Conflict, Violence & Humanitarianism P30305 Essay of 1350-1650 words (30%) Written by Ida Ab Razak 13022652 Introduction This essay seeks to explore the forms of practical and social applicability of a cultural understanding during complex peace operations or addressing conflict for humanitarian actors. According to the Conflict Sensitivity Consortium in 2008, a conflict-sensitive approach involves gaining a sound understanding of the two-way interaction between activities and context and acting to minimise negative impacts and maximise positive impacts of intervention on conflict, within an organisation's given the priorities and objectives of the aid. In the face of atrocities and violence, it is normal for aid to be hasted into approaches that their outcomes have not been anticipated thoroughly. It is often that in a situation that regards violence as the only solution after political pressures have failed, that conflict is a complex situation, which involves deep understanding of the conflicted peoples culture and avoid exacerbating the condition extending to before even to lend aid. Joan McGregor, the Peace and Conflict Advisor of RTC (Responding to Conflict) describes the matter simply in a way that aid is part of the solution or part of the problem; and in peacebuilding there is no sitting on the fence.
Conflict Analysis and Applicability of Conflict Sensitivity In engaging in a complex conflict situation, a framework is a useful tool to form a strategy to address the broad nature of the situation before rushing into the manifestation of the model into active humanitarian aid. One familiar and useful methodology that expresses clearly the steps of systematic approach is the conflict analysis framework. While the conflict analysis is to achieve a holistic understanding of the causes and effects conflicted areas affected by violence, it is also involves that the emphasis of the framework to be shifted away from using the perspective of humanitarian actors, individual agencies, and development organizations as a means to develop responses to situation in the field. Therefore, in practice, the network should convey ways in which humanitarian action will not contribute to the exacerbation of the calamities of the conflict, and to do more good than harm or at the least maintain a peaceful situation in their presence and in the long-term. An example of integrated programmes for conflict-sensitive development (Gaigals and Leonhardt, 2001) reflects a form of adopting practical solutions for a conflict-sensitive approach. Oxfam in Sudan with RTC offers training for national staff in analysing conflict and power relations and to assess the impact of unintended consequences of development programmes. Staff learned to assess opportunities for more proactive engagement with communities and individuals working to mitigate conflict, and to shift programming towards root causes of conflict. In this sense, the process of deploying humanitarian aid by identifying and envisioning the significant outcomes intended is examined and communicated in terms of recommended actions and data. The purpose in applying this model should therefore not be treated as a checklist rather, in view of the context-specific of each situation, to design a system, which will determine at some collective understanding of the key analytical
components presented. One of the dangers of using a framework that leans towards a progression is not addressing the root causes. In the example above, the exercise showed the lack of democracy present and how participation could change the dynamics of politics in Sudan. Explicit recognition of root causes, addressed rights and democracy issues, especially at grass roots levels among community based organisations Prior to engagement of a humanitarian mission, it would be sensible that a cultural analysis is done beforehand, especially those whose transitional periods are short-term. This is not to say that only experienced people are worthy of engagement, but cultural models and their peoples are progressive and may change from time to time, especially when displaced by conflict. Even locals need to reconcile and reanalyse conditions which they are already assimilated in. In Gaigals and Leonhardt (2001) Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development guide, a case study Wajir in Northern Kenya was presented where reconciliation were held by a group which were majority elders and women after which a number of killings had taken place but violence between members were a recurrent risk. Elements of this approach that are conflict-sensitive and adaptable practically are the participatory and peace-building approaches. The community were subject to political exclusions, limited resources, constant drought and ethnic, religious divisions. By closely studying their situation, the community were able to recognise structural complications, and designed approaches to address local administration, policing and formed drought preparedness and inclusive social structures. As each situation is unique, this framework can only be used after acknowledging the organic linkages and that each situation has been characterised by the context-driven specificity, wants and capabilities of peoples, integrating further essential elements such as the period of the conflict, its extents, and the appropriate time for humanitarian intervention, always taking into consideration local governments and actors. Each element of a conflict, whether it being human beings, entire communities, culture, the event of the conflict itself or the infrastructure has its behaviour of different time spans. We can learn about the behaviour of a person in a cycle of a day, whereas the behaviour of buildings towards the strain of conflict may only be evident after many years. Culture too has its own behaviour that takes more than observation to understand its rationale. Observation is a tool that takes into account many of the precautionary steps when understanding and engaging with culture in conflict as the observer remains as an external entity to lessen the effect of the foreign presence. Participation can be considered a more effective method as understanding cultures as it physically bridges the gap between humanitarian aid and locals as cultures presents itself in forms that are extraneous but relative to anyone, such as, language, symbols, rituals and behavioural models whether it is on the surface, as a proximate element or the rationale behind the cultural model outputs. Another example of participation from Gaigals and Leonhardt (2001) that is conflict-sensitive is an initiative for conciliation in a post-conflict environment undertaken by the War-torn Societies Project (WSP) in Somalia. How this is a form of social adaptability of conflictsensitive approach is it incorporates participatory research and workshops involving participation of decision makers and communities. This approach involves discussion, debate and consultation. However in this example, the approach implicitly recognises that the peace building process is one that needs to build trust and confidence, although misses the pertinent issue of not directly addressing the root causes which include major matters of armed youth, gender and rights, literacy and education.
