A Global Affairs Media Network
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT 10 Years of the Global Peace Index 2016 SUMMIT REPORT
Future of Peace Summit 2016
THE FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT BY THE NUMBERS The 2016 Summit utilized two hashtags: #2050Peace and #Worldin2050, which generated a rich discussion on the future of peace, conflict prevention, and the global peace index.
17.3 MILLION IMPRESSIONS 2,207 TWEETS | 411
CONTRIBUTORS
Twitter data by Brand24, TweetReach, Postano, and Hashtracking.
180 COUNTRIES 611 YOUTUBE VIEWS LIVE broadcasting through YouTube to 180 countries. Most views came from the United States and the United Kingdom. Data by YouTube.
200+ ATTENDEES
Over 200 attendees comprised the audience at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, DC and their makeup was as follows: 24% public sector and policy; 16% private sector; and, 60% civil society, non-profit, and NGOs. COPYRIGHT © 2016, DIPLOMATIC COURIER, A GLOBAL AFFAIRS MEDIA NETWORK™.
2
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
WELCOME
THE FUTURE OF PEACE - FORWARD! On June 15, 2016, the Diplomatic Courier and the Institute for Economics and Peace presented the 2016 Future of Peace Summit to celebrate 10 years of the Global Peace Index as well as Diplomatic Courier’s 10-year anniversary. The summit was hosted at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, DC. Over 200 attended the event in person while 611 watched the sessions live on YouTube and the official event website. Ana C. Rold CEO & Publisher
At the launch of our premiere edition, 10 years ago, NATO Deputy Supreme Allied Commander for Transformation and Diplomatic Courier’s first editorial board member, Sir Ian Forbes, wrote: “…the Diplomatic Courier will seek to focus hard on the realities associated with conflict, pointing to key issues that characterize conflict prevention and conflict management. In a time when so much is in a state of flux, it will bring a fresh voice to the global security debate.” That mission has never changed. As our content and reach has expanded and evolved, we remain centered on the importance of conflict management and the question of stability that can endure. That the Diplomatic Courier started primarily as a conflict resolution and diplomacy journal and grew to be so much more, is not a surprise. Diplomacy is rich, interdisciplinary, and full of complexities. So is peace. As The Diplomatic Courier enters its second decade, it is that challenge that will be at the heart of what we try to do. While conflict prevention and management will remain critical to our coverage philosophy, so will stories about where peace works and its net impact. It will be part of our job to narrate the simple truth that peace is an investment belonging in every portfolio. We were thrilled to be joined at the summit by so many individuals and organizations studying and practicing peace—be they in the international NGO arena, the academia, and the private sector, because peace and diplomacy are interdisciplinary. The solutions will come from every sector. I want to take a moment to recognize and thank our co-hosts at the Institute for Economics and Peace as well as all of our Thought Partners—1776, Alliance for Peacebuilding, Atlas Corps, DC Social Innovation, Devex, Defense Entrepreneurs Forum, DiplomacyLab, Gallup, GVH, the Institute of International Education, PCDN, Sister Cities International, Veterans4Diplomacy, VetImpact, and Young Professionals in Foreign Policy. Ana C. Rold CEO & Publisher Diplomatic Courier
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
3
diplomatic courier magazine presents
The World in 2050 A forum about our future.
The World in 2050 is a series of global summits hosted by diplomatic courier, in collaboration with private and public sector partners. the series was conceived in 2012 when the world reached 7 billion people, with the purpose of convening multi-stakeholders and stimulate discussion and solutions about the future. How will these megatrends, i.e. major global forces such as demographic changes, resource stress, technology, and economic power shifts change our future? Join global publics and thought leaders from 180 countries on a journey of strategic forecasting for a better future.
www.diplomaticourier.com/2050
A Global Affairs Media Network
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT 2016 | REPORT CONTENTS WELCOME
FORUMS
03 /
12 /
The Future of Peace - Forward! Ana C. Rold, CEO and Publisher, Diplomatic Courier KEYNOTES
08 /
Opportunities for Peace: What interventions are likely to bring peace in the next decade? Matthew Bishop, US Business Editor and New York Bureau Chief, The Economist Sandra Melone, Executive Vice President, Search for Common Ground Bill Vendley, Secretary General, Religions for Peace Melanie Greenberg, President and CEO, Alliance for Peacebuilding (Moderator)
10 Years of the Global Peace Index Steve Killelea, Founder and Executive Chairman, Integrated Research Ltd.; The Charitable Foundation; and, The Institute for Economics and Peace
10 /
U.S. Efforts Towards Peace and Progress Congressman John Garamendi, United States Representative (D-CA), United States Congress
14 /
Crafting Conditions for a Positive Peace John Hewko, General Secretary, Rotary International
16 /
The Nuclear Challenge to Peace Des Browne, Vice-Chairman, Nuclear Threat Initiative
20 /
The Urbanization Challenge to Peace
18 /
How to Build Peace: Major Peace Organizations Confront the Challenges of the Next Decade Nancy Lindborg, President, US Institute of Peace Carrie Hessler-Radelet, Director, Peace Corps Aubrey Fox, US Executive Director, Institute for Economics and Peace (Moderator)
22 /
Innovating for Peace Michelle Breslauer, Director, America’s Program, Institute for Economics and Peace Thomas Debass, Deputy Special Representative for Global Partnerships, US Department of State Shannon Green, Director and Senior Fellow, Human Rights Initiative, CSIS Christopher Schroeder, Author of Startup Rising: The Entrepreneurial Revolution Remaking the Middle East Frances Holuba, Director of Social Enterprise, Politico (Moderator)
Mary D. Kane, President and CEO, Sister Cities International
PUBLISHING. Diplomatic Courier magazine is produced by Medauras Global, an independent private publishing firm. The magazine is printed six times a year and publishes a blog and online commentary weekly at www.diplomaticourier.com. EDITORIAL. The articles in Diplomatic Courier both in print and online represent the views of their authors and do not reflect those of the editors and the publishers. While the editors assume responsibility for the selection of the articles, the authors are responsible for the facts and interpretations of their articles. PERMISSIONS. None of the articles can be reproduced without their permission and that of the publishers. For permissions please email the editors at: info@medauras.com with your written request. LEGAL. Copyright Š 2006-2016 Diplomatic Courier and Medauras Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication can be reproduced without written consent of the publishers. All trademarks that appear in this publication are the property of the respective owners. Any and all companies featured in this publication are contacted by Medauras Global and the Diplomatic Courier to provide advertising and/or services. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of information in this publication, however, Medauras Global and the Diplomatic Courier magazine make no warranties, express or implied in regards to the information, and disclaim all liability for any loss, damages, errors, or omissions.
