Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1: Introduction: Unsettled Reflections from Golden Valley, Myanmar -- Chapter 2: Promoting Peace or Pushing Norms? Understanding Normative Agency in Mediation Processes -- Chapter 3: New Kids on the Block: The Rise of NGO Mediators in Mediation and Peacemaking -- Chapter 4: The Promised Land of Inclusive Peace: NGO Mediators as Norm Promoters of Inclusion -- Chapter 5: What's in a Norm? What Normative Frameworks in Myanmar Reveal about Inclusivity -- Chapter 6: Chronicles of a Norm for Sale: Norm Entrepreneurship in the Myanmar NCA Negotiations -- Chapter 7: "The Trouble with Inclusivity": How Promoting Inclusive Peace led to an Exclusive Outcome -- Chapter 8: Conclusion: The Life and Death of Inclusive Peace in Myanmar.

This book explores the role of nongovernmental mediators in promoting "inclusive peace" to negotiating parties in Myanmar's Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) negotiations from 2011-2015. The influx of NGO mediators directly engaging with the negotiating parties and promoting the inclusivity norm coupled with the salience of discourse around "all-inclusiveness" at the end of the NCA process forms a puzzle around the agency that NGO mediators wield in influencing political outcomes, despite their lack of political and material leverage. The author argues that NGO mediators can effectively promote norms, using mediation processes as a site of norm diffusion. Bespoke international conflict resolution NGOs have become key mediation actors, within the last three decades through creating the niche world of "private diplomacy" and acting as "norm entrepreneurs" at the same time. As informal third parties, these NGO mediators directly engage with politically sensitive actors or convene unofficial peace talks. As NGOs, they are part of an epistemic community of mediation practice, professionalizing the field and producing knowledge on what peace mediation is and what it ought to be. This dual identity as both NGOs and mediators nicely sets them up with a unique agency to promote and diffuse norms. These norms often reflect the liberal peacebuilding paradigm promoted from the Global North, such as inclusion, gender equality and transitional justice, with the view that these norms are not ends in themselves but as necessary ingredients for effective mediation. The book further questions whether NGOs should promote norms in the first place. The outcome of the NCA process presents a critical and cautionary tale of promoting a presumed universal norm into a given locale and expecting a certain outcome without understanding how an external norm interacts with existing normative frameworks. The book illustrates that while NGO mediators do possess the "normative agency" to effectively promote norms to negotiating parties, my empirical research analyses how their promotion of the "inclusivity" norm to the negotiating parties in Myanmar's NCA paradoxically resulted in exclusionary outcomes: only half of the armed groups in the ethnic armed groups' negotiating bloc signed, and civil society was effectively crowded out from meaningful participation despite lofty rhetoric. This is an open access book.

AbstractThis article analyzes the increasingly prominent role of regional organizations (ROs) and non‐governmental organizations (NGOs) in promoting norms in mediation processes. In particular, we seek to understand the processes by which RO and NGO mediators promote the inclusivity norm to negotiating parties and the outcomes that result. We employ the concepts of local agency and social practices in examining the normative agency of ROs and NGOs in promoting and redefining the inclusivity norm. Through illustrative case studies of peace processes in South Sudan and Myanmar, we argue that ROs' and NGOs' mediation practices reflect their claims to alternative resources of power, such as long‐standing expertise and insider status in the context, and build congruence with strong local norms. We provide nuanced theoretical insights on RO and NGO mediators' claims to agency and provide empirical illustrations on how these claims contribute to constitutive changes to norms.

This article analyzes the increasingly prominent role of regional organizations (ROs) and non‐governmental organizations (NGOs) in promoting norms in mediation processes. In particular, we seek to understand the processes by which RO and NGO mediators promote the inclusivity norm to negotiating parties and the outcomes that result. We employ the concepts of local agency and social practices in examining the normative agency of ROs and NGOs in promoting and redefining the inclusivity norm. Through illustrative case studies of peace processes in South Sudan and Myanmar, we argue that ROs' and NGOs' mediation practices reflect their claims to alternative resources of power, such as long‐standing expertise and insider status in the context, and build congruence with strong local norms. We provide nuanced theoretical insights on RO and NGO mediators' claims to agency and provide empirical illustrations on how these claims contribute to constitutive changes to norms.

Track Two Diplomacy, a form of facilitated informal and unofficial dialogues between conflicting parties, has become a well-established form of international conflict resolution. This paper seeks to explore whether the techniques and practices of Track Two could be applied in a new setting beyond international armed conflicts: public health. Global society continues to grapple with the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, systemic racism, and climate change, among other pressing public health issues that can not only exacerbate but also create new conflicts that negatively affect communities. Innovative and interdisciplinary approaches are needed more than ever. We synthesize literature from both Track Two and public health fields to present a conceptual framework that posits whether and how such concepts as the "problem-solving workshop," "transfer," "reflective practice" and others might support parties involved in divisive, intractable, visible, and invisible conflicts which currently mark the public health space.

