Suchergebnisse

The twentieth century (characterized by the gruesome and haze of horror of two World Wars, the Cold Wars-CW, dictatorships, civil wars, genocides, etc.) has seen a great transformation in warfare but to the expense of the innocent civilians and yet in the full view of regulatory internationally recognized war-laws. So, if at one point in history, civilian populations hardly suffered war directly, the order of the state of affairs has now changed. Many civilians perish simply because warlords so desire; extremes of violence, killings and destruction of property is predominantly preferred. As if that is not enough, the indifference of the majority of the public in tranquil zones of the world towards the fate of the civilians in zones under by fire kind of provide implicit licenses to violence planners to do whatever it takes to "win". Consequently, great numbers of survivors are seen trying to escape from situations of assured death to that of probable death. It is against this background that we feel moved to take on this dissertation. Bearing in mind the generally complex and challenging contemporary conflicts that acutely breeds volatile security environments (for civilians), our thesis is that there needed to be an increased, noteworthy and continued applicable innovation of approaches to civilian protection. To be precise, as a strategy to sustainable peace, we have aspired after a world where the United Nations Peacekeeping Department (UNPKD) is not singly considered the sole custodian of the concept of civilian protection but (based on contexts and cases) as one but a leader among other stakeholders (local and foreign) able and ready to contribute to the common-pool of operational arenas. Thinking about these other stake holders, we have in this work stood by those that: firstly, move towards more civilian-centered operations that are; secondly, carried out by (a mixture of grassroots and international) unarmed civilians by means of; thirdly, engages nonviolent approaches and practices that in themselves anticipate the basic constituents of successive bottom-up Peacemaking (PK) and Peacebuilding (PB) in the hic et nunc of their Peacekeeping (PK) initiatives and applications. All these basics, in our view, do not just add up to drawing a continuous line that intersects the just mentioned Three Approaches to Peace (PK, PM, PB) coined by Johan Galtung way back in 1975; they also open avenues to sustainability. The thesis is taken on through three different parts; each subdivided into two chapters. With due attention to intrastate contemporary violent conflicts, the first part tries to demonstrate the reason why in PK there has been indeed need for rethinking the protection of civilians (PoC) and/or for enriching the methods until now employed in bringing it about. In the first chapter of the part, we kind of gave a sketchy attention to the historical journey that the patterns of violent conflicts in relation to the fate of non-combatants have made. It emerges that, unlike in the past, the pattern of contemporary violent conflict, especially with reference to the CW (especially in third-world countries) and post-CW periods, have become severely complex to handle. Wars have continued and proved to be very hot especially on the populations on the periphery; on those who are minimally directly concerned with and honestly ignorant of its objectives. In the period in question, these innocent men, women and children are more than ever struck hard not just by its direct consequences but also the indirect ones and their hopes are constantly put at the brink of mere survival and of the grave. Mores so the lucky ones who manage to escape these snares, continue to unwaveringly hope for bread, freedom, justice and peace, instead of iron that kills and destroys. In chapter II of the same part, looking at the commitments borne by the UN right from its early years in keeping, initially, the interstate and successively also the intrastate peace (of those tormented by reign of violence and terror), we acknowledge the strides gradually taken along the years. These strides has better late than never embraced a multidimensional point in time where civilian protection counts as a primacy. Accordingly, we recognize that the UN military PK is certainly capable of reducing the level of tension in conflicts but we also negated that, by so doing, it is able to guarantee a durable peace not only because of the application of the non-peaceful means which is limited to separating the conflicting parties but also because it lacks the strategic concern of fostering an active citizenship which is a basic ingredient to democratic populace. In Part Two, we have concentrated on the vision and the peculiar picture of the practitioners of the alternative way, particularly; the Nonviolent Peaceforce (NP) which operates on a benchmark of bottom-up strategic empowerment of local civilian unarmed and nonviolent efforts by international unarmed and nonviolent civilians to protect civilians, prevent, reduce and stop violent conflicts. The first chapter of this second part begins by singling out some of the nuts and bolts (Like: The centrality of sustainability; strategic, local and multilevel capacity and relational empowerment and mediation for peace; conflict transformation as the adequate language; nonviolence and nonpartisanship as a philosophy) that make Unarmed Civilian Protection (UCP) stands out faithfully to the above stated aspirations. Without giving importance to the chronological specifics and with a particular reference to the assessment of the practicality of the project that, on a later date, would organizationally become the NP, an extensive attention is paid to the vicissitudes that surrounded the founding of this UCP protection agency and especially to the foundations of the formative elements entailed. Chapter II does not only build on the findings and stimuli