MASTHEAD
READ IT ON
PUBLISHER Ana C. Rold
CREATIVE DIRECTOR Christian Gilliham
ADVISORY BOARD Andrew M. Beato Fumbi Chima Sir Ian Forbes Lisa Gable Mary D. Kane Greg Lebedev Anita McBride
EDITORS Kathryn H. Floyd Michael Kofman Paul Nash
WRITERS Jacob Argue Danika Li PHOTOGRAPHY Kaveh Sardari
PRESS/MEDIA Press@diplomaticourier.org EDITORIAL Editors@diplomaticourier.org MAILING ADDRESS 1660 L Street, NW, # 501 Washington, DC 20036
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
5
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Opening Keynote 10 Years of the Global Peace Index PRESENTER STEVE KILLELEA, FOUNDER & EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN INTEGRATED RESEARCH LTD THE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION AND THE INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE
TEN YEARS AGO, Steve Killelea was faced with the tough task of answering this question: if you can’t measure peace, how do you understand it? In the past, “peace” was considered a negative word, associated with left-wing, moral arguments that were perceived as being anti-global, anti-business, and anti-military. Instead of addressing peace, experts were encouraged to talk about security, something that Killelea realized was fundamentally different from peace. By establishing the Global Peace Index (GPI), Killelea hoped to bring peace back into the center ground as an area of study bounded in fact—no longer a moral argument, but a factual one. After a decade of building a global network of allies, mentors, and partners, Killelea’s GPI has succeeded in heralding a new future for the world of peace study. In his opening keynote, Killelea addresses the three main domains of the Global Peace Index, its methodology, and explores the way statistics of peace are currently studied. Later on in the day, Killelea also presented IEP’s first lifetime achievement award to his colleague and mentor Chic Dambach. The Global Peace Index measures peace using three distinct domains. Killelea’s team focuses on studying peace instead of conflict, something that he says has created completely different outcomes for peace as an objective study. With the Global Peace Index, peace is studied in tangible ways that can appeal to policymakers and people of influence. Peace is multi-dimensional so the Global Peace Index brings together a
8
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
range of indicators. It measures internal safety and security; ongoing conflicts; and levels of militarization. Peace has a strong relationship with the prosperity of a society. GPI experts present research on cost of violence and financial benefits of reductions in violence. This allows advocates for peace to create arguments for policy-makers that directly correlate with the economic well being of their constituents. The GPI allows us to study and define the concept of positive peace. Positive peace refers to the attitudes, institutions, and structures that create and sustain peaceful societies. Killelea believes that this is the most important issue to address. Cause and effect studies are an archaic and ineffective method of studying peace. The Global Peace Index abandoned studying causes and effects of violence and instead evolved a new form of studying peace. Killelea recalled an experience in Zimbabwe that he had which spoke to the effectiveness of the approach of the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP). IEP’s model is grounded in numbers and statistics. To date, the GPI has studied almost 9,000 indexes, surveys, and data sets to work out what factors are most closely associated with peace. They then crunched these numbers in order to figure out what was most statistically significant before creating a topology of peace. Cause and effect studies are ineffective due to human nature. When looking at causal relationships, you can only ever get approximations of solutions to a
problem. This is because at the root of every cause and effect relationship in society, you have a human being. These people have a tendency to shift blame and responsibility away from themselves, which makes it hard to pinpoint how exactly to solve a problem. A systems approach to studying peace allows for experts to look forward. Instead of looking backwards at root causes, IEP uses a systems approach that looks at what you can do to change the system. Rather than being interested in causes, experts study the flow and dynamics of the system, and the drivers of systemic change. Systems-based methodologies have proven results. In Zimbabwe, IEP used a nine month program to implement positive peace. During those nine months, their team looked at each of Zimbabwe’s eight domains and created feasible interventions that would have impact within a few years. The result of this program was that for the first time in 35 years, you had the government, the opposition party, and the civil societies associated with both sides sitting in one room and coming to agreements. The statistics on peace and violence are warped. The media often presents peace as being on a negative trend, but Killelea urged everyone to look at the flipside of conflict. He especially noted that many statistics on violence are extremely concentrated to a select few countries. What are the negative statistics of peace? This year’s GPI shows that
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
STEVE KILLELEA, INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE
SANDRA MELONE, SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND
CHIC DAMBACH, ALLIANCE FOR PEACEBUILDING
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
global peace has dropped 2.4%, with conflicts at a 25 year high. Refugees are numbering over 60 million, also a world record, and terrorism is up 80% from last year. The negative statistics of peace stem from an extremely small number of countries. Although conflicts have reached a 25 year peak, 75% of deaths occurred in three countries--Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Refugees are concentrated in the Middle East, and 70-84% of terrorist-related deaths are concentrated in five countries, three of which are again Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. By taking the most violent areas of conflict out of the data set, the outcomes now show that we live in a substantially
more peaceful world. For every one country that’s deteriorated in the last 15 years, three have improved. Commitments to funding peacekeeping are at a 10 year high, and we now have 60,000 more peacekeepers than we did in 2004. In Europe especially, many countries are observing historically low homicide rates and military expenditures have dropped down to just 30% of what they were in the 60s. IEP Lifetime Achievement Award As a special note, later on in the day Kilellea presented his longtime colleague and mentor Chic Dambach with an IEP Lifetime Achievement Award. This is the first ever award that IEP has presented, and both Killelea and Dambach made
brief remarks. Dambach is a key influencer in the world, and someone who has made profoundly moving works for peace. His career includes a stint in the Peace Corps as well as involvement in Congress and the Alliance for Peacebuilding. ■
“Many of us may be candles glowing in the dark, but some people are like lighthouses, with the shine that comes from them [affecting] many, many people around them.” -Steve Killelea
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
9
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Keynote Presentation U.S. Efforts Towards Peace and Progress PRESENTER CONGRESSMAN JOHN GARAMENDI UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE (D-CA), UNITED STATES CONGRESS
COMING FROM the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman John Garamendi is only too familiar with the costs and impacts of war and militarization. All too often, domestic problems and policies are treated as a separate entity from those abroad, but Congressman Garamendi insists that the two are deeply intertwined. In his keynote, Congressman Garamendi congratulated the work that IEP has done, and tied this to the potential impact that individuals have on sustainable development. Garamendi applauded the GPI as an unprecedented way of tracking and quantifying peace and humanity. He also addressed the role that the U.S. will play in sustainable development and the nuclear arms race as it deploys its considerable wealth and power. The U.S. needs to increase its progress towards Goal 16. Goal 16 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals aims to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.” The State Department and USAID have done well in promoting the achievement of Goal 16, Congressman Garamendi believes that there’s much left to be done. The creation of sustainable economies should be a priority. Although the U.S. has assisted in creating sustainable economies in some areas of the world, it still isn’t considered one of the primary objectives of our government. Garamendi urges that foreign economic policy should
