Peace is political

South Sudan is now its own country. Although there is a line on a map, we are running the risk of creating another Western Sahara situation. The borders must be set and agreed to as soon as possible. On top of that issue there are the lawless areas of the countries, tribal clashes, reintegration/education programs and the economy of course.

The grand ideology of peace is easy to understand. The experiences, practices and dedication to be peaceful obviously offers challenges.  Many of the violent conflicts are completely avoidable yet the will to actually prevent such events is just not there. This is so frustrating for many reasons which everyone can point out.  What will it take to change that behaviour?

The number of frustrations has no limit. The entire society/country has a loose grip on a reality/culture without war. At the moment there are a vast amount of aid programs, some have been available for decades. However, chaos still exists.

Chaos is solved with understanding, order and with a good balance of predictability. The base root of change is education and action. As people evolve through the chaos of war there is a transition of physical and mental reality. The violence of war may diminish yet the distrust and knowledge of insecurity lingers for years. That protracted insecurity which is manifested in corruption of society and individual, needs education and action to change.

Programmes such reintegration (DDR) of former combatants is one that I have spent a great deal of time with. In Sudan these programmes have not been very well explained to the people.  “No one was familiar with the term DDR as referring to a process of transitioning from military to sustainable civilian life.”[1] This is a strong indication of a fundamental breakdown in peacebuilding within Sudan.

There are so many levels of focus a person can take with most conflicts, international, regional, national, community, tribal, religious and individual. The old saying “the fish rots from the head down” is very popular. Staying true to that saying results in focusing on the leaders/governments. This focus really puts an emphasis on how leaders are chosen, in other words politics.

The sad reality is that there is a large amount of distrust within the most senior levels of leadership as well. The most powerful group is the Permanent Five members of the United Nations Security Council and it has been East against West from the outset. This divide has impacted every conflict the United Nations is tasked with solving.

Starting with the head of the fish, we must choose leaders that actually have the will to solve war not prolong or instigate.

[1] Small Arms Survey. Human Security Baseline Assessment. Sudan Issue Brief #17 May 2011. Pg., 6.

---

Garbage Leadership

The situation in Syria is one that was completely avoidable. However we have to put up with the lying sacks of garbage coming out. The lies are so gross that it is difficult to read/trust anything in mainstream media.

The information was clear from the outset that the Western powers did everything to ensure the violence escalated. All the while the Western powers blamed the Eastern powers for the escalation. Here in the West, the mass media has lapped up the rhetoric of the Western governing powers. That alone is heartbreaking, but not all that shocking.

The truth of the situation is that the Western powers put forth resolutions at the United Nations Security Council knowing it would never pass. Due to that, they are just as liable as the Eastern powers for what is transpiring today in Syria. Another truth is that the Western powers have been supplying training for rebel soldiers and communication equipment. Such support may not be weapons and bullets yet the impact remains the same, more death and bloodshed.

As the situation spirals into civil war, we may have to let it go. The momentum is of such force towards a completely failed state that I do not see any force on the horizon to stop it. This war will go on for the next two to five years at least. As for the regional stability, who knows? The situation is terrible to say the least. All because the world leaders could/have not stopped pointing fingers at each other.

All that is left are hopes and dreams for a miracle.

Systems of resolving conflict

The past two days I have been engaged in talks about process and systems to deal with conflict. Oddly enough the discussions were heated as some people were very rigid in their thought. There was a balance point that hinged upon consent of the people. The consent is an agreement between the parties as to the method of conflict resolution.

On the surface it is easy to agree that the people are the ones to choose the style of conflict resolution. Now this meeting was focused on issues in a Canadian urban setting. However, I had to point out that a few hundred years ago shooting each other was legal in Canada. I was quickly informed that such things do not occur anymore. In response I noted the fifteen murders that prove otherwise. Also I pointed out that our federal government has given tacit support for leadership change of the Syrian government.

The argument over process has been around for as long as people have gathered in communities. There are many governing systems, electoral systems, conflict theories and management styles. Within each of these is the common goal of peaceful coexistence. Even all out war has the grand goal of peace. Other commonalities rest in the reality of the aftermath of war.

Trust, respect, open communication and an open mind is essential for each of us to live peacefully. These commonalities embrace most procedures that frame a conflict resolution discussion. Even within the personal realm of inner conflict we must have these commonalities for our own self esteem. Without those components life can be stagnant, which will evolve into a sense of being trapped or not in control.

Being in control is the essence of peace. In the wider sense of society, consent and legitimacy are hallmarks of sound government. Who is the legitimate leader in Libya or Egypt? Who are the legitimate parties involved in Syria, Yemen, Sudan, etc…  In each of these countries legitimate governing powers have been questioned and consent of the people has been eroded if not completely withdrawn. In this circumstance we can become embroiled in violent conflict due to the breakdown.  

In order to evolve we must change. Society will not change unless individuals are able and willing to change. The individual must be open to new thought and new processes. Being self aware is vital to societal peace, this is the crux of the single person impacting international peace. For many of us we tend to use a single process/style of conflict resolution throughout our lives, although we may be aware of many others.

Dealing with conflict takes a flexible mind. As events unfold, the mind will process information using what it knows. Sometimes all it takes is a different view point, like turning the scrabble board or chess board.