How can international NGOs (INGOs) integrate peacebuilding into development and relief work in conflict zones? What are the risks and consequences of mixing relief with peacebuilding? Can INGOs simultaneously be mediator, arbitrator, advocate, trainer, witness, supporter, counsellor and therapist in fraught circumstances?

A University of Bradford Department of Peace Studies study pulls together lessons from the literature on peacebuilding and argues that by keeping alight the flame of idealism, INGOs can help individuals and local organisations preserve and nurture memories and knowledge of society free of conflict.

Is it possible to speak of community in times of violence? While it is tempting to think of a community as a homogenous entity with cooperation and shared purpose, this is rarely the case. Most communities in war zones are rife with ethnic, religious and political divisions around access to resources. Are civilians innocent bystanders or perpetrators of violence? In times of conflict, individuals benefiting from the war economy have a vested interest in keeping it going. Local organisations may not want to become involved in peacebuilding or with INGOs for fear of the political risks.

‘Track 2’ (T2) diplomacy relates to the little-publicised efforts by NGOs to address not only the structural roots of conflict, but also the psychological factors driving it. T2 does not assume malign motivations of individuals and attempts to understand local conflict resolution mechanisms.

Measuring success in building peace is no easy matter. Yet, progress has been made in developing indicators to evaluate effectiveness. Concepts of civil society, social capital, social energy and social fabric are described together with a preliminary list of indicators to measure them. Effective peacebuilding projects lead to the peacefulness of a community and can be measured against observable and recordable evidence.

Other points brought out in the study include:

• Peacebuilding does not work with a ‘hit and run’ approach: agencies should be prepared for a long haul.
• In their rush to find local pro-peace organisations and individuals to work with, INGOs often do not check them out properly.
• Agencies and donors are not necessarily learning from experience. Critics who disparage T2 advocates are often unaware of studies describing practitioner experience in conflict resolution.

The report suggests that INGOs should:

• Devote more staff time and work with local partners, to analyse and map conflicts and identify openings for crossing cutting projects that deliver relief while offering pro-peace messages.
• Work to bring together both T1 actors (host government, military, donors and UN agencies) and other international and local T2 players to share experience.

Source(s):
‘International non-government organisations and peacebuilding - perspectives from peace studies and conflict resolution’ by Nick Lewer, Working Paper #3, Centre for Conflict Resolution, Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, October 1999 Full document.

id21 Research Highlight: 22 June 2001

Further Information:
Nick Lewer
Centre for Conflict Resolution
Department of Peace Studies
University of Bradford
Bradford BD7 1DP
UK

Tel: +44 (0) 1274 234 192
Fax: +44 (0) 1274 234 197
Contact the contributor: n.lewer@bradford.ac.uk

Centre for Conflict Resolution, Bradford, UK

Other related links:
The Humanitarian Policy Group improves response to conflict

Visit the United Nations Peacekeeping Operation

The UN focuses on peace and security

The Post-Conflict Reconstruction Unit eases the transition to sustainable peace

Go to the International Peace Research Institute for more