Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe purpose of this article is to question some basic assumptions regarding reconciliation after wars and mass atrocities. Indeed, how can numerous policy-makers, practitioners, and scholars contend that reconciliation is necessary while it is often distrusted and rejected by victims? Are there not cases where calls for reconciliation would prove to be fruitless and even detrimental for peace and/or democracy? To answer these questions, it is worth looking at the interactions between reconciliation and negotiation. Beyond a theoretical interest, this question has a direct impact for practitioners; a better understanding of the issue is actually a sine qua non condition for more efficient interventions. In terms of methodology, this study refers to various examples as illustrative cases (Afghanistan, Rwanda, South-Africa, and the Franco-German case). Its objective is not to capture the complexity of each case study but to determine to what extent reconciliation can be considered as negotiable.

The purpose of this article is to question some basic assumptions regarding reconciliation after wars and mass atrocities. Indeed, how can numerous policy-makers, practitioners, and scholars contend that reconciliation is necessary while it is often distrusted and rejected by victims? Are there not cases where calls for reconciliation would prove to be fruitless and even detrimental for peace and/or democracy? To answer these questions, it is worth looking at the interactions between reconciliation and negotiation. Beyond a theoretical interest, this question has a direct impact for practitioners; a better understanding of the issue is actually a sine qua non condition for more efficient interventions. In terms of methodology, this study refers to various examples as illustrative cases (Afghanistan, Rwanda, South-Africa, and the Franco-German case). Its objective is not to capture the complexity of each case study but to determine to what extent reconciliation can be considered as negotiable. Adapted from the source document.

THE PRESENT CULTURAL FOCUS ON HEALING THE WOUNDS OF WAR THROUGH A RECONCILIATION BETWEEN VIETNAM VETERANS AND NON-VETS, WHILE LONG OVERDUE, RISKS SUSTAINING CONVENTIONAL FOREIGN POLICY OBJECTIVES-FOR EXAMPLE COLD WAR ANTI-COMMUNISM--IN ITS ATTEMPT TO TRANSCEND THE POLITICS OF VIETNAM. INDEED, IT TENDS TOWARD RECONSTRUCTING THE 1960S AS A PERIOD OF SELF-INDULGENCE, MORAL COWARDICE, AND FADDISM. AS SUCH, THE PRESENT RECONCILIATION, IN ADDITION TO RECONSTRUCTING THE HISTORY OF THE 1960S ALONG NEOCONSERVATIVE LINES, PERPETUATES THE INVISIBILITY OF "THE OTHER," THE VIETNAMESE. A RECONCILIATION WHICH IGNORES THE VIETNAMESE AND SMEARS THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT YIELDS AMBIVALENCE RATHER THAN HARMONY IN LEAVING UNRESOLVED THE ESSENTIAL FOREIGN POLICY ISSUES. TO PUT VIETNAM BEHIND US WE MUST COME TO GRIPS WITH WHAT MUST BE CALLED OUR IMPERIAL PAST. TO BUILD A GLOBAL AND HUMANE FUTURE, INCLUDING A GENEROUS RECONCILIATION BETWEEN AMERICAN AND VIETNAMESE, WILL REQUIRE A STRENUOUS REJECTION OF THE PAROCHIAL AND ETHNOCENTRIC MYTHS OF INTERVENTIONISM. IT WILL REQUIRE A RECONSTRUCTED PATRIOTISM COMPATIBLE WITH SELF-DETERMINATION FOR ALL NATIONS. IT WILL MOST OF ALL, REQUIRE A REJECTION OF A DANGEROUS BIPARTISANSHIP NOSTALGIC FOR THE PRE-VIETNAM COLD WAR CONSENSUS. FINALLY, RECONCILIATION CANNOT TRANSCEND POLITICS; ESSENTIALLY, IT IS POLITICS.

AbstractHow might divorce mediation evolve into reconciliation?

Peace initiative of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan; implementation since Jan. 1987.

This critical discourse analysis of welfare workers' responses to reconciliation demonstrates the ways in which language operates to maintain Indigenous people's disenfranchisement and oppression within the Australian polity. It cautions against welfare personnel assuming more liberation within their ranks than found within general society.

AbstractWhile it is often assumed that reconciliation culminates in the comprehensive resolution of conflict between deeply alienated parties, the article argues that reconciliation can only be achieved through complex mechanisms of estrangement that reveal alternative vistas or collective renewal. Art performs an important role in this process. The article theorizes estrangement as both an artistic and a political technique that can have world-disclosing, rather than alienating, effects on its audience: what Svetlana Boym calls estrangement for, rather than from, the world. I tease out the implications of this insight by examining the South African theater pieceUbu and the Truth Commission, which employs a number of estrangements devices in order to problematize the ambiguities and uncertainties of the post-Apartheid transition period. By subverting audience identification, yet triggering emotional contagion, the play imaginatively opens up the possibility of a common world in which agonistic relations are productively negotiated, rather than fully suppressed.

This contribution describes the speaker's experiences working with World Vision International (WVI). It demonstrates the power of cooperative efforts in the partnership between WVI, the World Health Organization (WHO), World Food Programme (WFP), and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC), along with localized NGOs. Through the relation of poignant anecdotes from the speaker's background, it demonstrates the potential for strategic alliances to build mutually supportive relationships between agencies. The contribution asserts that through the cooperation and coordination of international humanitarian organizations and NGOs, it will be possible to make the mechanisms for aid distribution at the local level operational. Finally, the article calls for a revitalized effort to develop new ways to lay the foundation for humanitarian partnerships and reconciliation of suffering and alienated populations. W. A. Butler

Reconciliation efforts have become an almost routine element of post-conflict peace building. From a scientific point of view, tools are needed to enable systematic studies of reconciliation. In this article, a structured method for studying national reconciliation initiatives is suggested, focusing on public statements and behaviors of those in power. The aim is to contribute to the development of systematic research in the field by designing a structured method to measure if, when, and what kind of reconciliation initiatives promote durable peace and if and when they instead might be an obstacle to peace building. Two widely used sources in peace and conflict research were used for coding: the Regional Survey of the World and the Africa Research Bulletin. The analytical framework, built on Galtung's well-known conflict triangle and applied to Rwanda and Mozambique, proves to be useful for structuring the analysis of reconciliation at this level. In addition, three hypotheses on reconciliation are generated, which would benefit from further research. Adapted from the source document.