Getting through chaotic moments

Everyone experiences the confusion, frustration and chaos which conflict can bring. Everyone can learn how to move through those moments of chaos with calm resolve as well. There are a number of components to chaos that you need to be aware of in order to move through such situations. As you read these you will most likely know them. The difficult part is applying your knowledge. You must apply it as often as you in order to excel at getting through those chaotic moments.

Emotions and communication are the two factors that are often the most poorly managed. Case in point is the situation in Syria. At first the people protested against the government. During these protest emotions of panic set in, non-violent communication was lost and bullets were fired. This same situation continues to this day. That is a very simple breakdown but in reality that is exactly what transpired.

To get through the chaos you need to be able to keep things as simple as possible. The complications will work themselves out. Breaking the situation in small goals is the best plan. For example in Syria the small goal was a ceasefire agreement. Neither side adhered to that which brings the entire situation back to chaos and even further distrust. However the ceasefire agreement is crucial and must be implemented. What we are faced with is how a ceasefire agreement is to be implemented.

The average person in Syria most likely wants an end to the violence. As usual the ones that seek to destabilize a society are in the minority. The question now becomes, how do you reach a peaceful resolution when both sides are locked on destroying each other? This question is a very difficult situation.

The common element in poor conflict resolution rest with the people involved. With the case of Syria there has to be a different set of voices now. The current voices are distrusted and have too much history attached. In order for a peaceful environment to take root there needs to be new leadership. The issue will always be the same but the people need to change.

Whether or not the people can transcend the history is the main obstacle. For example we can look at the Palestine/Israel wars. These people have carried the history, violence, revenge, hatred and distrust for generations. The face of the war has become ambiguous, inhumane and demonized. There have been small breakthroughs with the Israel/Palestine war, 1994 was one. Since then there has been stalemates and regression. The people are in dire need of new visions, leadership and voice.

To transcend conflict, an open mind is crucial. New perspectives and a willingness to focus on the future is vital as well. All too often relationships get mired in what I call “stacking bodies”. This is when people bring up past wrongs as they race to stack up the most injustices incurred. This tactic is very common yet rarely works to resolve a conflict, (I have never experienced this tactic working).

Getting past stacking bodies is a challenge that must be overcome. If history is not let go of, the conflict will only spiral into further frustration.  The emotional attachment to those past injustices will gain more moments to fuel the anger. To get past this tactic takes a certain amount of resolve and hard work. Focusing on the immediate situation will help. The moment you start to talk about the context or situations that began the chaos you have started stacking bodies.  This is where the hard work is most needed.

Emotions and attachments need to be managed so that a peaceful solution can be found. Doing so is made more difficult when the other side will not or is not able to do the same. However someone has to have the intelligence and the willingness to let go of old tactics.

Path to Peace in Syria

Bring peace to Syria will be as difficult as everyone wants it to be. From the very beginning the breakdown of peace was only helped to grow even more chaotic. Here we are today and once again the United Nations is going to take the blame for a peace operations failure.

Right of the top the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council fought each other instead of work together. The western countries (United Kingdom, France, Republic of the United States) are as much to blame for the breakdown as Russia and China. Each country has played politics with more of a domestic attention towards their own countries than they have towards Syria. That is the absolute reality. This entire situation could have been avoided if the will was there, yet it was not.

That lack of will was so clear from the outset that the current situation was as predictable as the sun shining. The immediate call for regime change was and still is the largest mistake made by many of the world leaders.  This mistake brought about many other mistakes. There is no good reason why only thirty Observers on the ground now. There is no good reason for supplying military equipment to opposition forces. There is no good reason for training forces outside of Syria and supporting their efforts to return to Syria.

What needs to be done now?

·         The ceasefire agreement still needs to be a point of focus. With that the Observer force needs to get on the ground as soon as possible in numbers of at least a thousand, more if possible.

·         Foreign journalists are good secondary observes but they can also be used for propagandist purposes. This is where people (like me) have to sift through all the information, find the sources, biases and reality. Truth can be manufactured and that needs to be deeply understood.

·         All border crossings and points of entry need to be locked down as tight as possible.

·         Arms embargo needs to be enforced and the complete disarming of all forces started immediately.

·         The world leaders need to support the legal structure of Syria and its constitution. The current government is the only legitimate leadership structure and that is the only avenue open for discussions.

·         The 26 February referendum results need to be a focal point of peace talks

·         A large peacekeeping force needs to be operational in conjunction with the Observer Force

These points are going to be almost impossible to implement, if it all. We know that the world leaders from outside Syria have only made things worse. Now we have to end that method and start within Syria.

As we look at the body count rising and the cities destroyed, we have to keep in mind that both sides of this must share equal responsibility. As internationals we must adhere to the current laws of Syria. Also we must focus on solutions and a future of peace. The current government of Syria has to be convinced that a peacekeeping force is not a breakdown of sovereignty. A peacekeeping force is there to strengthen the sovereignty of Syria.

Currently we are all embroiled in the chaos of violent conflict. Such a state clouds the mind and cements the cycle of hatred. As you read or watch the news take that frame of understanding and look past the blame and shouting that fills most media reports. We must tell our own governments to take such a view but first we must take that step. As you begin to see past through the cycle of hatred you can look to other wars like Palestine and Israel. Thus begins a new effort and path to peace.

