Anda di halaman 1dari 10

Final Assignment

Lina Gonzalez (Trainee Community Organiser)


UWE Student Number: 13970889
Online Training: Working with Communities in Conflict
Taught by: Community Resolve
(3401 words)

Is peace in Colombia out of our reach?

The current peace process between the left-guerrilla FARC and the Colombian
government
1
to agree their disarmament has fostered the emergence of debates
and discussions in many parts of the country. With the exception of a few people
that are wanting the continuation of the war to keep their interests safe, many of us
say to want to live in peace. However, we made the mistake of avoiding to talk
about the negotiation in progress or losing time with useless blame discussions
and confrontations between each other about what the government should do in
order to fulfill peace, or which are the bad or the good guys in the negotiation
process . The situation deteriorates even more our social relations. A common
mistake is that nothing that we discuss allows us to dream, neither imagine a better
future.

We are repeating once again the mistakes of the past: looking the fault on the
other, believing that our viewpoint is the right one and even closing channels of
communication with the people that think different to us. We try to reduce such a
complex subject to one single solution and we become trap in it; in trying to
negotiate something as big and complex that clearly doesnt have a unique and
immediate response but which requires us to reflect at all levels and commit with
multiples processes of change to transform our reality (Lederach, 2003, p.38)

Having said that, the vision I want to share in this essay, are my thoughts between
a number of ideas about Conflict Transformation and Peace Building developed
by John Paul Lederach - and the reality I had lived and perceived as a regular
Colombian citizen. To do so, I will try to answer the following question is Peace in
Colombia out of our reach? At some degree, these ideas have unblocked my
frustration and apathy, but most important they have allowed me to imagine
another reality and envision different ways of working and relating with others.

1
This process is advanced in the Havana, Cuba, since 2013 after 60 years of armed conflict.
In order to address the question, the document is divided in four parts. The first
part will present the idea of peace building as part of our everyday life, by showing
strategies that can be applied by any citizen. The second part shows how the
notion of negotiation might be mistaken as seen as a situation that relies on only
one solution, while presenting another approach that seems neglected. The third
part points out the importance of developing a strategic vision while consolidating a
network of action, and the final part, address a vision of how the peace building
process can gain momentum by addressing the problem of marginalization in
underdeveloped areas.

Peace building as part of our everyday life.

It seems clear that not only the agreements generated in the Havana- Cuba
peace talks, will drive Colombians to have a country in peace. Although it may
generate important changes in the country at the political, legislative and military
levels, we, all Colombians, must to start a process of change to end up with some
cultural, individual and structural patterns that nowadays are perpetuating the
conflict.

As Reychler pointed out Peace building is about complex change; it involves
concurrent activities by many people in different sectors, at several levels and
layers, and in different time frames. It is a multi-level, multi-sector, and multi-time
activity. (2003, p. 3). It cannot be only built from above but need to be promoted
and sustained from below. It starts from each individual being, by gaining the ability
to see conflict as a potential process for change. (Lederach, 2003).
I am aware that for us Colombians this is a difficult task to achieve. How can we
see positive a conflict that has conducted so many deaths and suffering for more
than 60 years?. I know it is not easy. However, it is important to clarify that conflict
and violence are two separate things, that unfortunately in the Colombian case,
they have been mixed and reinforced each other.
Many scholars suggest that we should understand conflict as an inevitable
situation; as part of our human condition (Lederach, 2003), which is prone to
happen more often in countries like Colombia due to the existing social
fragmentation and the strong social differences. Those are the result of our
cultural diversity, political extremism and the large social inequalities that had also
characterized other developing Countries.
However, the conflict is not, by itself the negative part. The problem is the way we
react to it. In my opinion, it is our conflictive behavior and indifference that
makes the situation worst. Indifference, because we as spectators, had become
used to the violence and even sometimes supported it
2
. Conflict behavior,
because we continue reinforcing the cultural patterns that allows the conflict to
escalate in our setting. We are not tolerant with differences and we tend to solve
day-life struggles by imposing one unique view; however we hardly dialogue and
search for alternative solutions.
For instance, both issues can be challenged if we have the willingness and the
right attitude to approach it. These changes are in our hands and can impact on
the larger scale and to further generations. However, they require us to become
more critically aware of our context and of ourselves, in order to guide our future
actions.