Mediators are expected to include or uphold a growing number of norms in their interventions. For instance, inclusivity, gender equality, transitional justice, democracy promotion and the implementing instruments that accompany them are increasingly incorporated into the strategies of international and regional organizations, states and non-state actors that mandate mediation missions in conflicts around the world. This working paper takes one step back and asks whether mediators actually can, or have the agency to, promote these norms. It presents the analytical framework of a three-year multi-case research project on the role of mediators in norm diffusion. It examines what norms form part of the framework for mediation processes, if mediators promote these norms and how and what norms are internalized in the peace process. Through process-tracing, the research project will apply this analytical framework to mediation processes in Syria, South Sudan and Myanmar.

This article focuses on the dilemmas and trade-offs that third parties face when mediating violent political conflicts. Should they ignore human rights violations because pushing the issue could jeopardize relationships with political actors who grant access for humanitarian aid? Will bringing moderates and hardliners together help the peace process or radicalize moderate actors? What should dialogue facilitators do when the act of identifying non-mainstream groups to be included into dialogue increases division and polarization? The activity of peacemaking is inherently characterized by such process and strategy dilemmas where two equally compulsory imperatives seem not to be attainable at the same time. The article proposes a framework to break out of either-or thinking in these situations. We argue that: 1) making oneself aware of how a decision is perceived, and 2) systematically exploring a set of different strategies for creating new unexpected options helps to ease these decisions and avoid rotten compromises. The model reworks and combines existing problem-solving strategies to create a new explorative option generation approach to peacemaking dilemmas and trade-offs. Some of these strategies, such as sequencing and incrementalization, are already well-established in peacemaking. Others, such as compartmentalization and utilization, are rather unconsciously used. All identified strategies, however, are not yet systematically employed to manage third parties' own dilemmas and trade-offs. Under the suggested framework, these strategies can act in complement to synthesize creativity and strategic thinking with surprising ease. Using examples from the authors' peacemaking activities and observations in Myanmar, Thailand, and Ukraine, the article demonstrates the real-world benefits of the framework in terms of decision assessment and optional thinking.

This article focuses on the dilemmas and trade-offs that third parties face when mediating violent political conflicts. Should they ignore human rights violations because pushing the issue could jeopardize relationships with political actors who grant access for humanitarian aid? Will bringing moderates and hardliners together help the peace process or radicalize moderate actors? What should dialogue facilitators do when the act of identifying non-mainstream groups to be included into dialogue increases division and polarization? The activity of peacemaking is inherently characterized by such process and strategy dilemmas where two equally compulsory imperatives seem not to be attainable at the same time. The article proposes a framework to break out of either-or thinking in these situations. We argue that: 1) making oneself aware of how a decision is perceived, and 2) systematically exploring a set of different strategies for creating new unexpected options helps to ease these decisions and avoid rotten compromises. The model reworks and combines existing problem-solving strategies to create a new explorative option generation approach to peacemaking dilemmas and trade-offs. Some of these strategies, such as sequencing and incrementalization, are already well-established in peacemaking. Others, such as compartmentalization and utilization, are rather unconsciously used. All identified strategies, however, are not yet systematically employed to manage third parties' own dilemmas and trade-offs. Under the suggested framework, these strategies can act in complement to synthesize creativity and strategic thinking with surprising ease. Using examples from the authors' peacemaking activities and observations in Myanmar, Thailand, and Ukraine, the article demonstrates the real-world benefits of the framework in terms of decision assessment and optional thinking.

This article focuses on the dilemmas and trade-offs that third parties face when mediating violent political conflicts. Should they ignore human rights violations because pushing the issue could jeopardize relationships with political actors who grant access for humanitarian aid? Will bringing moderates and hardliners together help the peace process or radicalize moderate actors? What should dialogue facilitators do when the act of identifying non-mainstream groups to be included into dialogue increases division and polarization? The activity of peacemaking is inherently characterized by such process and strategy dilemmas where two equally compulsory imperatives seem not to be attainable at the same time. The article proposes a framework to break out of either-or thinking in these situations. We argue that: 1) making oneself aware of how a decision is perceived, and 2) systematically exploring a set of different strategies for creating new unexpected options helps to ease these decisions and avoid rotten compromises. The model reworks and combines existing problemsolving strategies to create a new explorative option generation approach to peacemaking dilemmas and trade-offs. Some of these strategies, such as sequencing and incrementalization, are already well-established in peacemaking. Others, such as compartmentalization and utilization, are rather unconsciously used. All identified strategies, however, are not yet systematically employed to manage third parties' own dilemmas and trade-offs. Under the suggested framework, these strategies can act in complement to synthesize creativity and strategic thinking with surprising ease. Using examples from the authors' peacemaking activities and observations in Myanmar, Thailand, and Ukraine, the article demonstrates the real-world benefits of the framework in terms of decision assessment and optional thinking.