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 and conflict

Often I find it quite amusing that I focus on areas of violent conflict and yet I work in the area of peace. Sometimes I wonder if there is any improvement. Now there are times when I say that there has been great improvement. Plus the academic results suggest that we live in a more peaceful world.

We do have to recognize that we are coming out of the most deadly century known to us. Two world wars, El Salvador, Zaire/Congo, Cold war, Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, Afghanistan twice, Rwanda, Columbia, Indonesia, Kashmir, Yugoslavia and the list goes on.  Being a more peaceful time was not all that difficult considering the non-stop fighting we have just come out of.

One of the elements that sparks many of these wars is the desire for change in leadership.  I know that is a simple cause to state but it is a reality. The buzz phrase is “regime change”, which has a certain identity of corruption, brutality and violence attached to it. Of course the reality is that even in the most peaceful country an election can bring regime change.

In the grand idea of unity, we are all striving to live in a country where regime change is done peacefully. It is difficult to think of anyone that would want to live in a country where you are oppressed, fearful and living with violence every day.  However for many that is exactly what life is like the entire time they are alive.

It is odd that the average person is a very peaceful being yet we have the governments they elect being very violent. For example the RUSA, most people in this country are very peaceful so you wonder how can their government be so violent? Where is the disconnect? We can see the same thing in Israel and Palestine, the average person is against the use of violence, yet it has been a constant part of life since 1948.

At some point there is a major disconnect between the people and the leadership of this world. We spend more energy on killing each other than we do on helping it seems. Many governments are willing to engage in violent wars with no thought of an end strategy other than kill as many as possible. When it comes to peace efforts most leaders bark about the cost, it takes too long, it is messy, it is not done right and/or it is too complex. Such thinking just leaves me in a spiral of futility.

As I sit back and relax I realize that there is no need to worry about when our tasks will be finished. That day will come for each of us when we die, but the task will still need to be worked upon. It is the legacy of peace that is left for others. We are all human and we all deserve an equal opportunity to live a peaceful life. So with that I sense that being closed minded means you just found the edge of understanding, the frustration you feel is telling you to expand your understanding of life and others.

Syria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain are all on a similar path.

What happens in Syria if the current government is toppled?

We have many examples to look at, Egypt and Libya are two.  There will be a struggle of communicating effectively and making progression swift enough. Both of these will combine to erode the legitimacy of any new government.

In Egypt the military is still in power. In Libya the government is an ad hoc group that was a natural progression. Now in Libya the international support has dried up leaving it twisting in the wind. In both situations the people are left to seek other options other than what is being offered at the moment. These options will come from armed groups because we live in a reality where might makes right.

This might makes right attitude can only be culled by the mass peaceful rally of the people. We have learned from Poland, Czech Republic and Egypt that if the people stand united in peaceful mass rallies, the use of violence is defeated. The defeat of violence will give space for peace.

Next there needs to be a strong effort to communicate the planning process. This process has to have a constant avenue for public inclusion. Such inclusion provides transparency, legitimacy, stability, and unity. With these four elements, society will hold a great deal of patience as a new government is brought to power.

There is no mystery to how or why revolutions take place. The people simply no longer trust the leaders, they feel alienated by their own government and they lived with fear of the government too long. This combination of reality factors in every revolution. At the moment mistrust and alienation are quickly rising in Libya.

A peaceful transition is still very possible in Libya. What needs to be done is a major show of support by the international community in the form of leadership visits, major funding of programs, and infrastructure building. Within this support, armed groups will have a point of reference to hold trust in as the governance processes are continually worked on.

The capacity is there and so is the determination of the people to achieve peace. What is missing is the work needed to connect the people with the government on a unified vision of the future. At the moment there is no such unified vision, nor is there an avenue for dialogue to discuss this vision.

Communication builds trust, it can also destroy trust as well though. Due to that, the communication must settle on finding a cohesive and agreeable path forward to peace. At the moment the communication between the government and the people of Libya needs greater support and effort.

With all of the above, we can see exactly the same situation in Syria. Poor communication, mistrust, no clear vision of the future, alienation of the people and ultimately violence can be mapped out to see how Syria fell into such chaos. The road back to peace will begin with lowering the weapons, increased communication, inclusion of the people and building a common vision of the way forward.