Peace in Malawi

Within the past few days Malawi has successfully transitioned leadership of the president. The former President Bingu wa Mutharika died while in office (literally). The constitution provides for the Vice President to resume power, Joyce Banda. This transition went as perfectly as if such an event happened in Czech Republic. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/04/201247111815207836.html

Joyce Banda has become the first woman leader of a Sub-Saharan country. Further to that she is a strong advocate for human rights, which is a serious concern for any country. This is all very new and the hope for peace to remain is strong in her voice. That strength can be felt even in the news clip above. This success of peace is one to celebrate. However the pull of power is great and Joyce Banda has enemies.

 When you are embroiled in chaos the urge towards hatred and destruction is a strong pull. On an individual level you may be having a dispute with someone. You fight to ensure your stance over the others. For the most part the entire reason you fight is because your ego has taken a hit and you need to secure your confidence/authority over another. Rarely is the fight about anything that made the escalation to violence warranted. It is these moments of life that we need to be aware of, acknowledged and countered peacefully.

In Malawi there is a strong pull for peace to remain with the knowledge that chaos is near. That chaos needs to be kept in mind so that you know where the fight is waging from. At this point in Malawi, those that wish to take power can be succumbed through talks.

From all reports Joyce Banda is a person that can be trusted.  If you have read other postings of mine you will know that a person who is trusted to be peaceful can be a liability. This trust is seen as a weakness to others that are quick to use violence. I understand the use of violence and Joyce Banda may have to use violence to eliminate those that choose to destroy the peace within Malawi. This is the reality of life. It is clear that Joyce Banda does not want violence, however her enemies may. Now we must ask what are her options to ensure peace remains in Malawi?

For the coming years, Malawi is a case study of peace in Africa. We have the opportunity to observe a rare moment. We can observe how she works to build upon her trust, how she builds the peace to such a degree that no one would have a need to destroy it. For me this is a moment to learn about peace as Joyce Banda is walking into unknown territory.

Kenya Elections 2013

Once the model of peace in East Africa, Kenya fell into turmoil in 2007 during the electoral process. Since then, there have been a number of changes to the process and the distribution of electoral boundaries. The next election in Kenya will take place 4 March 2013.

From now to that date is a crucial period. This period is a point where political rhetoric will increase, opposition to the current leadership will challenge every move and the people will be encouraged to rise up. Each of these events are positives for a healthy and engaged people if the emotions and actions are managed properly.

All too often we view elections as a defined moment of government process. It is true that there is a defined window in which we must vote. What has come to be a reality is that people use that window to educate themselves on complex and far reaching policies. The reality is that elections are no time to debate policy because the time frame is too short and the issues are too complex. What comes to pass as debate morphs into sound bites, catch phrases, photo opportunities and smear campaigns.

With one year to go before the next election in Kenya, there needs to be a strong civic engagement effort built upon the need for controlled opposition. The entire group of parties and leaders that are involved with the leadership of Kenya need to come out now with a unified voice which speaks to the need for order.

The leaders need to be unified in their speech when it comes to protests, demonstrations and electoral integrity. Each leader needs to support the people to share their ideas in a positive manner. Furthermore the leaders of Kenya need to exemplify this in their own actions.

Peace is an environment that has to be prepared for and maintained. It is not a situation that comes bursting into reality as chaos does. The 2007 riots in Kenya proved how quickly peace can be lost. Once again an irresponsible leadership that promotes physical opposition quickly bring chaos which takes years to rebuild.

To bring an end to such a reality the people of Kenya have to be reminded that they are responsible as well. The government is the people and the leaders will prey on the mindset of the people. The people have to be educated to see the reality of their power to tell leaders who call for violence to step down. Violence is not to be tolerated and the best way to oppose violence is to stand peacefully in solidarity against those that call for the use of violence.

East Africa is once again building a peaceful society. Kenya is a major component in that region. The next year will be a turning point for peace.  

Syrian referndum of 26 Feb needs to be the foundation for peace.

For a society to remain peaceful the people have to take responsibility to ensure that environment. With each person, the leaders have to be more diligent in their efforts to remain trustworthy and honest. When issues of difficulty arise the need for peaceful dialogue is at its utmost importance.

During times of difficulty ideology will clash. This is a fact of reality and the root of most violent conflicts. For a society to remain peaceful there needs to be the voice of reason. The voice needs to be someone that will stand up and point out the common elements of understanding, goals, ideology and the reality that each person cares about the future. That person needs to have the trust of the people though. In Syria there are few people that have that trust and even fewer people standing up to voice the commonalities of the conflicting parties.

Who do we have standing up to speak of peace in Syria? The Friends of Syria have acted in a manner which is more an enemy of Syria than a friend. The current leadership in Syria has a tenuous grip on any perceptions of being peaceful. As for a single person, there is only one person that has any form of trust or credibility and that is the United Nations envoy, Kofi Annan.

We need to ask why the results of the 26 Feb referendum have so quickly been forgotten about? Why have the Friends of Syria not pressed upon those results? Why have the Friends of Syria continually called for more weapons? Why have the Friends of Syria worked so hard to discredit the current leadership in Syria knowing that such a tactic will only prolong the violence. Why have the Friends of Syria worked so hard to discredit Russia and China, when those two countries have only called for peaceful discussion within the legal framework of Syrian and international law?

