Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Date: Jeudi 26 Novembre 2015Description: Le Forum de Genshagen se tiendra cette année sur le thème : "Quelle politique de sécurité européenne pour les 20 prochaines années ?". Consulter le programme

Am 30. Oktober 2015 veranstaltete die Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung eine Podiumsdiskussion, die die Spannungen zwischen der Ukraine und Russland sowie das Verhältnis Europas zu Russland in den Mittelpunkt stellte.

Vor dem Hintergrund des 2015 durch die indische Regierung vorgelegten Konzeptes „Smart Cities“ lud die Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung vom 26. bis 30. Oktober acht indische Delegierte zivilgesellschaftlicher Organisationen und Beamte indischer Polizeiverbände nach Bayern ein, um in München, Bamberg und Eichstätt einen Erfahrungsaustausch zum Thema Frauen- und Opferschutz zu führen.

Die Kommunalwahlen vom 25. Oktober 2015 waren ein bedeutender Gradmesser der aktuellen politischen Situation in der Ukraine. Als Zwischenbilanz der Regierung Poroschenko zeigten sie, ob die Prognosen und Analysen richtig lagen und ob sich die relativen Gewichte der politischen Akteure seit der Parlaments- und Präsidentenwahl 2014 verschoben haben.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-wvckdq").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-wvckdq").fadeIn(1000);});});

Michele J. Sison, Deputy Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations, told an IPI audience that as societies attempt to come to terms with a legacy of past abuses, their transitional justice processes must focus on the victims, not just the perpetrators.

Transitional justice should focus on a “victim-centered approach that responds to the needs and perceptions of families, and the needs and perceptions of communities, as opposed to solely punishing perpetrators,” she said.

Ms. Sison highlighted the importance of including civil society from the beginning of the process. “These transitional justice processes must put victims and vulnerable groups at the very center of our strategies,” she said.

She emphasized it was especially important to consult marginalized groups, such as ethnic minorities and youth. “These groups must play an active role in the design and in the implementation of a transitional justice mechanism,” she said.

Ambassador Sison’s remarks opened a panel discussion on “Civil Society and Transitional Justice Processes: How International Actors Can Promote a More Inclusive Approach,” held at IPI October 29th, 2015. High-level panelists discussed how international actors could contribute to processes that ensure justice, accountability and reconciliation.

The event also marked the launch of a new US State Department report, Funding Transitional Justice: A Guide for Supporting Civil Society Engagement. The report is designed to offer guidance on how donors may better integrate civil society into their transitional justice funding strategies.

María Emma Mejía Vélez, Permanent Representative of Colombia to the UN, brought a first-hand perspective on transitional justice to the panel.

Colombia has been embroiled in civil war for six decades. The government and the guerrilla group Fuerzas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) began a peace process in October 2012, and the negotiations yielded an agreement this September.

The resulting innovative transitional justice framework, Sistema Integral de Verdad, Justicia, Reparación y No Repetición (Cohesive System of Truth, Justice, Reparation and No Repetition), was unveiled in Havana, along with a timeline to finalize negotiations by March 23rd, 2016.

In a show of good faith, FARC promised to disarm and demobilize within 60 days of signing the agreement.

Ms. Mejía said Colombia’s transitional justice framework “aims to get the maximum possible satisfaction for the victim’s rights.”

She said the framework would achieve this through four key pillars: a truth commission, a special jurisdiction for peace, a special unit for persons who have “disappeared,” and administrative measures for reparation.

The Ambassador added that Colombia aimed to fulfill all of its international commitments in the peace process, the first to be held since the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC), entered into force in 2002.

On the negotiations, she said it would be “easy to say, ‘It’s over with,’ peace, and take the photos,” after they conclude.

Instead, she implored the audience to remember that achieving an agreement is only a first step. “The work will begin March 23rd,” she said. “It’s not the end, it’s just the beginning of a society that has not been reconciled to find out how we will be able to live together, those who have been confronted for so many long decades.”

Geir O. Pedersen, Permanent Representative of Norway to the UN, addressed the importance of civil society for justice, accountability, and reconciliation. “It is doubtful that any transitional justice institution has ever been successful without engaging civil society,” he said.

