Peace and conflict studies - Wikipedia
peace building, both of which involve the use of conflict resolution processes or In this framework, training is viewed as a critical link between theory and. Of particular concern is the relationship between the military and the. NGOs, which play PEACEKEEPING AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION interests of specific. makes little difference to their performance as peacekeepers, and notes that for To start, we look at where conflict resolution theory has interacted with peace-.
Conflicts today are also increasingly intensive, involving determined armed groups with access to sophisticated armaments and techniques. The nature of conflict has also changed over the years. Peacebuilding Within the United Nations, peacebuilding refers to efforts to assist countries and regions in their transitions from war to peace and to reduce a country's risk of lapsing or relapsing into conflict by strengthening national capacities for conflict management, and laying the foundations for sustainable peace and development.
Peace and Security
Building lasting peace in war-torn societies is among the most daunting of challenges for global peace and security. Peacebuilding requires sustained international support for national efforts across the broadest range of activities — monitoring ceasefires; demobilizing and reintegrating combatants; assisting the return of refugees and displaced persons; helping organize and monitor elections of a new government; supporting justice and security sector reform; enhancing human rights protections and fostering reconciliation after past atrocities.
The resolutions also identify the need for the Commission to extend the period of international attention on post-conflict countries and where necessary, highlight any gaps which threaten to undermine peacebuilding. Demining Inlandmines and explosive hazards killed approximately 10 people every day — most of them children, women and the elderly — and severely maim countless more. Scattered in some 57 countries and 4 territories, landmines and other explosive hazards are an ongoing reminder of conflicts which have been over for years or even decades.
The vision of the United Nations is a world free of the threat of landmines and explosive remnants of war, where individuals and communities live in a safe environment conducive to development and where the needs of victims are met.
Twelve United Nations Departments and Offices of the Secretariat, specialized agencies, funds and programmes play a role in mine-action programs in 30 countries and three territories. Mine action makes it possible for peacekeepers to carry out patrols, for humanitarian agencies to deliver assistance, and for ordinary citizens to live without the fear that a single misstep could cost them their lives. Mine action entails more than removing landmines from the ground.
It includes high impact efforts aimed at protecting people from danger, helping victims become self-sufficient and active members of their communities and providing opportunities for stability and sustainable development.
A policy developed jointly by these institutions, the Mine Action and Effective Coordination: Much of the actual work, such as demining and mine-risk education, is carried out by nongovernmental organizations. But commercial contractors and, in some situations, militaries, also provide humanitarian mine-action services. In addition, a variety of intergovernmental, international and regional organizations, as well as international financial institutions, also support mine action by funding operations or providing services to individuals and communities affected by landmines and explosive remnants of war.
United Nations peacekeeping operations often play a key role in this process. UNMAS ensures an effective, proactive and coordinated response to the problems of landmines and explosive remnants of war, including cluster munitions. It assesses and monitors the threat posed by mines and unexploded ordnance on an ongoing basis, and develops policies and standards.
The Service mobilizes resources, and advocates in support of the global ban on anti-personnel landmines. UNMAS sets up and manages mine-action coordination centres in countries and territories as part of peacekeeping operations and humanitarian emergencies or crises. The UN has been actively engaged in addressing the problems posed by landmines since the s. It acted decisively to address the use of weapons having indiscriminate effects when it sponsored the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.
Inthat Convention was strengthened to include the use of landmines in internal conflicts and to require that all mines be detectable.
Eventually, a growing public outcry, combined with the committed action of non-governmental organizations involved in the International Campaign to Ban Land Mines ICBLled to the adoption of a comprehensive global agreement. As of Novemberit had States parties. Women and Children in Conflict In contemporary conflicts, as much as 90 percent of casualties are among civilians, most of whom are women and children.
Women in war-torn societies can face specific and devastating forms of sexual violence, which are sometimes deployed systematically to achieve military or political objectives.
Moreover, women continue to be poorly represented in formal peace processes, although they contribute in many informal ways to conflict resolution. However, the UN Security Council has recognized that including women and gender perspectives in decision-making can strengthen prospects for sustainable peace. The landmark resolution specifically addresses the situation of women in armed conflict and calls for their participation at all levels of decision-making on conflict resolution and peacebuilding.
Peace and Security | United Nations
The four resolutions focus on two key goals: Sincethe systematic engagement of the UN Security Council has firmly placed the situation of children affected by armed conflict as an issue affecting peace and security.
The Security Council has created a strong framework and provided the Secretary-General with tools to respond to violations against children.
I felt that this was particularly so when, at the San Francisco Convention, I introduced a request brought to me by a PSS member, asking the membership to consider changing the name of the section from Peace Studies to something more inclusive, like Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution or Peace and Conflict Studies.
The debate at the Business Meeting was spirited but in the end, inconclusive; and so the motion was tabled at that time. In order to help us frame these issues, I would like to begin with a series of questions: What are the boundaries between peace studies and conflict studies, if any? If there are boundaries, are they hard and fast, or is there overlap?
Does the semantic separation mask a unity of the field do we call ourselves different things only because of institutional pressures?The Power of Peacekeeping - Lise Howard - TEDxGeorgetown
In attempting to address some of these questions I begin with an article by Elizabeth Dahl focusing on the philosophical similarities and differences between peace studies and conflict resolution. A PS criticism of CR as accepting ambiguity regarding whom to blame for violence and a concomitant willingness to accept—and possibly reify—power structures by treating both sides impartially. The CR view that positive changes can take place if dialogue and other processes are followed; with the understanding that this may require engaging with elements one might consider distasteful.
A more revolutionary view of the term peace as espoused by critical PS; in effect requiring much more social change or social engineering than CR as a whole. I suspect that the essence of some of the difference between PS and CR may come from the perception that PS as a field is informed by a deeply seated moral position regarding power, conflict, fairness and unfairness while CR may be seen as more pragmatic in its approach to violence reduction. This means that the first two differences outlined by Dahl could be seen as differences in morality as expressed by differences in method.
This moral view regarding ends versus means was illustrated for me during a workshop that Pat Coy and I conducted at the Conflict Resolution Education Conference.