It is possible to gain this context awareness by taking a broader view of the conflict
that goes beyond our individual situation. Engaging with different groups and trying
to understand the situation and views of the victims, the rebels, the government,
and the friends that have different opinions - although growing up in similar
conditions -, can allow us to hold a more complex view of the conflict and surely
that will help to breakdown our indifference.

By looking closely the dynamics of the Colombian conflict, I have become more
aware of the need to promote a non-violent advocacy for change, through the
rejection of the culture and institutions of war and by supporting the existing non-
violent initiatives. As Francis pointed out (2010), this is a fundamental requirement
for conflict transformation to happen, especially if we take into the account that
violence is not only an emotional behavior, but it is encouraged by a structured
system in place. Violence only perpetuate violence and rarely solve problems
(Lederach, 2004). In our case, it has led to the dehumanization of the war and
even to our dehumanization (El Pais, 2013).

However, it doesnt mean that violence as an emotional behavior should be
tolerated or limited to a physical damage. Many times we get used to blame or
insult others creating psychological damage. Perhaps, we dont have this
intention and our responses are just guided by anger and frustration. Furthermore
in the same way, these negative behaviors are escalating the conflict, not only by
creating new barriers but by reducing our capacity of directing the conflict to a
positive outcome.

As Fisher pointed out, The challenge is to lower the level of reactivity and blame
(Fisher, 2003), while at the same time we realise our own agency to transform the

2
By believing and voting for a military action, as the only way to get rid of the conflict
current state. By thinking and being more conscious of our behavior, social values
and cultural principles, we would take a critical approach and prevent that negative
behaviors take advantage of the situation and ending up controlling us. The making
of us is an ongoing process that could end up with positive outcomes when it is
guided consciously. The more we know ourselves, the more positive our
interactions will be with others. (Fisher, 2003).

Likewise, the more we know about this specific conflict, and think about new ways
to transform it, the more we can develop an image of our purpose and find a
direction.

Moving from looking at solutions to strengthening
relationships

Not so long ago, my understanding of this conflict and how to approach it was
limited to the belief that dialogue was the only strategy to resolve Colombias
conflict. Nonetheless, deep in my thoughts, I was aware that this was only an idea
that hardly could be made in practice. For me, it was nave to believe that all
Colombians, could agree in the kind of country we all want. It was enough to
observe a discussion between friends or politicians to see that what started in a
dialogue ended up in a negative debate, almost a fight in which each part tried
to gain the point including myself.
As Hen pointed out, there is a common mistake of believing that dialogue is
necessary in a conflict situation to reach an agreement. In reality, the aim of a
dialogue is to find commonalities and a wider vision of the conflict, while at the
same time we develop a sense of respect and understanding for the other.
(Session 6). Dialogue is a fundamental way to promote constructive change but it
is not the only mechanism (Lederach, 2013).
By reading Lederachs ideas, I realised one fundamental fact. Conflict tends to
escalate when communication is broken down and also when social relationships
are not going well. His focus on developing relationships rather that concentrating
merely on the content of the conflict show me that a peace building process needs
to engage with different strategies and different layers at the same time.
Before, I was wasting my time and energy by trying to find the political solution to
the conflict. I dont know what I was thinking about. I am not a politician and I wont
like to be one. This tendency to focus merely on the most controversial part of the
conflict or in issues that are clearly not in our hands makes us to divert our
responsibility for the current situation. I know we feel disempowered with this
situation, but if we take a closer look of what Lederach propose, we can open
ourselves to a more hopeful and workable approach to this conflict. Only by
improving our existing relationships and challenging ourselves to break down the
invisible barriers that prevent us to relate with other groups, we can stimulate
positive changes.
This is necessary, because this conflict has escalated and going around circles, in
big part, due to the lack of social relationships between groups. Unfortunately,
during this long lasting context of conflict we have created stereotypes about each
other that do not allow us to see and think about others realities and points of view.
Building good relationships across levels and sectors is the great soft strategy
that should be encouraged by all. At the institutional levels, an effort needs to be
done to create spaces for integration and interaction. However, not always a direct
approach to foster reconciliation will work, more if it is only based on dialogue
between two groups in conflict. As Chauhan (2009) suggests it is possible to
encourage new relationships between strangers by using more fluid strategies of
integration: for example by creating more public spaces and promoting activities
around common interests such as: as sports, arts, festivals, among other things.
Through my own experience I have verified why is important to build healthy
relationships to overcome a conflict situation, and also, how easy is to develop
them by sharing common spaces and interests. My family is a good example of it.
We are a huge family, very diverse, but with strong ties among us. The success
lies on the fact that we concentrate on developing activities and common spaces
that reinforce our commonalities. During these interactions, we have developed a
relationship to the point that we care a lot for the other; no matter how bigger our
differences are, or what the problem or situation is. We try to prioritize our sense of
community and social interest, thus looking for alternative solutions to the problem
- including giving up our individual interests.