Mr. Pedersen emphasized three elements of transitional justice—jobs, security and justice—that can make possible democratization, sustainable development and peacebuilding. “It is a no-brainer,” he said. “We need both the state and civil society if we are to be successful in working on these issues.”

Habib Nassar, Executive Director of the Global Network for Public Interest Law (PILnet), spoke to his experience in civil society advocacy in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region.

Mr. Nassar lamented “the growing role of the international and a standardization of the field” of transitional justice. This has “led to a situation in which the local actors are no longer in control of the design of their own processes,” he said.

He outlined the consequences for justice processes when international actors disproportionately influence them. “Transitional justice is becoming the province of technocrats, bureaucrats, and then, the technical is privileged over the political, the general over particular, international over local.”

Homogeneous approaches to transitional justice “cannot accommodate local complexities,” Mr. Nassar said. “The standardized policies and mechanisms generate a rigidity that really paralyzes local creativity. We come and present really fancy nice models, and people are automatically paralyzed because they think that this is the only way to do it.” This is particularly troublesome in the MENA region, where such innovation is desperately needed, he said.

Pablo de Greiff, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, placed the development of transitional justice in its historical context.

Early transitional justice processes began in the 1980s in highly institutionalized countries like Argentina, Chile, Czechoslovakia, and South Africa. “When you leave that set of countries behind and start thinking about the fate of transitional justice in countries like Sierra Leone, Liberia, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, and some of places which now are potential subjects of transitional justice, to some extent it should not be surprising that results are more ambiguous, and challenges significantly higher,” he said.

Contemporary transitional justice processes are unfolding in countries where there has been war, not just authoritarian governance. Today’s victims do not experience “violations that come about from the abusive exercise of state power—they are the violations that come about through something that looks more like social chaos,” he said. “Because violations are different, the means by which they ought to be redressed, one would think, also ought to be different.”

Local conditions matter, Mr. de Greiff stressed. “We need to think much more about how to make transitional justice measures more context-sensitive, while at the same time satisfying and respecting the universalistic commitment from which they come about,” he said.

The Special Rapporteur closed the panel by sharing a disheartening realization he reached while preparing recent reports for the UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council. “Strictly speaking, the violations that we are talking about cannot be repaired,” he said. “We do lots of things to mitigate their consequences, but nobody brings back the dead, nobody is un-raped, nobody is free after spending 7 years in prison, those years are gone. So instead of focusing so much attention on correction and redress, we ought to be spending much more time on prevention.”

The panel was co-hosted by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) at the US Department of State, and Public Action Research.
Warren Hoge, IPI Senior Adviser for External Relations, moderated the conversation.

Related Coverage:
Funding Transitional Justice (Public Action Research, 2015)
Remarks on the Launch of “Funding Transitional Justice: A Guide for Supporting Civil Society Engagement” (US Mission, October 29, 2015)

Watch event:

Die Außenminister der USA, Russlands, Saudi-Arabiens und der Türkei treffen sich am 29.10.2015...

„Fue milagro!” – wie “ein Wunder“ gestaltete sich der Wahlabend am 25. Oktober 2015 in Argentinien. Die Wahllokale schlossen um 18 Uhr. Die ersten offiziellen Ergebnisse sollten um 23 Uhr verkündet werden.

Le 92e séminaire IHEDN-Jeunes de l’Institut des hautes études de défense nationale (IHEDN) s’est déroulé, du lundi 19 octobre au samedi 24 octobre, ...

en lire plus

Date: Mercredi 09 Mars 2016Résumé: Angèle Malâtre-Lansac, directrice adjointe de l'Institut Montaigne sera dans l'émission 28 Minutes sur Arte à 20h05.

Seit drei Wochen bombardiert Russland nun Rebellenstellungen in Syrien. Die Angriffe treiben noch...

On October 27th, IPI together with the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) cohosted a women, peace, and security event focusing on the effective inclusion of women peacebuilders in mediation efforts.