Elections in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

28 Nov 2011 was the date for the people to decide the leader of that country. Since that date there have been many reports concerning the lack of legitimacy of those elections.  Millions of votes were found illegal as well as procedural violations cited. As I am writing this article many protesters are now in the streets complaining about the election. At this very moment, the government has shut down radio stations and detained those that protest.

None of this is a shock because we had understood the reality of life in that country. However the situation needs to be resolved. As sad as it is, the current government must be allowed to govern, even though there is no doubt that the current leader has abused power.  That leaves us with the question of what to do?

Now as I have said many times, life is insane and this is one of those situations where a persons’ morals are in direct conflict with reality. We can be certain that any challenge to power will be met with violent force. The use of violence is not the choice of a peaceful person but when you are left with no options you must defend yourself. With that in mind it must be understood that no government rules without the will of the people.

The method or tactic being used by the current leader to hold power/control, is a combination of fear, corruption, loyalty and entitlement. In order to defeat the current leader there has to be a sustained focus on the use of those tactics and strong alternatives to every policy being offered. These alternatives have to be communicated. This is the task for the people of the country and they are doing many of these. The opposition is also using the other four tactics as well and that is where the international community can help.

We all have opinions but when it comes to international politics there has been a code of not talking publicly about who should lead what country. That is one reason why Russia and China do not speak about changing the leadership in Syria. Anyway, the NGO community does not have such restraints so many governments use that avenue to voice such concerns. For me I have no idea if the current leader would is any better or worse than the opposition leader and that needs to be a focus.

The focus for achieving peace in the DRC needs to be concerned with the independence of the Electoral Commission and strong education concerning peaceful societies. The institutions of the country and the average citizen need to be given great support so they feel safe in voting how they want. Right now is the time to begin that support in preparation for the next election.

All too often we only focus months before the date of elections. This not so alarming in a peaceful society but in a post-conflict society this lack of attention is harmful. As we witnessed in the past election, the Electoral Commission was poorly organized during the election. Also the opposition leader openly supported the use of violence no matter what the outcome.

The international community needs to step up the efforts to educate the people and those working in government. The education has to be focused on the responsibility of the people and the institutions to support the rule of a free and fair society. The chaos of conflict will grip any country as long as the ideology of disconnection exists. We have to get the people to practice the knowledge which holds a country in peace. That time is now because it can not be done in a months time, it will take years. As it stands now we have years before the next election in the DRC. Get to work now.

Peaceful leadership

On the surface of peaceful leadership there are a few indicators that should be adhered to.  One such indicator is the will of the people to die in large numbers for change in leadership.  On a more peaceful level, the will of the people to protest in very large numbers for weeks is also an indicator that leaders need to take great awareness of.

We have to ask why the leaders strive to rewrite constitutions and understand the answer provided in as peaceful a way possible.  However, it is true that such efforts to retain power can be power grabs and nothing more.  The person doing the grabbing is blinded by their own self-importance.  On occasion that power grab is solidified when opposition becomes violent.  The violence only strengthens the case for stability in government leadership to remain in power.

Of all the peaceful protests that have resulted in a change of government, peaceful demonstrations have been the greatest weapon.  No leader can violently put down a peaceful demonstration and come out looking as though they did the right thing.  The element of citizen restraint to remain peaceful can be difficult.  Even more so when government incites the violence itself by planting forces in the crowds just to start the violence.

Peace is a difficult route.  Yet when you take examples from the most uncomplicated situations peace seems so easy.  Carolyn Handschin-Moser wrote in an article titled Dignity: Cornerstone of the Culture of Peace a perfect example.

Two women were out with their children one day.  Somehow the two boys started throwing rocks at each other in anger.  What would you think if both parents advised their kids to throw bigger rocks to solve the problem?  Shock and awe was the term used by some.  As simple as that example is, that is the exact manner in which most countries act.

With the above example, the world is witnessing some major political changes.  North Korea shares the top of that list with Russia.  How will the people and the government deal with the coming months?  In other places such as Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Yemen the transformation continues as well.

Right now in the DRC, the political leaders should begin their campaign for succession.  The current leaders should start to educate and prepare for the next election.  The preparation could involve open debates, strengthening the independent arms of government such as the electoral commission and depoliticize the court/law system and education system.  If the people are not educated and prepared we will see similar events during the next election as we witness now.

I know how simple my ideas seem to be.  However I have experienced the brutal difficulty in applying these simple ideas.  Peace, it takes a courageous heart to stand up and practice when faces with the largest rocks.