Thinking together and working in synergy

What I have been talking above is about how the construction of peace could be
encouraged from rejecting violence and fostering integration. In other words, how
changing behaviors and strengthening relationships are fundamentals for creating
a positive approach to conflict and building peace.
However, it is clear that we need more efforts than that to build a sustainable
peace, especially in the post-conflict phase, where usually the Peace Building
Process gains momentum.
The post-conflict phase carries out huge challenges for local governments and
social organizations, especially in designing a workable approach and bringing
together all initiatives, resources and expertise in synergy to advance
transformation in the long term.
Lederach suggests the creation of and adaptive platform to coordinate the actions
and approaches that will be carry out during this phase, while at the same time
building a sustainable and inclusive network to foster constructive change in the
long term.
This is something that it is starting to be built in the Colombia
3
and that hopefully
would gain momentum when resources become available after the peace
agreement. However, it is important to point out that without fully involving the
people at the grassroots level, the Peace Building Process will become a fragile
top down initiative that will probably tend to fail.
The post conflict phase is the opportunity to build the The Big Picture; in others
words, to create the proper landscape and conditions for a real peace in place.
This is the time to capture the resourcefulness of all Colombians to build together a
strategic vision of the type of country we want to head on (Lederach, 2003,p.22).
This suppose a very complex thinking that should interweave different perceptions
and views of the theme, as it is clear that each discipline cannot deal alone with
todays complexities. Therefore, for the purpose of this essay, It is reasonable to
avoid looking at the big picture, because it is clear that a single lens is incapable
of doing it.
However, based on further research and thinking around how the post conflict
phase should look like, I will present in the following section some guideline of
action, which in my opinion would help to secure citizens support in the process
while at the same time tackling the root of the conflict.

Starting on the right foot
It seems clear that Peace is not only the absence of violence. Peace, as
Galtung once commented, is the key to enable people to achieve their potential by
providing the opportunities for self-realization (SGI) This is the best definition I
found and perhaps the key issue to this conflict. Therefore, I would like to center
this part of the essay in arguing why a developmental approach - as part of a

3
Initiatives such as the Coalicin de Paz from the central government and Reconciliacin Colombia from
social institutions, academia, local governments and Private .
development plan - is required in the post-conflict phase, in order to bring justice,
secure citizens support in the long term process and tackling the root of the
conflict.
It cant be denied that the Colombian conflict is embedded into a larger structural
problem, in which its unequal development is constantly fuelling the conflict. Only
by having a quick look of the country, it is possible to discern that power and
progress is concentrated in few people and areas, while there is a large
percentage of the population still marginalized and with little opportunities to
progress. Not surprisingly, they have been the more affected areas by the armed
conflict.
The needs theory suggests that some deep-rooted conflicts are about needs that
are nonnegotiable rather than interests that are negotiable. The resolution of this
kind of conflicts lies on restructuring society to meet those needs (Burton, 1990,b).
This is part of the larger dis- course of no peace without development and/or no
development without peace (Azar, 1990; Burton, 1990).
The examples of South Africa and Northern Ireland show that integrated
community development and conflict resolution strategies had helped to sustain
peace in post-settlement contexts (OBrien, 2007). They have given priority to
human needs and had avoided a top down approach (working in partnership with
grassroots organization and NGOs) as it is clear that it increases conflict and
discourages peoples participation.
The way peace is settled down would lead or not its future sustainability. The
post-conflict phase has the big challenge to show how the process of change
would look like after the country has committed to the construction of peace
(Reychler, 2003). It seems clear that as part of it, the government needs to start
paying back the social debt to the excluded communities. It is a fundamental right
that cannot be avoid anymore.
Therefore, by directing most of the efforts and resources from the post-conflict
phase on providing comprehensive interventions on those areas, with the final goal
of improving peoples well-being and providing real opportunities for them to gain
control of their lives, it is a good start to encourage transformation. However, this is
not an easy goal to achieve, more if we take into the account that human
development requires long term process, and the peace building process need to
show short term results to secure citizens commitment in the long term.
A focus on the development of infrastructure based on physical projects in those
marginalized areas is an interesting strategy that should be taken into
consideration, especially if it is focus on infrastructure for public services and/or for
boosting their local economy.
This is fundamental for two reasons: The first one is that by promoting the
construction industry in those areas, new large numbers of jobs can be created
(Collier, 2008) while a sense of justice is encouraged. At the same time, If citizens
see concrete benefits and notable improvements in the circumstances of their daily
life, they wont have the need to look for illicit means and sources to secure their
livelihoods (OBrien, 2007) This will allow that a more substantial development
process can take place in the long term.
The second reason is that these projects can be the way of bringing people
together around collective goals, even more if they encourage new ways of
working and shaping relationships. Its construction, planning, design in other
words its process, can be a good and a suitable space to incorporate a
multidisciplinary approach that could include processes or participation (to extend
real democracy), capacity building (to advance human development), community
development (to foster reconciliation in society) and conflict resolution strategies
(to transform cultural behavior patterns) amongst others. In other words, these
projects can be seen as small scale laboratories to bring by practice and to the
ground, what the country is looking to transform by law.

