Suchergebnisse

Disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) is a set of activities that forms part of the strategies for peacebuilding after civil war. DDR has become the standard way of addressing security threats in immediate post-conflict situations. However, DDR is designed to promote national security, rather than human or community security. This creates severe obstacles for success, if success is seen in terms of overall security promotion rather than defined merely by the number of arms collected and people demobilized. The reason is that if security at the community level is not improved, then people will be unable to abandon armed violence as a way of protection and of making a living. Disarmament in such a situation will probably be only temporary. Thus, it is a necessity for DDR to aim at community security. However, when community security becomes the aim, then this opens up questions about whether DDR is the most appropriate strategy. At best, it can be part of a more wide-ranging strategy, which in addition to top-down DDR programs also involves community-based activities. Altogether, such a holistic security promotion strategy should endeavor to make people and communities better able to protect themselves and to create a living that does not depend on war and violence. In other words, it should aim at making guns redundant 'Community-based' and 'Second-generation' DDR initiatives lend inspiration for such a wider security promotion approach. What they show is that the optimal approach is very context-specific. An analysis of the conflict, of local security mechanisms, and of the needs and capacities of communities, therefore, has to be the first step, despite the fact that this takes valuable time. Adapted from the source document.

A key component of peace process and post-conflict reconstruction is the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) of ex-combatants. I argue that DDR programs imply multiple transitions: from the combatants who lay down their weapons, to the governments that seek and end to armed conflict, to the communities that receive - or reject - these demobilized fighters. At each level, these transitions imply a complex equation between the demands of peace and the clamor for justice. However, traditional approaches to DDR have focused on military and security objectives, which have resulted in these programs being developed in relative isolation from the field of transitional justice and its concerns with historical clarification, justice, reparations, and reconciliation. Drawing upon my research with former combatants in Columbia, I argue that successful reintegration not only requires fusing the processes and goals of DDR programs with transitional justice measures, but that both DDR and transitional justice require a gendered analysis that includes an examination of the salient links between weapons, masculinities, and violence. Constructing certain forms of masculinity is not incidental to militarism: rather, it is essential to maintenance. What might it mean to 'add gender' to DDR and transitional justice processes if one defined gender to include men and masculinities, thus making these forms of identity visible and a focus of research and intervention? I explore how one might 'add gender' to the DDR program in Columbia as one step toward successful reintegration, peace-building and sustainable social change. (Human Rights Quarterly)

Abstract
The article deals with the issue of countertrades, GDR foreign commerce enterprises contracted with western firms in order to secure the modernizing of its economy. It discusses the argument of whether those contracts could establish new forms of European East-Westintegration between Comecon and EEC economies.
Starting from rather unfavorable general trading conditions in the 1950s and early 1960s, East Germany could intensify its trade relations with western countries in the late 1960s. Based on its international recognition in the late 1960s and early 1970s, it also got easier access to western credits to finance large-scale investment programs in the economy. With varying success and in order to refinance those imports from the West, GDR officials tried to conclude contracts pre-engaging western partners to accept mandatory deliveries by East German enterprises in return. The author defines three major forms of such contracts, distinguishable by the level and the type of GDR counter deliveries, agreed on by the contracting partners.
Since East Germany failed to put through high levels of its own counter deliveries, these projects contributed to its long-term indebtedness. Moreover, this kind of business, unintentionally created potential losses in the GDR's foreign trade firms due to various factors. Western companies themselves started to market East German products received in fulfillment of countertrade contracts. Western deliverers of investment goods managed to secure higher prices for their deliveries and lower ones for East German goods in order to subsidize the marketing of East German products they had taken over. That put additional pressure on the already decreasing competitiveness of East German export goods. Finally, the article presents a judgment on the advantages and disadvantages of the countertrade concept for East Germany itself.