10
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
be focused on lifting up economies and societies around the world. The encouragement of economic prosperity would lead to a more peaceful society where Goal 16 is employed and achieved on a global scale. Environmental protection has significant ties to sustainable and peaceful development. The current U.S. administration is trying its best to combat the effects of climate change and environmental instability, but faces an uphill battle. The Congressman argues that climate change will dramatically affect the outcomes of future Global Peace Indexes as people are displaced due to their shifting environments. According to a study from the University of California at Irvine, disruption in the Middle East can be traced in part to the crumbling of its agricultural sector. Policymakers need to carefully examine how the U.S. deploys its significant strength and wealth. The U.S. is in an unprecedented position of power and wealth. Although this bodes well for our domestic society, each action that the government takes has profound impacts on economies and societies across the world. Military deployments are inevitable, but are they currently too much? Recently, the House Armed Services Committee debated on the appropriation of approximately $600 billion in implementations of war. This is a direct contrast to the work of the Institute for Economics and Peace in studying the deployment of peaceful measures. Congressman Garamendi stated that
although military expenditures are sometimes necessary, they’re hardly the most important deployment of U.S. power. The U.S. government should be extremely wary of the effects that its actions have on global economies. Especially in the Western Hemisphere, neighboring economies are heavily affected by U.S. action, as well as fluctuations within our domestic economy. In addition to striving for stability, the government should actively work to stabilize economies around the world. The support of global education is key to peaceful societies. Well-educated societies are much more likely to be peaceful societies, and it’s because of this that Congressman Garamendi advocates for U.S. involvement in global education. The efforts of the First Lady Michelle Obama are a perfect example of the way that our government should be involved in encouraging, enabling, and assisting in the implementation of education programs abroad. The more educated a society is, the better the distribution of income, and the less social disruption there is. The nuclear arms race poses a significant threat to sustainable development. Garamendi stated that the majority of people don’t realize that we are a quarter of the way into a new nuclear arms race. The advent of an arms race due to a “we have to do it because they’re doing it” mentality has contributed to a sharp increase in danger, and a threat to security and peace. He believes that this arms race
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
CONGRESSMAN JOHN GARAMENDI
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
AUDIENCE MEMBER AT THE PAVILION
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
doesn’t have to happen, but efforts have to be made into arms control negotiations. The resources used in arms races are just another branch of how the U.S. needs to monitor the way it deploys its wealth. In the coming years, the United States will spend $1 trillion on rebuilding its entire nuclear arsenal and its corresponding deployment systems. Garamendi asks audience members to seriously consider whether or not this money needs to be spent this way. The new arms race is fundamentally different from the Cold War arms race. In the previous arms race, ground rules were established early on between the U.S. and the USSR. However, innovations in technology have created an overall lack
of knowledge regarding where nuclear resources are going. The nature of new weapons and their delivery systems is that they’re extremely stealthy. The lack of arms control negotiations are dangerous for all countries. Congressman Garamendi hopes that despite the obstacles posed by new nuclear technologies, the U.S., Russia, and China can make concerted efforts to discuss arms control. Without open negotiations, he fears that security issues will emerge that disrupt world security and have impacts on societies later on as we move into the second, third, and fourth quarters of the arms race. ■
The support of global education is key to peaceful societies. The more educated a society is, the better the distribution of income, and the less social disruption there is.
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
11
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Forum: Opportunities for Peace What interventions are likely to bring peace in the next decade? PRESENTERS MATTHEW BISHOP, US BUSINESS EDITOR & NEW YORK BUREAU CHIEF, THE ECONOMIST SANDRA MELONE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND BILL VENDLEY, SECRETARY GENERAL, RELIGIONS FOR PEACE MODERATOR MELANIE GREENBERG, PRESIDENT & CEO, ALLIANCE FOR PEACEBUILDING
THE MOVEMENT to analyze and to foster positive peace—began ten years ago when Steve Killelea launched the Global Peace Index (GPI)—has transformed the way policymakers discuss peace. Melanie Greenberg, President and CEO at the Alliance for Peacebuilding, was joined by expert panelists Matthew Bishop from The Economist, Bill Vendley from Religions for Peace, and Sandra Melone from Search for Common Ground, respectively. The panel came to a number of critical insights: first, GDP per capita is not a very good metric of how a country is doing. Second, creating lasting peace necessitates utilizing nontraditional methods. Third, religious community leaders have been meeting to solve problems; moving forward these infrastructures should be used to promote positive peace. Social progress does not necessarily align with GDP per capita. Matthew Bishop and his colleagues developed the Social Progress Index (SPI) in an attempt to move beyond GDP to consider what a good society looks like. There are three main pillars, each of which has four subcomponents. They are: basic needs, foundations of wellbeing, and opportunity. GDP per capita is not a very good measure of how a country is doing. Although as a general principle they align, GDP per capita and healthy societies do not always overlap. For example, countries like Brazil outperform their GDP per capita
12
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
while countries like China and Russia underperform with respect to their peers. Unsurprisingly, the Scandinavian countries have the highest scores on the SPI, and the failed states of Syria, Libya, and Somalia round out the bottom of the list. The SPI findings suggest that the most progress can be made in the countries which are at the bottom. The world average on the SPI is 61 out of 100. To get to the UN goals, the average needs to jump to 75 out of 100. It is manifestly easier to get from below average to average than from average to best, so if the UN goals are going to be met, the bottom billion will have to have considerable improvement, which will require peace to be developed and maintained. There is very wide-ranging performance in terms of personal safety. Personal safety is a component of the basic needs category. On health and nutrition, part of the same category, the planet scores 87 out of 100. On personal safety the world average is 43. Two notable examples are the United States and Brazil. While the U.S. scores 16th overall on the SPI, its personal safety score is 30th; likewise, Brazil scores 42nd overall, but 122nd in personal safety. (Note that America has the fifth highest GDP per capita, and Brazil has the 55th highest, so overall the U.S. is below expectation and Brazil is above expectation.) The SPI numbers show where focused policy attention is needed. By comparing countries with similar GDP per capita, lessons can be learned about how to create
