South West Asian political region

As with any situation of peacebuilding, the regional reality must be taken into consideration. Regional stability is as important as the stability in any given country. Such an argument is clearly rooted in a theory known as the “domino theory”. Basically this theory points out that if one country falls into chaos it is likely that the surrounding countries are likely to fall as well. The reverse is also possible, if a country takes a firm grasp of peace the surrounding countries are more likely to become peaceful as well. Of course there are many factors, one being size. A small country of a few million people would not have much impact on a large country that has a population in the hundreds of millions, for example North Korea and China.

One such example where neighbouring countries are very similar and can influence each other are the countries of South Western Asia. Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran are the most notable in this political region. The others are .

Each of those countries are experiencing a society that has endured violent conflict in the past twenty years. This experience has impacted the region to a point where it is difficult to say that it is a peaceful region. Further to that each country has a population that have been nomadic throughout history so they have a deep history of shared culture and trade.

At first though there is usually a thought that this region has been at war for hundreds of years. However that is an outsider looking in. Being a nomadic people they would have had regular contact with other cultures. Given the fact that many cultures exist, cooperation and peaceful relations must have been the norm.  However the nomadic culture is a difficult one to bring into a society such as the modern world sees society.

This region is one where a governing system needs to be invented. I am not sure we have a system in place that will adequately deal with the cultural needs of these people. To me this is a very positive element for peace because only the people of this region can say what governing system they want.

The British tried to implement a system in this region as did Russia try. Now the United Nations along with a great many peacebuilding organizations have offices and programs throughout the region. Within Afghanistan, a consortium of countries are trying to build a system.

 The one area that the world can assist this region is with economic relations. Most of the political governance needs to be left up to the people. I think that this understanding is just now sinking in after more than a century of poorly executed military efforts.

Unified Ideology for peacebuilding

For a number of years there has been an approach to peacebuilding named the Whole (All) of Government Approach or the Three D Approach, the three D’s being Disarm, Development and Diplomacy. These approaches look to a concert of programs to rebuild society through a unified focus in tandem with each other. This Whole (All) of Government approach is very similar to the United Nations Trusteeship Council ideology that has been scrapped by the world, just a different name.

These approaches look at every issue possible and set out to work on each with a unified voice. This is the reason that there is a United Nations effort titled Office of Coordinated Humanitarian Affairs. After some years it became clear that rebuilding society needs to have such a focus. For example, you can quickly understand what would happen if thousands of people returned to a city without government, police, schools, jobs, hospitals etc. Mix in the return of the soldiers/fighters if they have no job, schooling, prospects or opportunities. It is very clear that chaos will soon take over.

This Whole (All) of Government understanding has been a major focus of peacebuilding efforts for the past 15 years. To help this approach many governments around the world have come to realize that the private sector needs to be involved in peacebuilding as well. This is a very grey area of the task because it can quickly lead to bribery and corruption. However the need for employment can not be ignored.

The economy is not the top priority in peacebuilding, it is in the top five though. Stopping the violence is the top priority, which is the first D of the Three D Approach. The second D, Development relates to rebuilding of schools, hospitals and other institutions/infrastructures of a functioning society. As these are built society will begin to take shape and the economy/employment will become the main issue.

What is a very difficult thing for most people to understand is that the economy is truly in the hands of the people. A government has influence on the economy but it has very little control outside of regulating, monitoring and providing limited support. There are very few situations where the sole purpose of forming a society or a government is to make money. Is that why Uruguay, Lesotho, Kyrgyzstan exist, to make money?

The economy does take a large part of the attention because it is a system that can bring a unified focus and common goal setting ideology. The focus on the economy is huge because of this ideology, “ The pursuit of a job to make money to provide for a comfortable life, education, healthcare and ultimately a society that is peaceful”.

A strong economy is a stabilizing factor but without a peaceful society the economy will always be fragile. Therefore the peace in society needs to be the main focus and that is the responsibility of each individual. This responsibility is formulated in the last D of the Three D approach, Diplomacy.  Each person has to act in a diplomatic manner to ensure the peace is maintained.

Being diplomatic allows for difficult situations to be handled in a manner where everyone is treated equally and fairly. Diplomacy requires a large effort of everyone to be understanding, willing to learn, adapt, communicate to exchange ideas and progress.

Most peace efforts are now using this frame work to ensure a unified vision for everyone to follow.