Click here to view the event video on YouTube>>

Entrenched conflicts around the world demonstrate that traditional approaches to peace negotiations are not working. Today’s conflicts tend to involve numerous nonstate actors and play out at local, national, and transnational levels. Many civilians are affected by violence, displacement, and lack of economic opportunity; meanwhile, too many traditional mediation efforts fail. A growing body of research shows that the inclusion of a range of actors—especially pro-peace and nonviolent women’s groups—can generate political will and increase the chance of reaching a sustainable agreement. While inclusivity is not a panacea, its positive impact is evident in numerous peace processes.

ICAN presented the Better Peace Tool, the culmination of an extended consultative process with a full range of stakeholders active in peace mediation. A panel of mediators and mediation advisers reflected on this approach, discussing practical tools to overcome obstacles to inclusivity as they arise in practice. They also considered the negative outcomes for peace when exclusion wins the day—drawing on their experiences in Mali, Sudan, Syria, and elsewhere.

Speakers:
Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, Co-Founder, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN) & Member of the UN Standby Team of Senior Mediation Advisers (2011-2012)
Mobina Jaffer, Canadian Senator & Former Canadian Special Envoy to the Peace Process in Sudan
Arthur Boutellis, Director of the Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute
Tom Crick, Associate Director of the Conflict Resolution Program, The Carter Center
Visaka Dharmadasa, Founder and Chair of the Association of War Affected Women, Sri Lanka

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Geir O. Pedersen, Permanent Representative of Norway to the United Nations

Moderator:
Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, Senior Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute

 

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-bcbnjh").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-bcbnjh").fadeIn(1000);});});

A policy forum was held at IPI on October 27th on humanitarian assistance in times of conflict. Dr. Abdullah Al Rabeeah, Supervisor General for the King Salman Humanitarian and Relief Center, briefed the audience on the work of the center in providing relief aid to Yemen and the region.

The center was founded in May 2015 with the mission of managing and coordinating Saudi Arabia’s external humanitarian relief and development assistance.

“The food security program has been the most active with the health program,” Dr. Rabeeah said. “We’ve been delivering aid within Yemen, in the borders, and those in need in Djibouti.”

“Our center is impartial. We’ve not been involved in the politics or military actions,” he noted. “We have moved our help to cities irrespective of who controls those cities… In five months, our center has been able to provide thirteen food programs, reaching more than five million beneficiaries.”

Moderating the event was Hardeep Singh Puri, Vice President of IPI, who shared with the audience the four guiding principles of humanitarian action: humanity, which drives all humanitarian action to prevent and alleviate human suffering; neutrality, which requires humanitarian organizations to abstain from taking sides; impartiality, which guides humanitarian action to administer relief based on need without discrimination; and respect for independence.

“It is critical to understand and respect the work of NGOs in a conflict situation,” said Rabih Torbay, Senior Vice President of International Operations with the International Medical Corps. “As a non-governmental organization, we have to be impartial in our delivery of services. We cannot politicize who receives aid—everybody in need should receive aid.”

“The aid should be given based on need,” he added. “Not based on tribal, ethnic or religious affiliation, and we need to keep the humanity at the center of everything we do.”

Highlighting the difficulties of working in a conflict situation, Amir Mahmoud Abdulla, Deputy Executive Director of the World Food Programme, commended the work of humanitarian workers on the ground.

“Our colleagues on the ground in Yemen deserve a huge amount of respect and gratitude. We all have to acknowledge that they put themselves in harm’s way to deliver [the aid] and the need for ensuring their protection must be paramount,” he said.

Watch event:

 