Conclusion Using the conflict analysis framework will produce two outcomes; the tool may either affect the conflict, or the framework itself will be influenced by the conflict. This method of assessment is beneficial in the sense that it improves how development actors form approaches and interventions that does not intensify the conflict, yet improve communities’ ability to remain resilient in overwhelming conflict. It is also important that conflicts are seen from the perspective of those affected by the conflict rather than from the external side of those focused on development. It is important to remember that each instance of conflict is unique, placed in a distinctive culture in which each of its constituents also expresses themselves differently; therefore the strategies should be specific and context-driven. There are variation in peoples in that they may be engaged actively in the conflict, they may agree to the basis of “no war, no peace” basis but not to the extent of participation, yet there are those who seek alternative and nonviolent solutions. This variation indirectly contributes to the conflict, which should not be mistaken as caused or triggered by a single event or condition. Ultimately, humanitarian actors should gauge the situation and aim to “do no harm”; whilst strategies should centre their main objectives around peace building but always keeping in mind to decreasing unpremeditated undesirable impacts, as the effects of the program could reach well over into the aftermath of the crisis and have long-term outcomes. This is achieved through participation of locals in the conflict during the analysis period. To have a measure of local goals and to achieve success in a mission is to restore peace and ensure that locals have ownership over the progress that they sustain. In conclusion, a total international model is not far from a system that integrates the conflict analysis framework, coupled with assessments of the context-specific cultural model. Like other comprehensive models that seek to define, organise, and understand situations as a whole and or in detail, it is important that a model has to bring an element in the centre of focus to enable being considerate of the situation. The conflict should be controlled at the same time address the root causes of the conflict, as the actors can affect the process anywhere on the continuum. I strongly think that the people should be made the focus of each model, to effectively address the conflicts that may have arisen from the social patterns of the people, yet it is the existing strengths in culture that can be nurtured and naturally available to improve the situation.
Books Anderson, Mary B., 1939- (1999). Do no harm: how aid can support peace - or war. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner. 67-76. Gaigals, Cynthia; Leonhardt, Manuela (2001). Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Developement. London: International Development Research Centre. -. Abu-Sada, Caroline (2012). In the Eyes of Others: How People in Crises Perceive Humanitarian Aid. United States: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. -.
Journals (2004). Framework for Conflict Analysis. Inter-Agency Framework for Conflict Analysis in Transition Situations. November, 1-18.
Web Sources Roth, Colin. (-). Conflict-Sensitive Approaches to Development, Humanitarian Assistance and Peacebuilding: Resource Pack. Available: http://www.conflictsensitivity.org/publications/conflict-sensitive-approachesdevelopment-humanitarian-assistance-and-peacebuilding-res. Last accessed 14th Nov 2013. Rubenstein, Robert A.. (2003). Cross-Cultural Considerations in Complex Peace Operations. Available: http://faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/rar/Papers/crosscultural%20considerations%20in%20complex%20peace%20operations.pdf. Last accessed 10th Nov 2013. Sardesai, Shonali; Wam, Per. (2002). The Conflict Analysis Framework (CAF) Identifying Conflict-related Obstacles to Development. Available: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCPR/2145781111751313696/20480168/CPR+5+final+legal.pdf. Last accessed 7th Nov 2013. McGregor, Joan. (-). An Introduction to Responding to Conflict (RTC).Available: http://www.respond.org/pages/who-we-are.html. Last accessed 15th Nov 2013.