The Friends of Syria have equalled the current leadership within Syria in terms of prolonging the violence. If peace is the return quickly, the Friends of Syria must change their tactics to be more aligned with Russia and China. The call for a universal ceasefire, weapons embargo, highly enforced border security to the point of almost lock down with only food and medical aid to be allowed in and strong pressure to get all sides into discussions.

The phrase “all sides” deals with only the people within Syria. The only outsider taking part in the discussions should be the United Nations envoy Kofi Annan, no one else, not one more person from outside. This is a Syrian process and it is theirs to manage. The international community can assist by providing peacekeepers to ensure that law and order are maintained. Journalist and ngo’s can also enter so that the rebuild can start and is monitored.  

The discussions already have a foundation with the 26 Feb referendum. That process indicated the need for a new constitution as well as a new political system. The world needs to support that process. The world needs to look at the reality within the Syrian population two years ago. The country was on a path to peace. As always peace does not arrive quickly enough for some and so they resort to violence. That is the reality which is lost in all of this.

With friends like that who needs enemies?

Syria and Libya are on similar paths, although Libya is a few months further ahead. Both are flirting with death. With each bullet fired, chaos wins and peace dies. The frustration with those that continue to increase violence fuels the desire to let war reach its pinnacle as soon as possible. Of course these desires should be restrained.

 Living in a country that has a leader which is not to be trusted is very difficult. No amount of goodwill can be built, you always feel a gun pointed at you, discussion seems useless and the system corrupt. When life gets to such a state violence quickly becomes the only way a person can feel they have done something to express their disgust.

You see, that is what people need. People need to voice their displeasures. There has to be an outlet for the pressure of emotions. There has to be an option for a way out. People can not live in hopelessness. People will fight, kill and accept death themselves if there is no hope. Hope is needed so much that we have created religions so that people have something to hold on to when life is seen as pointless. To some degree this has backfired and now we have people fighting about which religion is the best one to believe in. Pure insanity.

A leader that lacks credibility yet holds the larger share of physical force is a leader that will use fear and violence to retain power. Such a leader knows they do not have the intelligence, compassion or right to stay in power. The only way to keep their power is to use fear and violence. These leaders do not have to be rulers of countries, they can be warlords, gang leaders, religious leaders or anyone. How many families are forced to live in terror because of such a person?

Within Syria we have many such people. No matter what they call themselves, whether it be the Syrian National Council, Friends of Syria or the Revolutionary Syrian Freedom Front. These groups show their true character in the continually call for increased weapon support. No amount of weapons will solve this because no weapon can work without a person to operate it.

As I mentioned above there is the point when a person can no longer live in restraint. That point is a reality, yet it is all too often used for the weak minded. We are seeing the weak minded come together in the Friends of Syria coalition. We are seeing the weak minded in Libya that are still fighting.

Peace takes great courage. We need more courage in Syria and Libya. We need the voices of peace not only for the people within these countries, also for the regional countries. Leaders that are peaceful and are trusted to be so, have opposition yet the opposition understands there is no need for violence. Again I must state the stupidity of those that counter with the fact that a peaceful person leaves themselves open to violence. That line of thought is a reality but we are trying to build a world where such violence is obsolete, are we not? With friends that have such a mentality, who needs enemies?

The people decide what style of government to have, not the international community

With each step we take in the pursuit of peace we are to learn. The past one hundred years we have been fixated on the attachment of peace, freedom and democracy. With each situation that I have either been involved or aware of, I have slowly come to realize that peace and freedom are not always teamed with democracy.

The vision of democracy being one person one vote, elected government, responsible representation, and people governing themselves are all valid points. However, we have learned from the RUSA through the years 2000 – 2008 that a democracy can also be tyrannical. We also see that only 35% of the population actually votes. We also know that few people in the RUSA feel they are the government.  This great beacon of hope is proving to be false and we have to rebuild the mindset as to what peace and freedom really are.

There is a saying which states “no government acts without the will of the people”. This is very true. Without the will of the people no government will last. Therefore no matter what style of government, the people have to agree.

There are terms of brutality that occur when governments abuse power such as the case with the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, military rule in Burma. In both cases the will of the people had been crushed due to violence and fear. Such situations are realities we work to see an end of. It is through the will of the people that we seek an end to such realities.

The will of the people to govern themselves is not conditional to democracy, it is a basic human desire. As we look back into the history of indigenous governance here in Canada, there is evidence of democratic rule for thousands of years. These governance systems are now being recognized as the spark for all democratic models used today.

As we seek to resolve violent conflicts in the world we have to let go of the quick jump to democracy. Instead we need to focus on the peaceful order of day to day life.  The common push for democracy may actually stifle the ingenuity to develop a new system of governance. We must understand that the people will choose their own system of governance.

As the transition takes place there will be a need for order. Although we all wish for the benevolent dictator is such circumstances, none has come forth. We are left with the use of a similar system to the now defunct United Nations Trustee Council. This Council was to oversee the transitional governance of a state while it worked out the details of how governance was to take place.

The priority of any peaceful transition is first to end the violence and ensure order is maintained. After that is accomplished the people will engaged in negotiatied governace. This process will decide how the people want to govern themselves.

Did Gadhafi provide greater stability in West Africa?

Would a peaceful transfer of power in Libya have provided greater stability in West Africa?

We know that the out flow of weapons from Libya has armed many groups. These groups have used the weapons to bring more instability to many West African countries.  It must be understood that the weapons are not the cause of the unrest. The unrest is already there, yet the flood of weapons have increased the occurrence of violence in the region.

