|
|
|
|
CIAO DATE: 12/99
Diplomacy and Ethnic Conflict: Facing the Challenge of Co-Existence
A Centre for International Understanding Conference
in association with INCORE Prague
1996
Participant Preamble to the 1996 Prague Conference Report
As we look back over our seven days together as a group, we find that the process was as important as the product. As we discussed ethnic conflict and the challenge of coexistence, opinions were expressed more and more openly and a culture of tolerance and trust was nurtured among group members who would, in other settings, have found past history creating many reasons for distrust.
In the final analysis, it was clear to us that even though we came from different regions, professions, and backgrounds—many of which included painful personal experiences—we produced a process of consultation that assisted our understanding of ethnic conflict. The variety of participants stimulated discussion. Insights into problems that might not otherwise have occurred to us resulted from the neutral and tolerant atmosphere afforded by this CIU conference. We are unanimous in our appreciation for this valuable experience, and we look forward to continuing contact and exchanges with the Centre for International Understanding and its Fellows.
Ethnic Conflict Collision of Different Cultures and Interests
Group 1 Report
I. Introduction
We began our discussion by reviewing the available source materials and the initial comments of panel speakers and defining the basic elements of our approach. While the group agreed that ethnic conflict can be fruitfully analyzed from a variety of starting points, we decided to narrow considerably the number of topics identified in the opening plenary. We also wanted to bring to bear our professional and personal experiences in ethnic conflict resolution. Our group of 10 was composed of seven diplomats (some assigned to their ministries, others to their IGO delegations) plus one academic and two representatives from the international NGO community. We also agreed that our written report would reflect areas of consensus wherever possible. Areas of disagreement would not be described in detail, but where significant, would be noted.
We agreed that most terms of discussion, e.g., “ethnicity,” “minority,” and “conflict,” were sufficiently clear to allow us to begin with the following hypothesis: Ethnicity itself does not cause violent conflict. Rather, ethnicity is a fault line through which various actors can cause violence to erupt. All were most interested in the dynamics of relevant players in such conflicts. Could we examine this and derive any insights based on our experience and expertise?
We agreed that analysis of conflict from pre-prevention to post-conflict management was valuable. However, our particular interests and expertise, plus time constraints, required a more limited exercise. We chose to look at how preventive diplomacy and post-conflict management work, and whether we could move from description of situations to prescriptions for future action.
II. Actors Affecting the Course of Ethnic Conflict
Our discussion showed that the societal players affecting the development and resolution of ethnic tension are numerous, and could vary depending on the situation. Nevertheless, we agreed on the following working list as a basis, dividing actors into governmental and non-governmental categories.
| Governmental Actors | Non-Governmental Actors | |
| Governmental Actors | ||
| Non-Governmental Actors | ||
| Internal | ||
| (Sub)Regional Area | ||
| World at Large | ||
In creating the following list, we recognized that some actors could operate in either category, could change categories over time, and could overlap, either in fact or in the perception of others. Since some players can also overlap categories, we simply list them below for the reader to place according to situation.
Leaders, and future leaders Political parties Associations (e.g., religious, cultural, professional, etc.) Economic/Industrial interests, however organized Labor Media, including influential individual journalists or personalities Artists and cultural figures Military and para-military organs Other countries, whether allied, friendly, or otherwise interested World powers Non-governmental organizations International non-governmental organizations Governments International Governmental Organizations Diasporas
Of most interest to the group were the roles of: Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), diplomats, and diasporas.
III. Intergovernmental Organizations
We first considered the wide array of these organizations, e.g., UN family, OSCE, CoE, EU, etc. Many of these play a role in resolving ethnic conflict regardless of the specific purposes of their mandates. We found that an evolution in these organizations had taken place in their treatment of ethnic conflicts. We agreed that at some point in some ethnic conflicts, a threshold is breached causing an IGO to take an interest. This IGO interest may or may not at first be welcomed by the parties to the conflict. Regardless of welcome, if IGO interest is strong enough, an IGO may begin a dialogue with the conflicting parties to find itself a role in resolving the conflict. This assertiveness on the part of IGOs was a noteworthy element in their evolution. It may in fact signal the development of IGO “identities” somehow larger than the sum of their state members.