Peaceful game theory

Last night I got into a discussion on what game theory is.  Now I have been a student of theories my entire life, as I see it.  All that information got snarled up before I could say a word, so it was not easy to define game theory in a flash. However I did realize that we were playing a card game so I used that as my analogy.

Game theory is the study of strategy used to get results.  It is a plan to win a chess game, to win a hockey game, an election, war or even to get a job.  The strategy you employ (whether you know your strategy or not) is the game theory you use to obtain your goal.   Everyone uses game theory.  One of the most popular theories is fight or flight.  That has been changed to fight, freeze or flight due to the fact that some people get so nervous that they can do nothing but collapse/freeze.

When we have events such as the Jasmine Revolution, we can look to see what the theory was and map it out.  Did Mohamed Bouazizi know that his actions would spark the Jasmine Revolution, would cause a number of other events in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Yemen and the Occupy movement all over the world?  You would have to believe that he did not.  However his own personal actions had been rooted in the theory that if he set himself on fire the government would take notice and make changes to the current system.  That was his game theory and he was right.

Now this is a very simple example of game theory.  There are much more complex psychological strategies which have been studied.  Yet the currents and streams of thought on the subject all deal with plans that a person or group uses to achieve a goal.

Game theory is often studied along with the art of decision making and information gathering.  These three elements are all part of strategy.  You need the right information to make the best decision so that the correct strategy is used.

For example we can ask why a government would rather shoot its people than allow protesting.  The initial reason is to gain control of the populous.  Governments feel threatened by large mobs of protesters so that mob has to be put down.  That is one level.  The other level is the personal one where the person in charge, Prime Minister, President or General also feels that their life is in danger or their job.  This personal level hinges on dignity, power and self-image.  The leader feels that the people should be grateful for the life provided and a large protest is a slap in the face.  Also the leader sees a possibility that they will be ousted from power so that has to be fought.  Next there is the image that no one else has the right to hold the position that the leader now holds, it is theirs and the mob is trying to steal it.

How leaders deal with these perceptions is where game theory comes in.  They must ask themselves, what is the best method to end the protest, to retain power and to regain the admiration of the people.  Shooting them is a popular choice because it does work, for a time.  Shooting and killing is the theory employed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Burma, Columbia, Libya, DRC and the list goes on.

For peaceful examples we have Poland Solidarity Movement 1980, Czechoslovakia Velvet Revolution 1989 which lead to the peaceful 1993 seperation of the Czech Rebublic and Slovakia, and the Ukraine Orange Revolution 2004.  Each has taken place in the last few decades.  We can go further back for examples of peaceful revolutions yet these are perfect enough.  As you can see the use of peace as a strategy is a successful game theory and it often results in a stronger country.  Of the peaceful examples Ukraine had a number of setbacks, yet the initial game theory of peaceful demonstration worked. 

That is a quick summation of game theory.  My theory in the game of understanding is that by using such broad examples it is easily understood. 

Just as I was writing this I have learned that Vaclav Havel has died this morning.  He was the person put up as the leader for the Velvet Revolution. Rest in peace my friend you did a great job, we need more like you. 

Political Game Theory

Anatol Rapoport was a Russian scientist that lived in the RUSA and then in Canada where he died.  His mind crossed many subjects of science, those being biology, psychology and mathematics.  While he lived in Canada he became heavily involved in peace studies.  In his time he developed strategy for what is known in political studies as game theory.  He is a wonderful human that is not very well known.

http://www.science.ca/scientists/scientistprofile.php?pID=211

I mention this man because today the people of Russia are in the process of voting for a new government.  Now I have always enjoyed reading about Russia and the people.  To me the governments that have controlled Russia are no better or worse than any other government in the world.  What I feel is that the people of Russia have gone through some really terrible leadership, which brings us to the current people seeking power.

One method of measure for a great leader is how they develop others to take over.  Succession planning has not been a strong point for the political leaders of Russia.  It is difficult to trust the entire political system when the leader holds onto power so tightly.  Do the vast majority of citizens in Russia trust the government?  To be fair, I would say that a strong portion of Canadians do not trust our government either.

Plus we have to think of the opposition parties as well.  They may be as untrusting because they are seeking to oust the current party.  With that we have a situation where the trust in political debates is very low.  Add to that the need to make the other party seem useless is a function of the entire election campaign.  I think about all of the things that I know are going on and trust is a major component which is taking a beating.  The level of intent to get the next shot in and cause pain is increasing.  It is like implementing a cease fire agreement but yet the two sides still continue to fire away knowing that it is doing more harm.  That is a situation in which my own mind and heart are truly confused as to the reason for causing more harm.