Peace, as does violence begins in the minds of people. When we are dealing with nomadic populations, we must look to the regional stability of peace. We must gather a sense of what the regional impact will when a central figure, such as Gadhafi, is lost.

We have to be cognizant of the power vacuum created and plan to fill that vacuum.  In the past few months we have witnessed (yet have not taken to heart) the need to put peacekeepers on the ground.

Libya is slowly slipping backwards because NATO countries left a power vacuum when they did not put soldiers on the ground. These soldiers did not have to engage in combat but would have been used to ensure the peace. We know that in order to maintain peace you need to put a force on the ground to step between the groups fighting. 

Syria is in the same situation. There is a strong need for intervention. Already there is intervention with the flow of weapons into Syria and the training of opposition soldiers. Why is the international community not using that effort for peaceful means? Instead of purchasing weapons and producing more soldiers which prolongs the violence, use those resources to build a ceasefire agreement and begin the dialogue process.

In the case of Libya, the lack of sector security reform is directly linked to the upheaval in Mali. We have known for decades that the armed forces in Libya were populated by the Tuareg nomadic forces responsible for many conflicts in West Africa.  These forces were not contained or even disarmed. Now we have a peaceful country Mali in upheaval.

The person in charge of the coup in Mali is Captain Amadou Haya Sanogo. He has stated very similar messages that have been spoken by others before him. The similarities are easy to see in comparison with Captain Moussa Dadis Camara, the Guinean junta leader who took power in Guinea during 2008. Guinea is still embroiled in political uncertainty. Mali is facing a similar future.

It is often a difficult situation to speak of peace when you know the current situation is not good but the options indicate a worse situation. At the time of Gadhafi there was little support for his remaining in power. Even if a person did speak of such they were quickly denounced as supporting crimes against humanity. With the evidence today, the spread of violence in West Africa since Gadhafi fell is there. Sadly this is a moment when a person asks, “Is it better now with Libya sliding into civil unrest, armed groups that thrive on instability have more weapons, governments being toppled, and regional peace again is taken a step backwards?”

This is the very question why Syria is of such importance. Taking the current power structure will leave a vacuum only to be replaced by another less stable group. No one is saying that the current power structure is a positive long term solution. Everyone is pointing to the need for change in leadership. The people want to have more opportunities for communication and political involvement. Those that know how difficult peace is to maintain lament the loss of every life. Due to that it is difficult to accept the killing of another to gain power. Unfortunately we live in a world that believes might is right. Even when we speak to the wisdom of open communication, governance for the protection of people and obeying the rule of law, when bullets fly, chaos rules and people die.

The question of greater stability is a speculative question. All we know is that there is an increase of weapons flowing around West African now. As I stated before the unrest was always there, the weapons made it more visible. Gadhafi was a brutal leader no doubt, however a peaceful Libya maintained peace in West Africa. With the unrest in Libya, the weapons were free to anyone that wanted them.

Choice, freedom and governance

Choice and being able to make choices are fundamental for freedom. By no means does that freedom have to be wrapped in a democratic style of governance. However we have come to link the two as if one can not live without the other. With all the revolutions in the Middle East we are living through a time where freedom of choice is being expressed by the people. Often these people live in Autocratic societies.

Now, as an outsider, I know that I should have no say in how these people choose to be governed, that is up to them. When I hear leaders (as has Canada’s leader) call for regime change, I feel the bullet of oppression rip through the right to self-determination. I am all for ending the violence in these revolutionized countries but I do not want to support war mongering or anything else that will cause more bloodshed. Furthermore I do not want to force a system of government on anyone.

In Syria we have many countries flapping their mouths off about regime change. These same countries are providing support as well in the form of weapons and training. What is really surprising is that the support is given to opposition forces that have very little support amongst the people within Syria. By supporting these opposition forces we are supporting a group that represents a minority seeking power and using force to get that power. This is the very thing the revolution sought to end in the first place.

Over the course of events in Syria I have sided with the plan in which Russia and China have always stated. That being a coalition of leaders meeting with the Syrian government to hammer out a peace plan. Doing this will ensure sovereignty, legitimacy and hopefully a quicker agreement to a ceasefire agreement. At the outset the other three permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have fought those plans, which in the meantime more people of been killed. Somehow the popular perception has it that Russian and China are the ones that have been blocking peace efforts. The fact is opposite.

The people of Syria need to be given the chance to exercise their will to run their own country. That is their right and their freedom. If they want to be ruled by a monarchy or dictator so be it. What ever format they choose to make that choice we must support. Now of course the international community has to abide by international law and human rights. So we can not support a system that selects a leader by shooting each other.

Now to throw even more mud into the mix. The international community may be ethically bound to stop  violent conflicts, legally there are no grounds to do so unless such violence spills into neighbouring countries. This has not happened in Syria. However there are forces outside of Syria going in.

In Syria, the path to peace is to support the people of Syria. That path is through the existing government and a ceasefire agreement with all opposition forces. This is the support in which the international community has always been asked to provide: The support of the current government to uphold the current laws and constitution of the sovereign state.  With that the international community has limited that support if a government is actively killing its own people such as genocides. In such a case regime change is deemed necessary.