more inclusive societies at each stage of development; moreover, the categorization of the scores gives policymakers an objective way to prioritize their agenda. Who works with whom affects peace outcomes. Through her years working in the field, Sandra Melone has discovered five principles to creating lasting peace, each of which suggests that who is involved makes a big difference. Military and kinetic forces are not working. With the rise of transborder threats—especially terrorism—standard military procedures are not suited to handle security challenges alone. In fact, in many countries in Africa and elsewhere the military does more harm than good, and the people view it with angst. Police forces have been more effective in keeping long term peace. Civil society organizations are important. Governments cannot be the sole Diplomats. NGOs and key members of the communities involved have a positive impact when they are present at peace negotiations. That conflict affects these groups means they care about the outcome of peace negotiations; therefore, they need to be involved for stability to follow. There has been a shift in how youth are treated in the peace process. UN Resolution 2250—passed unanimously by the Security Council December 9th, 2015—urges its member states to increase representation of youth in decision making
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
MELANIE GREENBERG, ALLIANCE FOR PEACEBUILDING
BILL VENDLEY, RELIGIONS FOR PEACE
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
PANELISTS LISTEN TO AUDIENCE QUESTION
at all levels.Youth actors are no longer seen solely as a part of the problem, but also as a part of the solution. This shift was precipitated by the observation that many forms of violent extremism stem from alienated young people. Rather than continue to allow this marginalization to continue, the UN advocates giving them a say in the negotiating processes so that they may instead become agents of peace. Countries that have successful interventions for peace engage with the media. Freedom of expression implies accountability. When all actors know that they will be held accountable for their actions, their behavior alters. A media presence, sometimes referred to as the fourth estate, is a vector for peace and democracy when present. Work with all parties. In certain circles it is taboo to speak to the enemy, but if that course is followed, the intervention is far less likely to succeed. Engaging respectfully with and listening to the bad guys alters the environment such that peace becomes possible. Empowering women has massive benefits
for society and peace. The UN has adopted seven resolutions on women, peace, and security since the turn of the century. Overwhelming amounts of data have shown that involving women in the peace process contributes to more positive outcomes, in addition to the effects women’s empowerment has been shown to have more broadly. Religious communities can contribute to peace in meaningful ways. There has been a revolution taking place among the world’s religious communities in the past 25 years: leaders of different faith backgrounds have begun to work together to stop/prevent conflict. Efforts at creating positive peace should utilize this religious infrastructure. Religions have moral heritages which can be utilized. The great world religions are oriented towards peace. Shalom, a salutation used by Jews in meeting and in parting, means “peace.” When Muslims meet one another, they say as-salamu alaykum, “peace be upon you.” As delivery platforms for peace operations, they simply need to recognize the practices, beliefs, and
doctrines that are already drivers of peace and magnify them within their communities. Religious leaders have begun to cooperate. Key members of various faith groups have started gathering, putting a problem at the center of the table and trying to solve it. They are learning to recognize their differences, and yet are still able to work together where their interests align— stopping bloodshed. Once the problem is understood, it can be a lens to go back to their communities with, and to discern assets they did not know they had. Bill Vendley, Secretary General of Religions for Peace, wants to take this one step further. Rather than put problems at the center of the table, put positive peace there. There is an emerging religious consensus that positive peace includes the reciprocal and unbreakable link between the obligation to foster the unfolding of human dignity—not simply respecting it but actually fostering it—and to search for the common good. Concrete drivers such as the Positive Peace framework developed by the Institute for Economics and Peace help to illustrate how to do that. ■
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
13
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Keynote Presentation Crafting Conditions for a Positive Peace PRESENTER JOHN HEWKO, GENERAL SECRETARY, ROTARY INTERNATIONAL
ROTARY INTERNATIONAL has been an integral part of the peace community for decades. In fact, when the United Nations Charter was being established in San Francisco in 1945, 40 Rotarians were involved in drafting the documents. General Secretary John Hewko continued that long-standing commitment to international peace and prosperity, proudly sharing how their approach has been effective with the esteemed audience members of the tenth annual Peace Summit. There were a number of key factors to their success. First, take a multifaceted perspective. Second, utilize the data available, and gather your own to maximize impact. Third, educating peacemakers is vital to changing the culture at home and abroad. Finally, governments cannot do it alone and, especially with respect to the refugee crisis, partnerships are paramount. Rotary’s multidisciplinary approach allows them to see challenges in unique ways. Hewko: “Look at our efforts as spokes on a wheel, with peace and conflict resolution at the hub, you get a picture of how Rotary is creating social and economic conditions that are at the core of positive peace.” Understanding and being a part of holistic community engagement is key. Rotary members are passionate supporters of international understanding. Rotary’s student and professional exchange programs are huge. Each year they send over 9,000 students around the world, which makes it the largest program of its kind in the country. Moreover, service projects see Rotarians and host country
14
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
populations working together to improve life in the affected region. It is important to get projects finished, but how they are built is perhaps equally so, and that part is often overlooked. The success of this approach depends on two aspects: sustainability and scalability. In some parts of the world women and children collectively spend hundreds of thousands of hours each day gathering water. Therefore, when there is easy access to clean water, there is more time freed up. This translates into women being able to better attend to their work and their families, and for children to be able to attend school and achieve higher literacy rates. Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) solutions can thus dramatically improve the quality of life for the most estranged members of these societies. To be sustainable, however, solutions cannot just be stop gap measure: if you install a hand pump, you must teach the community how to fix it if it breaks. To address this challenge, Rotary is developing the WaSH Sustainability Index.
with increase the long-term value of the projects evaluated. The two founding partners—USAID and Rotary—will clearly be using the Index in all of the relevant operations within their organizations, but they also aspire for this metric to be used by the NGO community at large, and thereby contribute to more sustainable outcomes. The Global Peace Index is an invaluable instrument for budgeting. The GPI shows NGOs like Rotary where they should be directing their resources to achieve the most effective outcomes. By analyzing areas of greatest concern, the Institute for Economics and Peace does the heavy lifting for NGOs whose resources are geared more towards action than analysis. Annual budget decisions of many players in the development space are influenced by the most pressing challenges outlined in the Global Peace Index. Data driven policymaking removes arbitrary choices in favor of objective decisions, and thus limits internal squabbling over resources.