Conclusions

This paper demonstrates why the Construction of Peace in Colombia is a hopeful
and workable approach but that requires complex changes and ongoing efforts. It
is not attached to only one option, one solution or even one person. It cannot be
achieved only from the top but neither from the grassroots levels. It requires the
synergy of multiples efforts, different kinds of power, applied creativity and a clear
direction.
At the individual level, there are some simple but fundamental efforts that need to
be done. They require our willingness and curiosity, to be able to discern the larger
patterns of the conflict, while engaging with the search for individual changes to
influence on the wider society. It was also a call at all levels to move from useless
blame to engage in more positive approaches and deeper understanding of our
situation.
At the institutional level, the effort doesnt seem as simple and it definitely has
complex challenges. Further cross disciplinary thinking is needed to find new ways
of working, not only to maximize the impact of the resources available in the post-
conflict phase, but also for finding a path of how we should develop.
There is an emphasis on bringing justice in the post-conflict phase by directing
most of the efforts and resources in development projects with a developmental
approach in the most marginalized areas touched by the conflict. The focus on
visible projects would allow using their processes of designing and construction to
foster reconciliation and empower these communities, while its product shows a
visible and needed outcome that could encourage peoples wellbeing while at the
same time securing the support of the citizens for the long term transformation.



Bibliography

Azar, E. E. (1990). The management of protracted social conflict: Theory and
cases. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
O'Brien, C. (2007). Integrated community development/conflict resolution strategies
as peace building potentialin South Africa and Northern Ireland.Community
Development Journal, 42(1), 114-130.
Burton, J. W. (1990). Conflict: Resolution and prevention (pp. 202-203). New York:
St. Martin's Press.
Chauhan, V. (2009). Creating spaces: Community development approaches to
building stronger communities.
Collier, P. (2008). The bottom billion. Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and
What Can Be Done.
El Pas, (2013). Debemos reconocer que tocamos fondo. Available at:
http://www.elpais.com.co/elpais/judicial/noticias/debemos-reconocer-tocamos-
fondo-santos-sobre-informe-victimas-conflicto [Accessed 02 March, 2014]
Fisher-Yoshida, B. (2003). Self-awareness and the co-construction of
conflict.Human Systems: The Journal of Systemic Consultation and
Management, 14, 169-182.
Francis, D. (2010). From Pacification to Peacebuilding: a call to Global
transformation. Pluto.
Lederach, J. P. (2003). The Little Book of Conict Transformation.Pennsylvania:
Good Books.
Lederach, J. P. (2004). The moral imagination: The art and soul of building peace.
Oxford University Press.

Reychler, L. (2008). Sustainable peace - building architecture in: Encyclopedia of
violence, peace and conflict. Elsevier Science & Technology, Oxford, United
Kingdom.

Session 6. Conflict Resolve. Online training. [Accessed 10 March, 2014]

SGI, Johan Galtung--Father of Peace Studies. Available at:
http://www.sgiquarterly.org/global2002Jan-1.html [Accessed 26 March, 2014]

Anda mungkin juga menyukai