Bonn, 26.10.2015. An diesem Wochenende vor 70 Jahren trat die Charta der Vereinten Nationen (UN) in Kraft. Die Welt leuchtete zur Feier des Jubiläums im satten UN-Blau – von den Pyramiden in Gizeh über den Reichstag in Berlin zum brasilianischen Christo Redentor und dem Tafelberg in Südafrika – ein starkes Bekenntnis zur Weltorganisation. Besteht denn überhaupt ein Anlass zum Feiern? Die Weltlage ist bedrückend. Der Krieg in Syrien geht bald ins sechste Jahr. Ein Großteil des Nahen Ostens und Nordafrikas wird von Krisen und Konflikt geschüttelt; die Ukrainekrise wirft ihre Schatten auf Europa. Fragile Staaten sind in einer Spirale aus Gewalt und Armut gefangen. Insgesamt sind weltweit 59,5 Mio. Menschen auf der Flucht. Das Artensterben schreitet in einer bedrückenden Geschwindigkeit fort. Es leiden immer noch Menschen unter Hunger und werden ihrer Entwicklungschancen beraubt. Ist die UN, die für das Versprechen steht, Lehren aus den zwei Weltkriegen zu ziehen, den Weltfrieden zu wahren und Fortschritt und Lebensstandards in größerer Freiheit zu fördern, also gescheitert? Viele, viele Male. In aktuellen wie vergangenen Krisen spielt die UN aus den unterschiedlichsten Gründen nicht die Rolle, die sie spielen sollte: Sie wird umgangen, die Mitgliedsstaaten stellen ihr nicht genügend Ressourcen oder Autorität zur Verfügung, oder die UN selbst verzettelt sich in bürokratischen Eigeninteressen. Das beschämt die Welt, nicht nur die UN, denn die UN ist letzen Endes eben keine Weltregierung sondern bietet den Regierungen der Welt ein Forum. Was also hat die UN nach 70 Jahren vorzuzeigen? Der ehemalige UN-Generalsekretär Hammarskjöld sagte einmal, die UN sei gegründet worden nicht um die Menschheit in den Himmel zu bringen, sondern um uns vor der Hölle zu bewahren. Gemessen an diesem nicht trivialen Maßstab kann die UN viele Erfolge verbuchen, zum Beispiel: Ein Atomkrieg ist der Welt bislang erspart geblieben. Dank UN-Vermittlung, Streitbeilegung oder Blauhelm-Intervention wurden vielfältige Konflikte in den letzten Jahrzehnten verhindert oder beigelegt. Die Pocken wurden ausgerottet, Landstriche von Minen gesäubert. Unser Verständnis von Entwicklung hat sich gewandelt – es geht nicht mehr ausschließlich um wirtschaftliche Entwicklung sondern darum, die Freiheiten der Menschen, ihr Leben selbstbestimmt zu leben, zu erweitern – innerhalb der Grenzen des Erdsystems. Viele Kolonien in Asien und Afrika gewannen die Unabhängigkeit und traten der Staatengemeinschaft bei. Die internationale Rechtsordnung, also die Idee internationaler regelbasierter Kooperation, hat sich verfestigt. Auch wenn Menschenrechte vielerorts immer noch unter Druck stehen, haben sie einen globalen Siegeszug angetreten. Bei humanitären Katastrophen reagiert die UN meist als Erste und bleiben, wenn andere aus Sicherheitsgründen schon gegangen sind. UN-Organisationen gehen dorthin, wo andere nicht hingehen können oder wollen. Mindestens genauso wichtig ist aber die Tatsache, dass die UN mit dem Gewaltverbot, der Idee einer regelbasierten Zusammenarbeit und der Verankerung der Menschenrechten eine zivilisatorische Errungenschaft darstellt, die es gerade in den heutigen Zeiten zu bewahren und stärken gilt. Das Kräfteverhältnis im internationalen System verschiebt sich. Die bislang von den westlichen Industriestaaten dominierte und uns privilegierende Weltordnung steht unter Druck und muss sich den Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländern öffnen. Gleichzeitig zeichnen sich immer stärkere globale Interdependenzen ab, die erfordern, dass alle Staaten dieser Welt gemeinsam Herausforderungen wie den Klimawandel, oder globale nachhaltige Entwicklung bearbeiten. Die Welt hängt in einem nie dagewesenen Maße zusammen – wie die 2030 Agenda für nachhaltige Entwicklung anerkennt. 70 Jahre nach ihrer Gründung braucht die Welt mehr denn je eine starke UN, die für das globale Gemeinwohl eintritt. Viele Entscheidungsträger, die die Wahrzeichen ihrer Länder dieses Wochenende UN-Blau haben beleuchten lassen, stimmen diesem Satz zu. Sie wenden aber gleich darauf ein, dass die UN in ihrem derzeitigen Zustand nicht in der Lage sei, eine Antwort auf die riesigen globalen Herausforderungen und den Bedarf an Global Governance zu liefern. Sie fordern zunächst eine umfassende Reform. Obwohl diese Diagnose an sich nicht falsch ist, muss der erste Schritt ein anderer sein: Die Mitgliedstaaten müssen den Multilateralismus und damit auch die Vereinten Nationen wieder ernst nehmen. Sie müssen sich in die Mühen der Ebene der multilateralen Verhandlungen begeben und bereit sein, ihre oft allzu kurzfristig verstandenen nationalen Interessen im Interesse des globalen Allgemeinwohls auf den Prüfstand zu stellen. Nur so kann der Grundstein gelegt werden für Reformen, die die UN zu einer Organisation machen, die sowohl den Bedürfnissen einzelner Staaten als auch denen einer miteinander verwobenen und voneinander abhängigen Welt besser gerecht wird. Ein erster Gradmesser dafür kann ein ambitioniertes und gerechtes Klimaabkommen im Dezember sein.