Indices are a helpful guide for NGOs. In the age of big data, nonprofits are doing everything they can to make sure that their efforts are directed where they can have the biggest impact. In collaboration with USAID, Rotary is launching the WaSH Sustainability Index. Still in the pilot phase, the WaSH Sustainability Index is a tool to evaluate the sustainability of a project based on four critical factors: 1) institutional arrangements; 2) management practices; 3) financial conditions; and, 4) technical operations and support. Such an assessment
Peace education is a core tenet of Rotary’s mission. Just as war is fought with soldiers wielding weapons, peace is waged by students armed with knowledge. Each year, Rotary selects up to 100 individuals from around the world to receive fully funded academic fellowships at one of their partner universities. These fellowships cover tuition and fees, room and board, round-trip transportation, and all internship and field-study expenses. In just over a decade, the Rotary Peace Centers have
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
JOHN HEWKO ANSWERING AUDIENCE QUESTIONS
JOHN HEWKO, ROTARY INTERNATIONAL
STEVE KILLELEA AND JOHN HEWKO AT THE PAVILION
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
trained more than 900 fellows for careers in peace building. Many of them go on to serve as leaders in national governments, NGOs, the military, law enforcement, and international organizations like the United Nations and World Bank. Programs last 15 to 24 months and require a practical internship of two to three months during the academic break. There were about a dozen Peace Fellowship alumni in attendance, and Hewko had them stand to be recognized, and extended the invitation for other audience members to apply. Rotary has partnered with the Institute for Economics and Peace in their shared effort to educate peacemakers. IEP has made it their goal to have trained one million peacemakers globally, and Rotary is using its vast network to help them reach that aim. Peace Fellowship alumni are selected to present the GPI findings to local Rotary clubs and the GPI ambassador program is available online to all its members to peruse. To further their plan, they have made dissemination of peace education a competition. Receiving creative entries from the world over, ten finalists
were chosen to get funding for their unique approaches. Peacemakers are also being trained in country. For example, Rotary has pioneered a positive peace workshop in Kampala, Uganda, which will equip 100 members of Rotaract—the arm of Rotary for young adults—with the tools they need to build peace in their local communities. Projects are underway which will follow this model. Partnership with government maximizes impact. Hewko reiterated the old adage that “1+1=3”, and emphasized that Rotary would not be where it is today without the partnerships they have developed over the years. Rotary organized a coalition to end polio. In 1985, Rotary formed a public private partnership with WHO, UNICEF, and CDC with the audacious goal of eradicating a disease from the face of the Earth: polio. Without the partnerships they had made, the world would not be where it is today— within shouting distance of ending polio now and forever.
Governments cannot do it alone; the refugee crisis has shown that firsthand. The immediate influx of migrants to communities in Europe and elsewhere presents an assimilation challenge too large for governments to tackle single-handedly. “This is a moment,” Hewko claimed, “when leadership from civil society is going to be absolutely critical.” One of the initiatives they have launched is a coding school in Berlin. Started by a Danish Rotary Peace Fellowship alum, the project offers a two-fold solution: it helps local migrants integrate into the local economy, and it meets the growing need of local tech startups for qualified coders. Failed and failing states cannot possibly support peaceful society. Syria, once on the verge of meeting the UN Millennium Development Goals for education and healthcare, has lost six decades of progress in just five years of conflict. “We would be foolish to underestimate these and other challenges,” Hewko concluded, “but we would be even more foolish to think that we can do nothing to stop the conflict, or to end the violence.” ■
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
15
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Keynote Presentation The Nuclear Challenge to Peace PRESENTER DES BROWNE, VICE-CHAIRMAN, NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE
THERE HAS NOT BEEN a nuclear detonation since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, over 70 years ago; nonetheless, the awesome power of these devices necessitates that the world be ever vigilant. The Vice-Chairman of the Nuclear Threat Institute, Des Browne, addressed the audience at the tenth annual Global Peace Index (GPI) on what he views to be the challenges to peace in the coming decade, as seen through the prism of his work. In brief, the key points are as follows. First, there have been notable achievements in arms reduction since the end of the Cold War. Second, the Nuclear Threat Institute has launched a biannual Nuclear Security Index to generate accountability for participation in the nuclear pipeline. Finally, ownership of nuclear weapons is not conducive to peace. The nuclear weapons reduction efforts have seen progress since the Cold War ended. Global efforts to reduce both the saliency and numbers of nuclear weapons, to curb the spread of nuclear technologies, and to prevent terrorists from gaining access to the materials needed to build a nuclear or radiological weapon–something they have expressed a determination to do—have had success. There are fewer nuclear weapons now than there was during the Cold War. Approximately 85% fewer nuclear weapons exist now than there were then, but it should be noted that these are in increasing numbers of nations, many of whom are in some of the most unstable regions of the world. The New START Treaty between
16
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
the United States and Russia was signed by Presidents Obama and Putin in 2010, making a significant contribution to arms reduction and verification through a legally binding framework which will be valid for ten years. Obama has shown leadership on the nuclear issue. A set of global nuclear summits, led by Obama, contributed to substantial reductions across the board, as well as the number of countries with weapons usable nuclear material. There were at one stage 50 of these countries in the world; there are now just 24. The nuclear agreement with Iran was a step in the right direction. A truly multilateral negotiation, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, which would have cascaded into a new round of proliferation in the Middle East more generally as well. The crippling economic sanctions placed on Iran were lifted once the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that it has restricted its sensitive nuclear activities. Their uranium stockpile will be reduced by 98% for 15 years, and it must keep its level of enrichment below 3.67%. Their plutonium pathway has been completely cut off. Iran will also be required to allow IAEA inspectors to access any site they deem suspicious. Finally, the break out time has been moved from two to three months to about a year, and should Iran violate any aspect of the deal, sanctions snap-back into place for ten years. The Nuclear Security Index keeps all players in the nuclear space accountable.
There are nearly two thousand metric tons of highly enriched uranium and plutonium spread across facilities in 24 countries. A biannual report that analyzes thousands of indicators in these countries, the Nuclear Security Index (NSI) ensures that nations are held responsible for the security of their nuclear materials. The Nuclear Security Index’s far reaching analysis is a useful metric. Developed with the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) and with input from a respected international panel of nuclear security experts, the Nuclear Security Index assesses the security of the world’s deadliest materials: highly enriched uranium and plutonium. The Index is designed to encourage governments to take actions and build confidence in the security of their materials. By identifying areas that need improvement, policy makers are guided to their problem areas, or, if need be, getting the international community involved to secure their facilities. The limitations of the Index are outweighed by its utility. While this index is not perfect, it is a valuable tool for measuring progress and incentivizing efforts to make progress on certain areas. “It is not about where on the Index you are,” Browne asserts, “it is about where you were last time that matters.” The ability to know whether or not progress was made, objectively, was a clear factor in the development of this tool. Other indices are affecting the policy debate. The 2016 Global Peace Index provided strong evidence that poverty and lack of opportunity were the drivers most
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
DES BROWNE, NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
closely associated with violence. Policies that place greater emphasis on education and economic opportunity are therefore important for more reasons than one. Having cost the United Kingdom 7.7% of its annual GDP, a lack of peace is a critical issue that must be dealt with on all fronts. Nuclear weapons have no place in peaceful societies. It is hard to imagine a peaceful world when nations continue to invest in weapons that are capable of killing millions of people, when these weapons continue to be part of strategic deterrence constructs. World leaders have advocated for the abolition of nuclear weapons. As John F. Kennedy said in 1961, “Every man, woman,
and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles hanging by the slenderest of threads capable of being cut at any moment by accident, or miscalculation, or madness.” The lesson of Damocles sword is was created by Cicero to illustrate the sense of constant fear people in which people with great power live. Kennedy drew a parallel to the nuclear age, in which fear always looms. Ronald Reagan famously said that “a nuclear war cannot be won… and must never be fought.” On another occasion Reagan posited the following: “The only value to our two nations of possessing nuclear weapons is to make sure that they will never be used, but then, would it not be better to do away with them entirely?”