In conclusion, the international community must support the people in its right to choose the system and the leadership of their own country. Those rights must be protected up to the point where the system used threatens regional peace or threatens an unequal section of the population (what ever that is).

peace will return in Syria

Peace is best achieved through daily attention and regular work. When a situation gets to a point of chaos, the effort to get back to where peace was lost is even greater. In Syria the areas that are in chaos need to understand that peace is now on both the government and the peoples shoulders.

To get back to how society was a year ago, a ceasefire agreement must be produced. Such a thing can not take place without the two sides talking. Since the current government of Syria has stated they will not hold talks with the opposition forces, an option is Shuttle Diplomacy. This is what the United Nations Envoy is there to do so he best get on with it.

Pick a date to work towards implementing the ceasefire agreement. As that date draws near there must be a communication campaign that will keep the transition period as open as possible. People have to know what to expect when the guns stop. For those that have not experienced a ceasefire transition, the silence is very unnerving yet calming at the same time.

Protests and chaos will take place. However the need for order is an absolute. This has to be planned out and executed with as much perfection as possible. The right people must be used to bring order and it certainly can not be government forces, unless you want the ceasefire agreement to get cancelled. One option is the use of the Observer Forces and this must be a part of the ceasefire agreement.

As the days pass and the ceasefire agreement holds, the international aid organizations can go in do the assessments and write the policy options. The people in the conflict areas need to be tasked with cleaning up the mess, this will keep them occupied while the ceasefire is held. Also it provides a spark that the conflict is improving.

There are elements that must be held in check and these are the desire to finger point, claim victory and fall into the trap of blame. What needs to take root is the peaceful understanding that everyone is to blame, there is no victory in war and the finger can only point back into your own eye.

Government forces need to pull as far back as possible. If any force is needed it must be an unarmed force. Also the weapons that are held by opposition forces must be checked and cleared. There will be less chance of breaking the ceasefire agreement if the weapons are not there.  A ceasefire agreement is a very unstable situation and often they are broken due to carelessness. Someone has to fire a shot first and that person has to be kept in mind concerning how fragile the situation is.

One last item that needs to be understood, peace does not take orders from a clock. We can set timelines but these must be flexible to allow for conditions to be ripe for success.

Syria is in a very difficult spot but with some assistance, peace will return.

Peace is slipping in Libya

The Libyan armed revolution was to be over when the former leader was killed. However in the past few months there have been reports of growing tribal aggression. We were aware that such a thing was possible. It is a common reality that such events happen. However, the cycle did not have to happen.

The upside is that Libya is not fully engulfed in another civil war –just yet. The reality of civil war is slowly marching to existence though. At this point we have a very disturbing question to ask, “At what cost will peace be made?” The payoff is usually in the form of political power.

I have written about the peaceful transition of power many times. One such topic is Negotiated Governance, this is exactly where Libya rests at the moment. They are negotiating how and who will govern the country. This negotiation can take place using words, elections and votes or the exchange of bullets. Either way the argument is going to take place. When all is lost the bullets will come to life.

There is still time to keep the guns silent and we have squandered much of that time in the past six months. Due to that it will take an even greater effort to communicate in peace with words to slow the anger and lower the weapons. We do know that the current tactics being used for the communication of a common goal in Libya is not effective.

At the moment we have very little time to draw up new plans. The best possible method is to increase the communication, power sharing and broaden the circle for discussion, planning and decision making. Let us not forget that Libya wants to have elections in June. The chances for a peaceful election under this current pressure is getting worse.

As I stated before the international community needs to severely boost aid in the targeted areas where violence is threatened. The focus of the aid needs to be an all out ceasefire agreement coupled with awareness/education programs, and a decentralisation of the governing power structure. Not an easy task. As crazy as this sounds, the people of Libya were calling for this very action back in December. We have wasted all that time.

As communication failures mount and groups voice their options to use violence the rhetoric also escalates. This sinking to the stupidity of violence can be averted if the will of the world is there to be wise. Too be honest though, I am not too optimistic that such wisdom will prevail.

Where to draw the line

Morals in society are portrayed in the form of laws. When ever the most controversial subjects are being discussed this question soon comes up, Where do you draw the line?

That question is often asked yet it always gets put into a societal/law realm. In realtiy this question can only be answered by the individual. For any over arching system such as government, where the line will be drawn is a question that will always change. – Here is why.

No matter what the issue of moral behaviour is being discussed, the time/era in which that debate takes place is the main contributor to the answer. In reality there was a time when government, law and order was not even a part of daily survival. Today there are a great many systems to advise us of how to behave. Laws, constitutions, religions, treaties, etc all have their impacts on how we should/do act.

Society has drawn lines on somethings for many years such as violence, theft and fraud. These three are held with contempt in just about every society we can think of. To go even further into the level of behaviour for society, we have the Declaration of Human Rights. So we have systems for the individual and for governments.

Going back the question of where to draw the line is a question that needs to be taken seriously yet at the same time every individual must take a ninety percent portion of responsibility for that answer. The government can not answer this question with out a strong and possible violent debate taking place in society. There fore the individual must answer that question themselves knowing what the current system will allow.

Debates on a great number of subjects are being held right now. There are factions that allow for exception. The laws and morals are held in respsect and truth and gauged by what we deem rational people. For the person that is not rational these morals and laws are augmented. Also we can think of the may ways a person must act in society and then go to work (professional soldier). In such circumstances the moral code and laws change.