This led us to ask: When and how does an IGO take an interest in ethnic conflicts? We formulated the following basic conditions, any one of which may be sufficient for an IGO to take an interest:
An interesting question yet to be addressed is what this new “ego” on the part of IGOs implies for their future roles in ethnic conflicts, particularly within states.
IV. International NGOs
We discussed the broad variety of NGOs—those that operate strictly on a national basis, and those that operate beyond borders. We agreed that their number and areas of endeavor had increased dramatically over the last 20 years. It was interesting that in the current international scene, NGOs do not always approach the same ethnic conflict with a common view. This diversity and/or competition among NGOs can be helpful or harmful to the resolution of ethnic conflict. We then moved more from describing how NGO actors enter the scene of ethnic conflict to identifying the basic criteria for their constructive involvement in ethnic conflict. These criteria would include:
We recognized that this list covered a wide variety of both moral and legal questions. We also concluded that the national and international NGO scene was evolving. Some NGOs had been established actors for generations and some were now trusted “subcontractors” of governments. Indeed, governments were now using NGOs in some cases as an avant garde to undertake tasks or missions in ethnic conflict which central authorities were not yet prepared to support formally. In such cases, governments could adopt NGO successes as their own or distance themselves from NGO “failures.”
V. Diplomats
At first, we tried to define the exact role of diplomats in ethnic conflict. Much discussion resulted on the concept of serving the “national interest.” We also tried to look at the variety of roles diplomats might play throughout the spectrum of conflict, from low- to high-intensity, and post-conflict. Our conclusions may be summarized as follows:
VI. Diasporas
Moving to the role of diasporas—both individuals and groups—we again assumed the existence of such an actor without a precise definition regarding size, composition, level of organization, or purpose. We agreed that diasporas can often play a significant role in ethnic conflict. However, the extent of that role depended on their organization, level of interest, ability to project influence (e.g., financial, military, etc.) and provide other resources (e.g., skilled workers, representatives, etc.). The role of diasporas in ethnic conflict can be positive or negative, and has varied over time and place. Finally, to ensure that a diaspora role is helpful in resolving ethnic conflict peacefully, its attitudes and resources must be mobilized responsibly and effectively.
VII. Conclusions
Periodically, throughout the discussions described above, we refocused on the need for a written report, but we did not allow the value of clearly drafted conclusions to force discussion in a certain direction. In the early stages of our discussion of ethnic conflict, we realized that we could not define terms that had been subjects of dispute among experts for decades. Rather than letting this exacerbate differences, we found ways to continue dialogue while respecting each other’s opinions. Working understandings of terms developed even when formal agreement often eluded us. While we did not define anew the subject matter or produce case studies of individual conflicts, we found most satisfying the elaboration of general guidelines that may be used in discussions and case studies undertaken in the future.
Throughout our deliberations, we spoke as individuals and were pleased to note that a culture of tolerance can be nurtured that gives a group a distinctive dynamic or “personality” of its own. Ultimately all of us in the group benefitted from the views, experience, and background of each participant. Although opinions were expressed openly, even among participant whose countries might see themselves as antagonists, the atmosphere was rewardingly open, positive, and productive as we faced, during our week together, the challenge of coexistence among peoples, disciplines, and individuals.
Group 2 Report
I. Introduction
We began our discussion by outlining what we believe to be the underlying causes of ethnic conflict. Our plan was then to discuss the limitations of the international community, followed by an outline of how to address conflict. Having finished the above, we were hopeful that our discussion would lead us to a consensus regarding definitions, notably: What is ethnic conflict; how does it differ from other conflicts; and how should we address it?
Our group was composed of seven diplomats, an academic, and an NGO representative, all acting in individual capacities. Backgrounds varied—some of the group had legal training; some, extensive theoretical perspectives; many, direct experience in conflict prevention and resolution. All had some knowledge of specific cases and situations. This mix inspired a lively and wide-ranging debate, which we cannot hope to reflect in this brief report. However, the thoughts contained below represent some of our broad approaches, which we hope will stimulate further discussion.