Present day nuclear policies are not conducive to peace. The U.S. and Russia still hold 90% of the global nuclear inventories, and deploy thousands of weapons in ready-to-launch postures. A comprehensive treaty banning nuclear weapons testing remains unratified by a number of key states 20 years after it was signed, the United States among them. Leaders argue that terrorists gaining a nuclear weapon would be disastrous, but that their ownership of thousands of them leads to a more peaceful world. Seventy years since the last nuclear detonation, the prospect of becoming complacent to nuclear risks is unwise. Setbacks, both large and small, have the potential for catastrophe. ■
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
17
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Forum: How to Build Peace Major Peace Organizations Confront the Challenges of the Next Decade PRESENTERS NANCY LINDBORG, PRESIDENT, US INSTITUTE OF PEACE CARRIE HESSLER-RADELET, DIRECTOR, PEACE CORPS MODERATOR AUBREY FOX, US EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE
THE GLOBAL PEACE INDEX has made waves in the peacebuilding community; building rhetoric, facilitating discussions, and providing a data-based method of analyzing peace. Although a decade has gone by since the GPI was first created, there still remains a huge gap between where the world is in terms of global peace and where it needs to be. This forum addresses the roles of two major peace organizations and analyzes which priorities need to be taken in order to achieve a world without violent conflict. Aubrey Fox, US Executive Director of the IEP, moderated the discussion and presented questions from the audience. Nancy Lindborg, President of the USIP, focused on the administrative and logistic side of peacekeeping. Peace Corps Director Carrie Hessler-Radelet discussed the importance of individual contributions and building community trust from personal relationships. The Peace Corps and United States Institute of Peace work hand in hand to promote peacebuilding. Before taking questions and answers, Fox encourages President Lindborg and Director Hessler-Radelet to discuss the roles of their respective organizations in the development of peace over the last decade. The Peace Corps has always placed an emphasis on the long-term capability of their volunteers to assist in capacity building. Long before the term “positive peace” became textbook, the Peace Corps
18
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
has been practicing the concept of it. By employing front-line workers for a minimum of two years into the communities they serve, the Peace Corps strives to encourage development and diplomacy to help individuals realize their potential and build their societies up. USIP focuses on inclusive gatherings and discussions in order to create paradigm shifts. President Lindborg emphasized the importance of working with directly with communities in conflict zones, and building peace from the ground up as well as making top down administrative changes. She also argued that the role of youth in peacebuilding would be of the utmost importance in the coming years. In order to further peace keeping efforts, administrative and community changes need to be made. In response to an audience question, President Lindborg explained the resource-management crisis that response systems are facing, while Director Hessler-Radelet speaks about the critical need for personal relationships. The response systems domestically and globally are severely overstretched. Currently, 80% of global humanitarian aid is directed to victims of violent conflict and 20% to natural disaster relief -- a number that’s flipped from a decade ago. The price of conflict costs 13% of the world’s GDP each year, and about $600 billion goes to the U.S. military each year, as opposed to just $50 billion that funds the entirety of the civilian response system. This statistic represents a deep funding
imbalance. President Lindborg believes that instead of having a reactionary response to violent conflict, funding and resources should be redirected in order to get ahead of these problems. Government infrastructures need to be remodeled in order for meaningful progress to happen. In addition to the funding reform that needs to happen, Lindborg also believes that there are many institutional structures that need to be revamped. One of the biggest setbacks to efficient crisis response is that governments fail to have a shared understanding of long-term goals versus short-term necessities when it comes to addressing violent conflict and peacebuilding. Personal relationships are critical to the success of peace movements. By cultivating deeply personal relationships, Peace Corps members develop bonds of trust that are built upon when developing capacity-building infrastructure. According to Director Hessler-Radelet, even the largest institutional partnerships such as the one shared by the Peace Corps and Rotary International are built upon individual and local connections. The Peace Corps has a longstanding commitment to building service communities and structures such as Youth Corps in their partner nations. Goal 16 should serve as a North Star for milestones over the next decade. When asked what types of milestones they would like to see in the decade,
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
AUBREY FOX, INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE
CARRIE HESSLER-RADELET, PEACE CORPS
NANCY LINDBORG, US INSTITUTE OF PEACE
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
President Lindborg responded that whatever the milestone, they should fall under the realm of Goal 16 of the Sustainable Development Goals now that the Millennium Development Goals have ended. Goal 16 is a building block for long-term conversations about peaceful, sustainable, and inclusive societies. By using Goal 16 as a sort of “North Star” countries are much more capable of measuring their levels of peace, inclusiveness, and sustainability under U.N. standards. Some of the questions President Lindborg hopes to address are: Is there political will to move peacebuilding forward in some countries? Could there be fewer countries in the red (least peaceful) on the GPI? Instead of having Africa be a mosaic of different colors
associated with various levels of peace, could we one day see it being completely teal (most peaceful)? We are dealing with the hardest cases of peacebuilding now that the MDGs are over. The Millennium Development Goals served as a guiding method of dealing with some of the world’s issues. However, the countries left that are still war-torn and stricken by instability are those that withstood 15 years of efforts to stabilize them. Peace organizations are now faced with the significant obstacle of rebuilding and re-addressing these countries. However, Director Hessler-Radelet believes that the power of peace will win over the power of war on an individual level, and these individual efforts will culminate into systemic changes. ■
Currently, 80% of global humanitarian aid is directed to victims of violent conflict and 20% to natural disaster relief - a number that’s flipped from a decade ago. The price of conflict costs 13% of the world’s GDP each year, and about $600 billion goes to the U.S. military each year, as opposed to just $50 billion that funds the entirety of the civilian response system.