For me the answer to, where do you draw the line, depending on what is going on around me, the line moves, at each moment that decision is to be made by me.

control the weapons or the mind?

Elections are an important part of a free society. When the people have trust in the system to choose who is going to be the leader, that feeling expands into everyday life of the people. Right now we have an election process taking place in Burma. This process is taking place after years of harsh political censorship and control.

The ability of a government to control the people in such a manner (as has happened in Burma), usually employs violence. As a country begins to come out of that situation of violence and fear there is still the threat of violence. Mainly the threat continues because the old power structure is still fighting. To decrease the violence there needs to be a concerted effort to eliminate the flow of weapons.

We are witnessing this flow of weapons in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and many other countries as well. The flow of weapons keeps the society destabilized and in fear. To combat the destabilization of society, disrupt the flow of weapons and bring peace is a multi-level task.

The problem is international in scope.  During July 2012, UN member states will meet to negotiate a legally binding international instrument governing the transfer of conventional arms: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The problem is, will this stop the weapons trade?

The war in Sierra Leone and Liberia was fuelled by diamonds and timber. As the war became as savage as a war has ever been, the world took measures to end the trade in “blood diamonds”. The measure taken is known as the Kimberely Process. This process did stem the flow of diamonds for a time. What we have to realize is that the people engaged in trading diamonds for weapons are criminals.  They will continue to work outside of treaties and laws.

The concern is that we must know the Arms Trade Treaty will not end the illegal trade of weapons. Of course having these laws is better than not. The largest demon in all of this is the desire to grab power/control through the use of fear, violence and oppression. The quick demise of peace in Cote D’ivoire is another example in the use of fear, weapons and oppression.

The battle of human relations is the largest demon we have to tackle. All the weapons in the world will have no bearing if the people who own them have no desire to use them. However, we live in a world where insanity is present, people will kill for power and build weapons to instil fear.

The positive element rests in the balance of peace. Most of us are peaceful. We wish to trust each other and enjoy the many differences of the world. We enjoy the process of debate, the camaraderie of sport and the challenge of opposition. Elections are filled with such elements. Furthermore, All of these elements in society are positives. It stops to be positive when fear, violence and oppression are used to gain power and control over another and that is where war begins to be fought ultimately  in the mind.

transformative peace

All systems of life are complex. No matter what a person does there is history, emotion, reason, impact, understanding, judgement and many other elements that will lead into future decisions and possibilities. The complexity comes down to asking, why did I act the way I did, what was my desired outcome, did I get that, how should I have acted, what should I do differently next time, etc.. Also there is an element of conscientiously and unconscientiously knowing what you are actually trying to achieve. Many have no idea what they truly want to accomplish in life, other than to have an easy life.  How do you know?

To be as honest as possible I am one that has no idea what I really want for myself. The one thing I have always strived for is to understand the world as deeply as possible. This leads me to seek out situations where everything is unknown – chaos. I seek such situations so I can help others more than anything else. As I think about that though, I question many things because I can see how I have acted in ways which have caused harm. Once that harm has been caused no amount of life will change that. That leaves me with the knowledge that I am not a peaceful person. Even though I work to bring a greater understanding of peaceful methods of managing difficulties, to decrease the amount of violence in the world and educate others on peace, I am a student as well with much to learn. Enough about me.

As society roles along we seek to understand and manage the complexity of our interactions. In this we are building our culture, our identity and the world. Most of us manage the complexity of interactions well enough that we get through life with relative ease. For others the journey is a bit more complex. This is where the larger society must assist.

As far back as life has existed for us, we have always had some sort of structure of behaviour. For any two people that interact there has to be an understanding of social agreement. Even if that agreement is to kill one another there still exist the understanding as to how each other will act. In the rational world you still may want to kill but understand that doing so is contrary to ensuring a safe and secure society. Due to this we have built systems to deal with those that do harm.  

At the outset there had to be some sort of ethical code which we all agreed upon. This code of ethics/law has evolved into the court systems many countries have today. Yet before the current system there existed a great many other systems. One such system that is being put back into use is the idea of restorative justice/transformative peace.

The current system of courts is an adversarial system mixed with retributive justice. One side works as hard as it can to destroy, defeat or prove the other side wrong/false. Once a person is found guilty they are sentenced. Off they go and that is about all the society does. The transformative system is similar in many ways but one. Transformative peace seeks to heal the entire community.  It is a co-operative system that looks to understand, learn, improve and heal as one. For example;

A person does harm in the community and is captured. That person is taken before the community.  The focus of discussion is on how society has failed in such a manner to allow a person to feel the best thing to do was to commit that harm. Transformative peace looks at the entire society and seeks to change both the person and the elements of society which contributed.

Of course there are elements of the adversarial/retributive system that address the same issues but they do so in a manner where the entire societal element remains broken. Society continues to erode in such a system because the focus is more on the individual.  The circumstances of the individual  environment is not seen as a large contributor to their character in the current system.

No matter what a person does there are circumstances of history, emotion, reason, impact, understanding, judgement and many other elements that will lead into the decisions made and possibilities seen.  Transformative peace seeks to understand the circumstances to improve the chances for everyone else to not choose harmful actions.

Economic balance

As the world goes through the economic problems, there has been a call for a change in the capitalist style of economics. The 99% have been heard. Will that change happen?

To make a comparison, the United Nations has been working to change the way we fight, ballots not bullets. This change has slowly been taking root in the 67 years the UN has existed. How long will it take for us to change the economic system to one that is more balanced?

