), partaking in society has evolved and changed over years and the role that globalization and colonization plays in how communities have been shaped and transformed over years.  Another challenging question was thinking about gender free spaces in society and whether or not they exist- is their any space in society that is free of gender- and I am so glad that this session left me with more questions than answers.

 

Practitioners Managing Disagreements

August 7, 2017 /

Meeting people who think and hold different opinion from us is an everyday experience in human relationship.Therefore Peace Builders and especially practitioners in the field must learn to relate with everybody including those who hold different opinion from them.

These opinions may be about content or procedural,it may also be from individuals or group   who operate differently and think differently .Your ability to relate with them will always help you and increase your confidence when you go to any community that is in conflict.

Some conflicts that we go to Communities to mediate started as a result of minor disagreements by individuals or institutional opinions that were different and they could not be reconciled.Therefore learning to relate peacefully with  people who hold different opinion from us practitioners is a great asset.

During the session on Who are the Peacebuilders? and Challenges to Peacebuilding by Prof Pushpa who was supported by Sujata Moorti and Joseph Book,participants where led to discussed what they have learned from the different teachers in this summer peacebuilding program and their styles of presentations.One strong message that resonates and got me thinking is how peace builders can learn from disagreements ,because out there you will meet with many peace workers who have  different views and approaches to the issues and conflict.

One thing we most make honest efforts to do to be successful and effective in our practice is to listen to others opinion that are different from ours  and learn how to manage the disagreements .We can not be peace builders  who are helping communities in conflicts to build peace but do not manage our disagreements.

Gender, Peace and Conflict

August 7, 2017 /

Today’s session with Dr. Moorti was dynamic and informative, pertaining to cultural and societal understandings of gender and sex – what the differences are, and how one forms another. This was a good base from which to explore the role of Gender (as opposed to sex) in times of conflict and peace. I appreciated her explanation of how sex has been mapped onto gender, because being a student at a liberal arts college in the US, these phrases are thrown around a lot, without much explanation or discussion surrounding them. I thought these discussions highlighted some really interesting points, such as the fact that patriarchal societies would not survive without females who are complicit. Furthermore, I found the relationships Professor Moorti drew between patriarchy which is propped up by certain capitalist structures. Similarly, the point that Victorian gender norms were imposed via colonialism, on countries which traditionally had more fluid views on sexuality and gender is interesting (and depressing).

In the same way I appreciated the deconstruction of patriarchy, I also enjoyed the discussion about feminism not as an identity, but rather as a political process/activity. Also, the discussion of gender needs to be informed by other categories, such as class, caste, sexuality, economics and sex. This discussion led to the introduction of the effects that certain development programs have had on societal dynamics between different genders. While there were a number of issues with these programs (such as the fact that they viewed women in reference to their context as reproducing subjects), often the ‘issue of women’ was viewed in isolation, resulting in unintended consequences. Dr. Moorti raised the example of efforts in Bangladesh to empower women economically, which had a positive relationship with a rise in domestic violence. The main issue was that the development apparatus had completely ignored what the potential ramifications might on other elements of society.

I enjoyed the discussion surrounding the militarisation of women in conflict zones, particularly because this was a concept I was introduced to recently during a Critical Security Studies seminar.  The example of Laura Bush securitising the lives of Afghan women living under the control of the Taliban as a justification for US military intervention there, during a speech at the UN is the perfect example. Ironically, she is also behaving as an actor in relation to her husband and his administration, to help them achieve their military and political goals. She too, becomes complicit in the militarisation of female bodies in conflict.

 

Think Before You Act #2

August 7, 2017 /

As we begin our third and final week, we are focused on our final projects. I am part of the group that must create a mediation process between the Afar people of Ethiopia on the Horn of Africa and the International Financial Corporation of the World Bank. The latter is funding a pipeline in Ethiopia for which the Afar feel they have not been properly consulted or compensated. We are to use the Compliance Advisory Ombudsman guidelines of The World Bank as well as traditional justice practices of the Afar people and other African and Asian contexts.

In preparation for constructing a mediation process, we are creating specific questions to ask the parties, as well as glean background information for our own use.

Questions to consider for strategic discernment and proposal of a mediation process:

For the Mediator and all parties:

What is the relevant cultural and historical information related to the context?

What is the nature of the conflict?

Who are the parties involved?

Who should be at the table?

What questions do each of the parties need to address to inform all at the table, including the Mediator?
Are there laws, policies, relevant guidelines or development strategies that must be considered by all parties?

What outcomes are sought?

Who settles what with whom?

For the mediator:

What biases do I, as the Mediator, bring to the process?

What are my strategies for managing my biases? Can I hold to “equidistance” and “impartiality” between parties while conveying necessary information?

Are there stories to be shared by each party?

Are there rituals of each group that might be helpful or need to be respected?

Where would the meeting be held? What aspects of the space need to be considered?

What do the words e.g., mediation, negotiation, etc., mean in each context?

Is there just, common ground between the justice practices of the parties involved?

Is there sufficient trust to begin to build an agreement? If not, have the two groups engaged in any activities that would build trust? What is the prognosis for reaching a sufficient level of trust? How will everyone know?

In my current repertoire what tools are most appropriate to helping the parties vet the issues and reach a resolution?

Rancho Cielo

August 7, 2017 /

The visit to Rancho Cielo was incredible.  For those who do not know, Rancho Cielo is a nonprofit organization that offers education/vocational services to underserved, “at-risk” youth.  I have to say it was incredible to see what the organization has done. The programs are in either the Construction Academy and Drummond Culinary Academy.  This nonprofit seems more promising in helping at-risk youth than what any probation camp or juvenile detention center can do to help them.  According to Rancho Cielo, the cost of Rancho Cielo is about $10,000 per year.* In addition, about 80% of their students stay out of trouble and about 85% continue to be employed.* Rancho Cielo also stated incarceration is about $100,000 and about 40% of the youth stay out of trouble.* It was also interesting to hear about the transitional housing opportunity they have for the youth; about 22 can live at the ranch. The youth need to apply and state why they want to live at the ranch. I believe this nonprofit has figured out a way to help “at-risk” youth rather than punish them.  When I was interning with the Learning Rights Law Center, I remember visiting different juvenile detention centers and probation camps. The centers and camps were intense and it seemed depressing to see young kids locked up and supervised in an intense manner. I have never seen this type of set up before. So, it was nice to know that Rancho Cielo was an alternative to helping the youth change their life and avoid incarceration in the future.  I hope that there are other ranches out there for “at-risk” youth. I think this alternative is worth pursuing.

 

 

*Rancho Cielo. http://www.ranchocieloyc.org

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2024 2017 Summer Peacebuilding Program

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑

Sites DOT MIISThe Middlebury Institute site network.