What does it do - really?  Why cause more harm?  Is it the lack of causational thought where the person that fires the shot, only sees the shot fired as being the death blow to everything?  I guess that is it.  There is no thought process beyond the shot being fired.  There is no thought of impact or future return fire.  The game of tracking "who has the most hits wins" is a bullshit game but I must agree that it is the most popular game played in politics.

Impact of corruption on USSR

We are living the impact of what corruption brings.  The European Union is at the verge of collapse, China owns the Republic of the United States of America (RUSA), people are in the process of governmental purging – all due to corruption, waste, mismanagement and poor leadership in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt.  The Occupy movement is making a stand but needs to regroup.  Perhaps the Occupy movement should pool their entire resources and purchase a multinational corporation.  Aside from that the complete picture of corruption around the world is showing its face.

The current situation makes me think of the USSR during the 1980’s.  The level of corruption and mismanagement was so bad that the politicians at the time felt it necessary to close the doors on the USSR and open up as Russia, thus came Glasnost and Perestroika. 

During the 1990’s I paid a great deal of time and focus in Russian history.  Mostly because I felt that the people of Russia and Canada formed a bold and daring relationship, starting in 1972.  Also the friendship was enriched through diplomatic avenues.  Furthermore, I was impressed with the courage that the Russian people exuded to embrace realities they saw during the 1980’s.

Now the issue of the cold war will always be linked to glasnost as it should because the Russian leaders knew that the world was dead if things continued without change.  Knowing that there was going to be no honest co-operation from the RUSA, acting unilaterally, Russia set out to build a more peaceful world.  They began by telling the world that the cold war pursuits were insane.  Then they looked internally to the realities within their country. 

Politicians were blinded by realities of infighting and personal goals within the USSR.  These two components ripped the fabric of any cause for unity within the governing system of the USSR.  A whole sale change was needed to end the corruption and so it began.  A courageous step into the unknown, which is still being worked out.  A greater act of peace is difficult to find.

99% rant

There comes a time when you just have enough bullshit.  Now the average person would just throw more bullshit back, mainly due to the fact that they have no clue as to how such actions only worsen a situation – thus the spiral of chaos into war.

The 99% has supported the 1%.  It is the 99% that buys all the garbage and demands all the services.  If the occupy movement gives in now the 1% have won.  I admit that at the outset I did not feel the Occupy movement was going to amount to much.  My reason is mostly because the physical occupation of parks and squares is not an easy task, when the temperature swing is -25 to -40 C for weeks on end.  That alone will be the 1% advantage.  However I understand the cause and do support the need for a rethink.  In context, the 99% fight was the cause of the French revolution and assisted in a Republic of the United States to be born. 

Taking the historical context and fast forward to today, the 99% are again fighting to stop the elite from plundering/hoarding the riches.  As I study this reoccurrence I have a realization that it is not the system at fault, it is the people that operate the system.  A benevolent dictator would never be overthrown.

Just to throw some shit around, here is some wild accusations/arguments to ponder:

The Occupy movement is being dismantled in many cities due to a number of reasons.  In most media those that call for an end to the Occupy movement state that the point was made now go home.  To follow the same line of argument but to an extreme (almost insane) we have made the point that murder is not acceptable yet we continue to fight that.  To an even greater degree of insanity the Occupy movement is in agreement with the ideology concerning capitalism as Osama Bin Laden.  Now those are connections and statements that could get a person fired and alienated. 

As an expert in peace, knowing many possible consequences is vital.  What really starts to piss me off is that for all the wisdom people throw around about communication, the application of such wisdom is rare. 

“You made your point now go home.”

That statement alone indicates the point was not even close to being heard.  In fact that statement will only entrench a faction of the occupation and what will be the consequences?  Such a statement may be the spark to ignite a single person such as Osama Bin Laden.  That is what an expert in peace operations must contend with.  Does the US share any responsibility for assisting Bin Laden?

Ultimately this divide between people is created by us.  At the outset the ideology behind such actions were hoped to provide a peaceful end.  That is the hope of any system we put in place.  The system fails when we get lazy, greedy and distant.  As we alienate each other we build false realities which will crumble and then we start to blame, hate, judge and demand adherence of everyone else but ourselves.  That is the bullshit I am tired of.