I like the idea of the Tobin Tax. In a simple explanation this is a tax on all currency trades. Also I do not believe that people will stop inventing or investing because of a higher tax. Furthermore a rebalance does not take away money from the system so the argument that there will be less of it is a false argument.

Anyone interested in a differing view point on economics might enjoy this link, I would think most reading this would have seen it though ;

http://www.nfb.ca/film/whos_counting

“In this feature-length documentary, Marilyn Waring demystifies the language of economics by defining it as a value system in which all goods and activities are related only to their monetary value”.

The world of trade and commerce has changed over the centuries and will continue to change. We are now in a stage where the mentality is aware of such. We may not make any significant moves in the next decade or so but each step is just as important. One statement that the Prime Minister of Canada made I felt was very well made, (and I really do not care for this PM), “The developed nations are complacent with their wealth, believing that they will always have it no matter what.” I have had that thought in my mind for years in terms of our complacency with peace. With peace comes a strong economic environment. Rarely does it take place the other way around. However peace can be lost due to a very weak economic environment.

A very weak economic outlook was the starting point of the Jasmine Revolution, which sparked the Arab Spring. In those events we are making change to the governing systems. The 99% are now being heard. This is a stage to grab hold of to achieve a more balanced economic environment.

The Soviet Union made their change in the late 80’s. They had seen what the rest of us did not see until the late 2000’s. That was not an easy transformation for Russia and they are still in the process of that change. Russia has made some great steps and they have more work as the current election process is showing us. Just think of how the rest of the world will deal with such a change.

Educating for a peaceful future

http://www.educationandtransition.org/resources/the-role-of-education-in-peacebuilding/

The above link leads to a UNICEF website that has a report which studies the impact of education in conflict areas. 

For many years I have noticed that every society has a form of peaceful conflict resolution within its culture. This cultural knowledge is quickly destroyed when wars are prolonged. I have noticed such a loss of knowledge in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Sudan, Central African Republic where war has taken place for decades.

As the loss of life grows so will the cultural knowledge. This loss is not well known or understood but the loss of identity as a people is still there. Through education we can save cultures and identity.  Yet there does exist a side where doing so can prolong wars. We see in Palestine/Israel where the youth are taught to hate the other, this is a poor use of education. So we have to be careful as to the content of the education.

Any form of education that is built upon blaming the other is broken and peace will not be a result. When we engage in such methods of blaming and pointing to past wrongs, I call this "stacking bodies". The end game is who ever has the most bodies stacked up is justified in their actions.  In my mind such a game theory/tactic is useless because each side will be embroiled in such a battle until the no one is left to stack any one. It is a zero sum game.

This is where education is most vital. We need to break those methods. I am not saying we forget, I am saying we take responsibility for the future. The past can not be changed and the future people must be educated in such a manner that they can feel unburdened by our past mistakes. As it stands now in Palestine/Israel, everyone is still carrying the burdens of people two thousand years ago. We have not changed any of the past yet we have killed millions of eachother to prove which side was right or wrong.

At some point the past has to be left there so the future can grow more peacefully. Education is our only method of ensuring we can do that.

Libyians need to talk

Lately I have been working with a group to manage the process of transition in Libya. The main element that is on the minds of most people in Libya deals with the question;  What has been accomplished since the revolt? This question indicates a lack of information getting to the people, difficulties in the management of the process and the presence of the old guard mentality.

It would be unwise to think that violence would not take place in the coming months or years. The reason is because the people (any people in the world) do not change their methods in such a short time frame. Libya still has a large component of people that believe in the same governing style as the past government did. Mix that reality with the strong desire for quick change by the public. That scenario is like putting a match near gasoline.

At the moment there needs to be a very aggressive communication plan set out in tandem with an equal diplomacy effort to all tribes, rebel groups, political parties, religious factions and any other element of society that exists. Both the communication plan and the diplomacy effort need to reach out to as many people as possible.

The message must inform everyone that a period of time is needed to quell the element of violence that is still fresh in peoples’ minds. With that the diplomacy effort needs to ensure that all armed factions are informed as to the process of transition, steps that each faction must take to secure the peace and where they can assist with the transition process.

When and if violence does occur it will most likely start because people are not satisfied with the speed of transition or feel left out of the process. The only tool that is available to ensure violence does not take place is through communication. A government that uses threats of violence dies the same way – just as the past government went. Also it must be acknowledged that this is the time where a relapse of war can take hold. The next few months are tenuous as the patience of the people begins to wear thin, thus the need for a robust effort to reach out extensively.

The communication and diplomacy points to a large education program for the entire country. Goals need to be set, validated, marked and evaluated constantly.  The people need to know what state the police, army and court systems are in. People need to know the people that are in charge and what their plans are. Right now there is not enough information getting to the people and there is no clear idea of what is going on.

Large public events/speeches need to take place. Newspaper articles written, radio and television interviews need to take place. If these actions are not taken we may see violence erupt.

Decline in Syria

The world has no idea how to deal with the situation in Syria.  The Security Council is dead locked on what to do as there are two differing approaches being debated. The Security Council is so useless that they can not even convince themselves that monitors should be sent in. With each passing day more and more weapons are building up in both the military and the civilian rebel groups.