With experience in the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) program of the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone behind him, the author is now working in Afghanistan. While ardently anti-war, he is also well aware that military might is often the only guarantee of human security. (Gaiko Forum)

"This volume represents the first in-depth and comprehensive discussion of reintegration of former combatants in war to peace transitions. In addition to a systematic reflection and review of existing literature on DDR, the authors devised and applied a field research methodology to studying the reintegration of former combatants in Angola with potentially significant implications on the design and implementation of DDR programs. The volume is written for academics, students and practitioners focusing on war to peace transitions and post-conflict issues."--Jacket

"The history of Germany's political programs during the 20th century is of special interest when discussing whether and how far changes in childhood and in the rest of society are interrelated. Rapid and extreme changes of political regimes are characteristics of 20th century German history. First was the Empire (the so-called Second Reich), followed by the Weimar Republic, then the Third Reich, next the partition of Germany into the German Democratic Republic and German Federal Republic, and finally, a reunited Germany after 1989. These five major epochs and 20th century political regimes dealt with childhood in different ways. Despite these variations, each regime's political measures relating to children and their perception of childhood show considerable consistency. Their permanent orientation toward social order and, consequently, their almost complete denial of children as active protagonists in their own lives deserve special attention." (author's abstract)

Since 1989, international efforts to end protracted conflicts have included sustained investments in the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of combatants. Yet while policy analysts have debated the factors that contribute to successful DDR programs and scholars have reasoned about the macro conditions that facilitate successful peace building, little is known about the factors that account for successful reintegration at the micro level. Using a new dataset of ex-combatants in Sierra Leone, this article analyzes the individual-level determinants of demobilization and reintegration. Past participation in an abusive military faction is the strongest predictor of difficulty in achieving social reintegration. On economic and political reintegration, we find that wealthier and more educated combatants face greater difficulties. Ideologues, men, and younger fighters are the most likely to retain strong ties to their factions. Most important, we find little evidence at the micro level that internationally funded programs facilitate demobilization and reintegration.

yes ; The success of programmes that relate to disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) of former combatants into civilian life is dependent on four crucial aspects. First, it is essential that there is insightful and comprehensive planning that is based on sound research and analysis in order for a realistic strategy to be developed. Second, it is critical that the requisite political will exist at all levels to implement this strategy efficiently and effectively. Third, these programmes are typically expensive and time-consuming processes, and hence the necessary resources, namely financial and material support, and technical expertise, need to be secured. Fourth, it is vital that effective monitoring and evaluation systems are included in DDR processes, and that these systems are an integral part of the implementation strategy. The purpose of this paper is to examine critically current DDR developments, as well as explore the possible next steps for DDR. This will include the consideration of the current state of DDR and the extent to which initiatives such as the Multi-Country Demobilization and Reintegration Program (MDRP), the United Nations Integrated DDR Standards (IDDRS) and the Stockholm Initiative on DDR (SIDDR), as well as other contemporary policy instruments and programmes encompass a human security perspective and reflects the interests of the poor. The key question that this paper will explore is: to what extent does current or "third generation" DDR programming differ from those DDR initiatives of the 1980s and 1990s (or "second generation")1; and to what extent do they contribute to the sustainable alleviation of poverty?

The purpose of this study was to provide a better understanding for policy makers and service providers of mobility and migration among ex-combatants and the effectiveness of Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) programming in Uganda. The study followed a scoping study on migration in Uganda conducted in March 2011 by the Transitional Demobilization and Reintegration Program (TDRP) of the World Bank. This study had the following specific objectives: 1) to analyze push/pull migration factors of ex-combatants in Uganda, with a specific focus on social as well as economic factors both within communities of origin and at new communities of re-settlement; 2) to explore any impact of DDR programming on migration of ex-combatants in Uganda; 3) to increase the understanding of the impact of migration by ex-combatants on the effectiveness of past and current DDR programming, specifically on reintegration efforts; and 4) to generate recommendations on how to improve DDR programming, taking into account findings from other related studies.