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
19
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Keynote Presentation The Urbanization Challenge to Peace PRESENTER MARY D. KANE, PRESIDENT & CEO, SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL
NOTING THAT “weapons of war have no purpose but the negative,” President Dwight Eisenhower sought to counter this fact with a constructive, positive effort to build true and lasting peace. At the White House Conference on Citizen Diplomacy convened in 1956 to discuss the methods of achieving said peace; Eisenhower brought together representatives of government, industry, business, labor unions, education, law, and medicine from all over the country to discuss the “most worthwhile purpose there is in the world: peace.” With the majority of the world’s population living in cities, he wanted to link cities together in friendship. Sister Cities International was born. Its current President and CEO, Mary Kane, asserted its relevance at the annual Peace Summit, held this year at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, DC. There were a couple key points from Kane’s presentation: first, grassroots action has a profound impact, often in ways that one could not predict. Second, partnerships need to be made everywhere, even with our enemies—perhaps especially with our enemies. Last, assistance breeds commerce through trust. Peace happens through people. Through programs like Fulbright Scholars, Sister Cities International, and the Peace Corps, Americans cultivate the understanding that everyone wants the same thing—a better life for their children and a peaceful world. Postwar America held out its hand to help rebuild. 70 years later, Japan and Germany are two of our strongest allies. In the 1950s, a Sister City partnership
20
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
developed between Brest, which was was part of Vichy France during WWII, and Denver, Colorado. That relationship is still strong today, with numerous student, business, and municipality exchanges. Having spawned in the postwar era, Sister Cities International now has a network of 1.1 million people involved in their effort to promote peace and prosperity. Obama’s recent visit to Japan, making him the first sitting President to visit Hiroshima, was a symbolic gesture suggesting that the United States is committed to creating a future based on trust instead of violence. Xi Jinping is an alumnus of Sister Cities. The first Sister City partnership with China did not come until the 1980s, between St. Louis and Nanjing. Today there are close to 200 Sister City relationships with China. In 1985 Xi Jinping went to Muscatine, Iowa on a sister state delegation as part of an agricultural exchange. By the time he returned in 2012, he was the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China Xi. While in Muscatine, he insisted on having tea with his host family. Possibly more consequentially, however, was the $4.3 billion agreement he signed to buy soybeans from Iowa farmers. At a speech he gave in Des Moines before he left, Jinping said the following: “When I think of America, I think of my host family.” Technology has contributed to the peacebuilding process. San Diego and Jalalabad, Afghanistan have a Sister City partnership, a key part of which is training emergency responders. Moreover, high school members of the San Diego Rotary Club Skype their peers halfway across the world, asking questions such as, “what
are Afghani stereotypes of Americans?” and being asked questions like, “What do Americans think of Islam?” This humanizing process has changed views on both sides on the other’s culture, religion, and country, helping to create a more tolerant, peaceful world in the process. Peacemaking happens among friend and enemies alike. The Sister City partnerships developed between the United States and the Eastern Bloc were internally labelled, “Let the first strike be a knock on the door.” The metaphor was poignant, even in those times of tension, ordinary citizens were doing their part to make peace; unfortunately, this was not the case in other areas. We did not attempt to build relationships with the Middle East and North Africa. The so-called Clash of Civilizations may not have happened between the West and Islamic countries had there been more people-to-people connections made in decades past. The type of mistrust that allows a shutdown of Muslim immigration to be a policy held by a candidate of a major party would not have propagated if people from both cultures had interacted more together. But is not too late. Los Angeles was the first city to start a formal relationship with Iran, four other cities have ties with Afghanistan, and eight cities now have partnerships with Iraq. New York City’s Sister Cities showed an outpouring of support following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Tokyo sent ten million dollars—$5M for the city, and $5M for the state; Jerusalem sent supplies for the first responders; the
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
MARY D. KANE, SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
MARY D. KANE AND THOMAS DEBASS
AUDIENCE AT THE PAVILION
Mayor of Rome withdrew their bid for the 2012 Olympics and urged the Olympic Committee to give it to New York. When such an unfortunate event happens, it is hard to see the silver lining but, looking back, the support New York received from its overseas allies underscore the fact that these partnerships have real, tangible effects. Comfort is not natural when making peace. “At Sister Cities, we got comfortable,” Kane opined, “it is easy to go see your friends in Germany…” The places that are easiest to cooperate with, however, are not the ones which pose a threat to peace, and that is why there has been a renewed effort within the organization to stretch their limits. New relationships with Cuba, Somalia, and Myanmar are being developed. Vietnam is still a hot-button issue, with only Seattle and San Francisco having Sister Cities there, but more are hoped for in the future in the continued effort to reconcile. The next President, the honorary chair of the organization, ought to urge them to stretch, as Eisenhower did.
Sister Cities create economic opportunity. Peace and prosperity go hand in hand; to have one allows the other to flourish. What is more, cooperation sows the seeds to help commerce grow. Connections build trust, access, and expertise that help local businesses find new opportunities. Whether it is access to new markets, assistance navigating import and export regulations, or introductions to new partners, sister city programs expand the resources available to local businesses—they can even bring jobs. For example, in 1998 Toyota chose to build one of their North American plants in San Antonio, the sister city to where their headquarters were located, Kumamoto. Sister city relationships can be critical to connecting transportation hubs and municipal officials to create commercial connections. In recent years, several direct flights between sister cities, including Washington, DC to Beijing, China; San Antonio, Texas to Monterrey, Mexico;
and Boston, Massachusetts to Belfast, Northern Ireland have started, allowing for easier business travel and tourism. Several port-to-port relationships have been developed as well to increase trade routes and exchange best practices. Economic development programming allows for an exchange of best practices between communities with similar industries, resources, or geographies. Minneapolis is learning about how to cultivate winter tourism from its sister city in China, Harbin (known as the “City of Ice”); Tamworth, Australia is learning how to be a year-round music city from its American counterpart, Nashville, Tennessee; finally, 50 business leaders from Chicago and Mexico City were convened in 2014 to discuss trade and investment plans among the partners, and the mayors of their respective cities signed a first-of-its-kind agreement to increase their competitiveness in the world economy, especially with respect to job growth and innovation in the technology, bioscience and culinary sectors. ■
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
21
Future of Peace Summit 2016
Forum Innovating for Peace PRESENTERS MICHELLE BRESLAUER, DIRECTOR, AMERICAS PROGRAM, INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMICS AND PEACE THOMAS DEBASS, DEPUTY SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR GLOBAL PARTNERSHIPS, US DEPARTMENT OF STATE SHANNON GREEN, DIRECTOR AND SENIOR FELLOW, HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE, CSIS CHRISTOPHER SCHROEDER, AUTHOR, STARTUP RISING: THE ENTREPRENEURIAL REVOLUTION REMAKING THE MIDDLE EAST MODERATOR FRANCES HOLUBA, DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL ENTERPRISE, POLITICO