of Chapter I, it supersedes it and makes real a new and distinct reality. Herein, a unique place is devoted to the formative components reserved to the practitioners as a strategy for guaranteeing the competencies and high professionalism needed for the successful execution of field strategies attached to the NP UCP objectives, principles, key methods and practices. Through the analysis of the UCP Training Course entitled "Strengthening Civilian Capacities to Protect Civilians; A joint UNITAR- Nonviolent Peaceforce online Course" the chapter tries to show how the activities of the organization intrinsically flow from its very being; from elements which define it. And this is illustrated in how the very life of the NP UCP is blended with its formative spirit and content; a sort of transformative training that seeks to promote transformative operational frameworks that applicable to situations and contexts. The third part of the work is an applied one. It is dedicated to our chosen case study, namely, NP's intervention in the longtime violence-stricken Republic of South Sudan; in a country which (Thomas Hobbes would say) has once again reverted to its natural state; a harsh reality of hand to mouth living and a never ending search for sustenance in an ambiance virtually challenging to change. In chapter I, the pragmatic implementation of NP UCP in strengthening the local civilians' capacity, security and sense of safety in situation of violent conflict is marked out. Here, some concrete instances of this intervention are presented to exemplify the claim that a multiple base of actors (UCPs, the inviting civil society and/or local NGOs of an UCP presence and local partners) can sustainably and strategically provide the PoC work that for a long time was and is still largely entrusted to the military. And at the end of the day PK, PM, PB resources are considered to consist in not only financial and material supports, but also, and (in the same way) importantly, the socio-cultural resources of the affected people. And in this way people in conflict settings are seen as resources rather than recipients. Even though we evidently confirmed that the alternative way counts exceptionally big in strategically promoting, developing, and implementing sustainable unarmed civilian PK as a tool for preventing, reducing and stopping violence and protecting civilians in situations of violent conflict, we also acknowledge that it is not without challenges. These are actually what chapter two of the part extensively dwells on. The second chapter is instead dedicated (at length) to looking at the challenges that NP faces not only with regard to its missions lands but also in general. We have gone about this in the form of a comprehensive assessment and in some humble recommendations are advanced. Among these challenges we have particularly paid attention to issues like: The meager UCP funding and the dominant top-down mentality; the violent bully character of some major world power wielders; the need for more practitioners to carry out UCP; the dynamicity and complexity of conflict nature as a challenge; conflict prevention challenges like delays in capturing the signs of time so as to effectively intervene; the presence of spoilers as a challenge; the challenge of effective sustainable credibility. Recommendations proposed include among others: Investing in systematic reflections on the extent of the progress and failures so far registered in efforts to involve the UN, regional bodies and other donor agencies or individuals in the cause of NP (UCP) and reflecting on the philosophy that underpins the reasons why financial assistance to UCP and NP in particular is founded; more emphasis on the already existing engagement with political leaders and other influential people and embarking on popular campaigns to propagate a concretely evidenced knowledge of the feasibility of the alternative way, instituting and investing in "School Project" (dedicated to preferably to high schools) within the NP Advocacy and Outreach office and insisting on the positives of volunteers' contribution; enriching a little more the content of the just elaborated online UCP training course; etc. Hereafter, the general conclusion of our dissertation will be drawn. A profound acknowledgement of the UNPK pivotal role with its actual multidimensional fronts in PK basically intended as PoC specifically in the contemporary intrastate violent conflicts. It is also observed that, thanks to the appropriate blending of local and international capacities giving priority to the former, UCP's strategic approach to PK (which is not limited to the PoCs but is also anchored to preventing, reducing and ending not just those that are already on but also lays for standing up to the future possible ones) could be counted on. Thus far, it is on one hand, admissible that, despite all the challenges that there may be, NP (UCP) mechanisms is already proffering a great deal to this end, and on the other, it is evident that it can and should still do more. The ability of its interventions to stand the test of time and to stand up to the future conflicts (i.e. its sustainability) resides in a time which is not yet at hand and in the continuous involvement and inventiveness of many. As per now, if the Italian proverb "Il buongiorno si vede dal mattino" (Meaning: You can tell how something will go by how it begins) holds, then it is, up till now, realistic to count on NP as one of the most outstanding Bottom-up UCP organizations in the PoC in (selected) contemporary violent conflict situations. All that is needed is the building and the consolidation of international interest and support for UCP that presents the hope and reality of alternatives to over dependence on armed intervention; alternatives that chances the revitalization of local communities and the restoration of the social fabrics and capital of the affected people.