II. Root Causes of Ethnic Conflict
We decided to assess the impact of specific factors relating to culture and the pursuit of group interests on the development of ethnic conflict. We concluded that culture and interests are inextricably linked, and that conflict results from either real or perceived change, or lack of change, in the relative status of different elements related to the projection of a group’s culture and/or interests. When identifying and analyzing root causes of ethnic conflict, one has also to bear in mind that functions of individual actors may be manifested (clearly observable) or latent.
The way in which any given situation is perceived by a group is a crucial determinant of conflict. Perceptions are created from within—by one’s own cultural mindset, as well as from outside influences. Public perception of events may be shaped by, among others, public or private sector leadership, politicians, business, religious leaders, other interest groups, educators and the media. In some cases, the media itself may be manipulated by any of these or other groups or individuals. Contact with the diaspora and exiled groups, as well as opposition and internal dissidents, also shapes the perceptions of specific ethnic groups. Perception is also relevant when it is not deliberately manipulated. Mitigating factors in creating perception include changes in the level of actual public knowledge and the presence of multiple sources of information (education and the proliferation of media sources could therefore be considered conflict prevention instruments).
Change, or lack of change, is relative to other groups in society. Change may result from any number of different factors, including that imposed from outside, as well as that created from within. A change in the status of a group (either closer or further away from their interests) with respect to others in the same society may create tensions which can lead to conflict. The evolution of the local, national or international environment—be it political, economic, legal, social or physical environment—may precipitate conflict. The time frame in which this takes place is also important. Rapid change tends to create stresses in society, particularly when it is unevenly distributed. However, the lack of change over time also contributes to building tension.
For purposes of this discussion, the group decided that as a working definition, an ethnic group may be considered as a group of people that share a common identity based on culture, interests and/or region. Another perspective suggested that the perception of these factors by others is also important in distinguishing an ethnic group. The root causes of ethnic conflict may be discovered by examining the perceived or real change or lack of change of various factors relating to ethnicity (see inset). These factors may be seen either from the point [--- Unable To Translate Text Box ---] of view of the state or from that of the ethnic group.
III. Addressing Conflict
We decided to examine the question of conflict management by breaking the process down into five stages:
Questions arose regarding how to differentiate between the concepts of conflict prevention and preventive diplomacy. One way could be to consider the two approaches as either means to cure an illness, or simply the treatment of symptoms—a heart attack can be avoided by staying active and eating healthily; however, once the symptoms appear the patient must follow a strict diet, and take specific medication!
Because of time constraints, we focused our attention on the first two stages. We tried to keep in mind the roles of the various actors—internal, external, formal and informal—in addressing conflict. We also discussed the shortcomings of the international system, which imposes restraints on the activities of these actors. For example, while States are constrained by the principle of “non-intervention in internal affairs,” non-State actors may be excluded from participation in key decision making. Moreover, we also considered the interplay between the principle of territorial integrity, the principle of self-determination, and the response of the international community to the creation of new states. The group concluded that an open democratic society at all levels was likely to provide the best mechanism both for effective early warning and conflict prevention.
(a) Conflict Prevention:
We defined conflict prevention activities as those that attempt to mitigate the sources of tension that might lead to conflict.
Many of our debate focused on whether the presence of legal frameworks or conventions—either international, bilateral or domestic—act as instruments of conflict prevention. We decided that while the rule of law should be guaranteed, it does not necessarily have to be codified. In some cases, customary and traditional laws can also provide valuable standards. The key factor is their equal application, without discrimination, across all sectors of society.
A system of checks and balances helps to avoid the misuse, or abuse, of power. Independent and impartial national human rights institutions, such as Ombudspersons and Commissions and regional and international courts and arrangements, assist in enforcing national and international human rights norms and commitments. Constitutional Courts have been particularly useful in this regard. It was suggested that federal political systems which distribute powers between national and local governments may be in a good position to accommodate ethnic interests. However, we recognized that such systems must be approached carefully, as they may encourage movement toward secession.
The existence of mechanisms of reconciliation within society are an essential component of conflict prevention. Generally, local solutions are desirable, for example, in order to provide culturally sensitive means of addressing sources of misunderstanding. The idea is to develop mechanisms and legal frameworks that at best prevent, or at least discourage, any recourse to violence. These mechanisms must be dynamic, so they are able to anticipate and respond to changing societal circumstances.