All of this was preventable with a small force of one thousand peacekeepers to be sent in last November to enforce the rule of law as stated under the current Syrian system. A complete lock down and use of small arms and light weapons needs to be enforced as the Peacekeepers patrolled with the current Syrian army. Batons, shields, water cannons, pepper spray and riot gear would be allowed only.

At each protest both the current Syrian army and the UN peacekeepers would work to control crowds and enforce the rule of law. At the same time the ruling party must obey the wishes of the people and if the people choose to hold massive strikes, rallies or protests, they must be allowed to do so.

Also foreign media should be allowed in as well to report. No embedding reporters, that is just a strong move for covering up lies.

The world has no idea how to deal with this.  That is only because the world is full of shit.

Hypocrisy

Of late, I have been reading about the causes and indicators related to why people/countries engage in war and/or peace.  There are theories that point to economics, governance, population age, gender balance, resources and religion/ideology as root causes. We do know that a mix of all these play a part. There are other elements that rarely get discussed which are; stupidity, insanity, intolerance and to put it very simple – some people are assholes. Human trafficking is one such example of such behaviour. It takes an evil piece of work to enslave another to a lifetime of hell for monetary gain. However, human trafficking is a thriving business.

In my holistic understanding of the world I know that I contribute to the continuation of such practices.  I am alive therefore everything that transpires in this world I am a part of. Moreover, I understand that I am in a relationship with everyone else that is also alive, whether I know that person or not.  We are all here at this moment and that is reality.

In that context I often think of the hell a 14 year old girl has lived in the past five years locked in a cell only to be used as a prostitute? What causes us to act so horribly to a nine year old? This is the very base of individual impact that war/hell has on the world.  Going one step up we have the gang/organized crime element.

In this network we see elements of ethics beginning. The transactions of money and “goods” takes place because of the trust each side has.  People have to work together for the operation to run, this takes a strong need for common benefit.  All the while the operation is destroying the greater peace, which in turn destroys the common benefit of the entire world. Do you see the hypocrisy?  When you live in such a world you must rule with fear because logic, justice, compassion and humanity are dead.

Going one more step higher we get to world organizations and governments.  In this step we can add religions/ideological groups.  Violence that is brought about in the name of god, country, or whatever can be a murky area.  Sometimes these groups must defend against attacks.  However, there are some wars that have raged on for centuries and no one knows exactly why, other than it began due to a fear of the other. Fear only works on the weak and even then the weak can grow tired, then realize they out-number the rulers. This scenario has been going on between Christians and Islam for two thousand years and still going.  It is taking place in Mexico with the drug wars. It is taking place now in Syria and other areas.

Every country has signed onto the Declaration of Human Rights that belong the United Nations. Still we have member nations killing another because they believe/think differently.   While they kill each other on battle fields they turn around and defend their actions in terms of self- preservation. I am sure the person that locked up the nine year girl would use the same argument.

Preventive Diplomacy

Wisdom is a resource that is often given to us in riddles and clichés.  Clichés such as “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” or “a stitch in time will save nine” have been offered as solid points to ensure that a situation is kept in check.  The result is much worse and more costly if proper care is not taken.  The same wisdom and knowledge is important to understand when managing peaceful conflict.

Peaceful conflict may seem like an oxymoron or just moronic.  However, as I have stated in past writings conflict is only the meeting and joining of two or more whatevers.  For example typing this article, my fingers come into conflict with each key, thought is conflict, child birth is a conflict as is the act that began the child, and meeting a person for the very first time is a conflict.  It just so happens that most of us are brainwashed to see conflict as a negative element. The negative focus only warns us that we must take notice of the wisdom we have to prevent situations from getting worse.

When dealing with international peace often we do focus on violence, death, struggle, injustice and rights abuses.  As we think about those situations the world had invented Peacekeepers to prevent the worsening impact of war.  Today we have come to the point where preventive diplomacy is a common element in political circles. Below are five priority areas that the current Secretary-General of the United Nations listed for strengthening the use of preventive diplomacy:

(1)early and decisive action to address emerging threats;

(2) investing in and better equipping “preventive diplomats” and their staff;

(3) predictable and timely financial support to maximize efforts on the ground and to deliver results;

(4) stronger strategic partnerships with regional and subregional organizations;

(5) greater support for national institutions and mechanisms for mediation, including civil society and, in particular, women’s and youth organizations.

For me and my work I feel that the most important element of the five is number five.  Engaging in this area will accomplish all the rest. 

Taking the holistic mindset we go from international politics to the personal relationship. On a personal front and in the lives of individuals, preventive diplomacy is a difficult ideology to explain and even harder to implement.  I have been engaged in peace for at least twenty years, I still get caught up in emotions and do stupid things that have caused a number of my own relationships to crumble.

In our personal lives preventive diplomacy is all about caring for yourself and others equally. The policy of “do no harm” is often relevant as is the Golden Rule, “treat others as you wish to be treated”. The difficult part is that we are all different in some manner.  Some of us truly believe in Machiavelli where the ends justify the means and business is conducted at all cost to win. 

What is vital though is the foundation of understanding.  We gain understanding through learning and communication.  Sometimes you know what to do but just do not have the energy or desire.  You feel that you have given enough.  Frustration sets in and then you throw all the work out and let loose.  If the other side is well trained they will realize this and just let you go off.  To be honest, I can count the number of times when I have been able to vent without fear of repercussion.  Someday I hope that balances out even.