AS DEVELOPMENTS IN PEACE continue to emerge each and every single day, it becomes increasingly apparent that the progression of peace is no longer limited to interactions between governments. With the GPI serving as a baseline for data collection and analysis, experts are now faced with the challenge of isolating variables that promote positive peace-not just as an absence of violence, but as a realm of structures, attitudes, and social environments necessary to sustain peace in society. In the last forum of the day, Michelle Breslauer of IEP, Thomas Debass of the US Department of State, Shannon Green of CSIS, and author-entrepreneur Christopher Schroeder join POLITICO’s Frances Holuba in a discussion on the drivers of peace, the role of evolving technology, and partnerships in policy making. Multi-sector engagement drives peace. Although violent conflict was traditionally a function of clashing governmental interests, governmental action alone has become obsolete as the best way to combat violence and societal disruption. The private sector, universities, NGOs, and individual communities have become deeply intertwined in the business of peace. The presence of smart devices allows for an unprecedented wave of bottom-up peacemaking. By the end of this decade, Christopher Schroeder says that two-thirds of the human population will have a smart device with access to the internet. For a
22
DIPLOMATIC COURIER
generation of youth in war-torn countries, education that was previously unreachable is now accessible at the touch of a fingertip. E-commerce work and payment, safety in the movement of cash, and the ability of youth to affect a corrupt system all signal an age of “peace tech.” Schroeder says that if you think of peace as a top-down issue, people become problems to solve, but if you think of it as a bottom-up issue, people are assets to be unleashed. Increasing waves of violent extremism are met with civil society engagement in peace. As terrorists become more capable of exporting their violence beyond borders, growing numbers of communities have begun to realize that terrorism is no longer an issue that you can execute and arrest your way out of. Shannon Green encourages civilians to become engaged not just in military campaigns, but in the process of peacebuilding. Civil societies, private sector actors, and grassroots level organizations such as #MyFriend and P2P: Challenging Extremism, are key to combating the global phenomenon of violent terrorism. The government is in the backseat of diplomacy. Forty years ago, 80-90% of official funding for diplomacy came from the ODA. Now, the number is flipped, with 90% of money coming from private actors such as diaspora groups, corporations, and civil societies. Coming from the State Department, Thomas Debass believes that the U.S. government can no longer operate on a diplomacy model grounded
in 1969. Nowadays, there are actors more agile, more knowledgeable, and more effective than the government. By creating partnerships between the private sector and the government, resources are less strained and actors can create more leverage in war-torn countries. IEP identified eight pillars of peace that are a framework to engage and unite different actors in the public and private sectors. Michelle Breslauer explained the eight factors are statistically linked to peacefulness. These measures are: low corruption, sound business environment, high human capital, well functioning government, equitable resource distribution, good neighbor relationships, acceptance of the rights of others, and the free flow of information. Breslauer said that it’s key that actors from private and public sectors see themselves as part of the same peace agenda, and that these eight indicators have a hand in the interests of any and all peacemakers. Technology is a double-edged sword. Although innovations coming from the technology sector have made peacekeepers and peace builders capable of things they never believed possible, this technology has also opened the window for terrorist groups to spread their conflict farther than ever before. The internet is just as much a tool of good as it is a tool of oppression. ISIS is well known for its use of the internet and social media to spread its propaganda
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
PANEL DISCUSSES INNOVATING FOR PEACE
CHRISTOPHER SCHROEDER, AUTHOR AND ENTREPRENEUR
AUDIENCE MEMBER AT THE PAVILION
MARY D. KANE, SISTER CITIES INTERNATIONAL
and publish horrific acts of violence. Ms. Breslauer believes that technology needs to have a root beyond just the surface activity of online activism but can be used as a tool for participation. Shannon Green echoes her sentiments and adds that technology is an enabler, but not the answer to corruption and social justice movements. Technology opens access, but doesn’t come with answers. Well-versed in the realm of technology, Chris Schroeder argues that although smart devices open worlds of possibility beyond local communities, it’s never going to be able to solve the issue of human nature or the issue of time constraints. However, by enabling access to programs such as the Chris Stevens Initiative, technology can create bridges of understanding between generations and communities that create thousands of young ambassadors and peacemakers. Beyond this, it’s up to peacemakers across the world to make a change, as the technology doesn’t come with an instruction manual for peace. Peace is both a public policy and business concern. Although domestic and foreign peace has
long been a major issue for public policy makers, peace has become a major concern for the economic and business sectors as well. In this last section, panel members explore what makes for a good peace investment, the role of entrepreneurship in public policy, and what makes for an innovative partnership. Peace is the product of social entrepreneurs. When evaluating what peace measures to invest in Schroeder said that peace can often be measured in many of the same ways a traditional business venture would be—profitability, growth, success, return on investment. More and more businesses are taking steps to become more engaged in their communities and in the business of peacemaking, but there’s still much to be desired in ways of enforcement. Breslauer added that although there’s still a long way to go, there are increasing efforts by IEP and others to analyze the cost-effectiveness of peace policies. By harnessing the best qualities of America, social entrepreneurs are opening the realm of public policy to communities diverse in nationality and age. When evaluating the United States, people
admire its diversity, and its spirit of scientific and social innovation. According to Debass, 51% of startups are created by immigrants, meaning that those who flee their home countries and come to the United States are in their own way engaged in peacebuilding and community-growth as they generate jobs and income. Additionally, programs such as Diplomacy Lab, which engages think tanks in universities across the country, bring future policy makers into the fold long before they officially become members of the public sector. Peace is a domestic problem as much as it is a foreign problem. Michelle Breslauer strongly emphasized the necessity of realizing that peace is a part of everyone’s community, and not just a foreign policy challenge. By engaging individuals on all levels of society, panel member Shannon Green hopes to create a peace infrastructure that mirrors the public infrastructure put in place for natural disaster relief. ■
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT
23
Where nations connect Effective diplomacy requires influence and in DC’s international circles no place says influence like the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center. Whether an economic summit, trade negotiation or a private diplomatic affair, our international trade experts and expansive network of leaders enable embassies and governments to amplify their message and strengthen their impact, locally and globally. Expand your reach. Grow your influence with us.
10 Years of the Global Peace Index
THANK YOU
THANK YOU TO OUR PARTNERS FOR THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT & THE WORLD IN 2050 SERIES.
HOST PARTNER
PARTNERS
CO-CREATE WITH US! What is Co-Creation, you may ask? Co-creation involves unleashing the creative energy of many people, such that it transforms both their individual experience and the economics of the organization that enable it.We invite you to co-create with us.Whether it is by helping us curate a specific summit agenda or partner with us for the entire series, we welcome you to be a thought partner and help us showcase a better vision for the World in 2050.To join our global coalition of co-creators and thought partners, contact us at: info@medauras.com.
FUTUREWELLBEING OF PEACE SUMMIT
25
FUTURE OF PEACE SUMMIT 2016 10 Years of the Global Peace Index Ronald Reagan Building | Washington, DC June 15, 2016