We spent considerable time discussing the respective roles of education and the mass media as important instruments of conflict prevention. Education should be used to encourage mutual tolerance, and reflect the perspectives of all groups in society; while access to the media should be available to all, without discrimination on the basis of ethnicity. The media has to be sensitized to the issues surrounding ethnic groups, to continue to develop mutual tolerance in all sectors of society. Mechanisms must be available to address cases of the misuse of information.
Conflict prevention activities should not only be confined to cultural factors. Tensions between ethnic groups are intensified by economic disparities. Regional economic disparities are exaggerated if the regions are identified with particular ethnic groups. On a very basic level, if we could eliminate economic disparities between groups in society, we eliminate a major source of tension.
Economic assistance, either from the State or from the international community (e.g., regional or multilateral organizations, other States or NGOs) can be considered a conflict prevention activity. There was discussion regarding the relative merits of “community compensation” versus untargeted (to specific ethnic communities) economic assistance. The former directs funds toward specific communities to address the cumulative effects of discrimination, while the latter spreads assistance over a geographic region or economic sector in order to avoid the appearance of favoritism. If economic assistance is perceived to be targeted at one group at the expense of another (be it regional, ethnic, social, etc.) the economic assistance itself could contribute to a rise in tension between the groups.
In many cases, economic assistance is provided by the donor community, either bilaterally or multilaterally as a means of promoting stability. Therefore, it is crucial that diplomats and officials ensure that factors relating to ethnicity are taken into consideration when negotiating assistance packages. The social implications of economic reform programs on specific ethnic groups should also be considered.
Governments cannot be expected to take economic decisions which cause gross inefficiencies in order to promote ethnic harmony. However, they should ensure that the results of economic decisions do not create, or exacerbate ethnic tensions.
We discussed that just as the State has responsibilities toward its citizens; citizens have responsibilities toward the State. It is important for all ethnic groups resident in a State to respect both the rights and obligations which derive from citizenship, and to show significant will to live in harmony within the State. There should also be mutual respect between permanent residents and the State.
This list of conflict prevention activities is by no means exhaustive. Ultimately, much of our discussion centered around the types of policies that should be pursued by state and non-state actors, both internal and external, to promote mutual tolerance and peaceful co-existence.
The group considered that any change affecting the factors listed above could be an indicator of possible ethnic conflict. Some important factors we identified included monitoring legislation, arrest and convictions, and human rights reports. Shifts of political power were also emphasized. What was clear, is that there are many actors involved in early warning. The following table illustrates the complexity of the issue:
Non-State (Informal) State (Formal) Inside Outside Inside Outside Community Leaders Diaspora Local Governments Other Governments NGOs International NGOs National Governments Multilateral Organizations Media International Media Judiciary International Institutions Religious Leadership Religious Leadership (supranational) Security structures: police, military External Security Forces Political groups / parties, acting inside or outside of the state Political groups / parties, acting inside or outside of the state
There is no single focus for the information being gathered, and so the group posed the questions—“Who warns whom?” since information is often based on perception or limited sources, the group similarly questioned—“Who decides what information should be accepted as the basis for action?” Finally the group considered that it was not even clear what this information was warning of, since there was no clear definition of what constituted ethnic conflict.
In practice, interpretation of the information will be affected by national and international political will and interests, as well as various individual, institutional and commercial interests.
IV. Definitions
One of our initial objectives was to develop definitions of terms like ethnicity, ethnic conflict, nationalism, national minority and so forth. As we proceeded, it became clear that we were not going to be able to reach a consensus on definitions. This was not a surprise, as we were all aware of the fact that many years of scholarship and diplomacy have also failed in developing internationally accepted definitions of these terms.
It is clear that the definitions of value-laden terms like ethnicity and nationalism can be themselves potential causes of conflict. Additionally, how conflicts are described affects our response to them. Is ethnicity distinct from culture? What is the impact of ethnic nationalism, particularly when combined with chauvinism or aggressive nationalism? We recognized that “nation” is not synonymous with “state” or “country,” and that nationalism and citizenship are often very different concepts.
We decided that further reflection was required on these questions—well beyond the scope of this exercise. We did conclude, though, that this was a very useful and unique opportunity to exchange ideas which helped to deepen our understanding of the issues involved.
Email this citation