Cinq mois après avoir élu Andrzej Duda (PiS) à la présidence de la République le 24 mai dernier (avec 51,55% des suffrages), le parti Droit et justice (PiS) s'est largement imposé aux élections parlementaires qui se sont déroulées en Pologne le 25 octobre. Il a obtenu la majorité absolue...

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-axjqvx").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-axjqvx").fadeIn(1000);});});

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told an IPI audience that a series of reviews undertaken to mark the UN’s 70th anniversary had revealed that efforts to bring better governance to the world were falling behind evolving threats to political and social stability.

The reviews “all share a sense that global governance is not keeping pace with the challenges of a more complex and interconnected world,” the Secretary-General said. “We need to tune all of our institutions to the times – times in which even the most local problems have a global dimension.”

Referring to three of the reviews—on peacebuilding, peace operations, and women, peace and security— he said, “A common narrative is emerging – one that recognizes that failure to more effectively prevent and address interconnected problems such as conflict or inequality or climate stress will have severe and costly consequences across all dimensions of our work.”

The Secretary-General cited the widely hailed Sustainable Development Agenda adopted in September, as outlining a crucial framework to work towards resolving these interconnected problems over the next 15 years. He expressed his hope that a universal climate accord will join the SDGs as part of that framework, following the UN’s climate conference, COP21, in Paris, this December.

The Secretary-General’s remarks kicked off a high-level panel discussion on “The Future of Global Governance: A Commitment to Action,” appropriately held at IPI on October 23rd 2015, to mark United Nations Day.

Taken together, the three peace & security reviews and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) make clear four priorities for the international community to “take a people-centered, planet-friendly approach,” to the challenges of the global era, the Secretary-General said.

First, under “resilience,” he emphasized the SDGs’ promise to “leave no one behind.” He called for a greater focus on prevention to make possible the future that the SDGs envision. “This will not happen by solely fighting fires, when evidence shows that they could have been prevented had we acted and invested early,” he said.

The second theme he identified was “strengthening partnerships.”

“The various reviews uniformly recognize that implementing ambitious goals cannot be done by the UN system alone—or by member states alone,” he said. “Achieving a peaceful, sustainable future is a collective effort, starting now.”

On the third theme, “getting the financing right,” he called for more resources, more flexibility in the use of funds, and a greater share of public and private funding to meet shortfalls. “For the UN, the need is for better interconnection and sequencing of financing requests,” he said.

The final theme he identified was the critical need for greater participation of women and girls. “Excluding women from employment opportunities hinders sustainable development and economic growth,” he said. “Excluding women from peace processes hinders peace.  Excluding girls from schools holds societies back.”

Gender equality, he said, is a universal goal, and will have a range of benefits. “We need an all-of-society-approach that fully and equally incorporates the contributions of women in every aspect of our work,” he said. “The reviews rightly prioritize gender mainstreaming and the role of women as central to success.”

Mogens Lykketoft, President of the UN General Assembly, called for reflection on what the reviews tell us about the UN for the future. He listed questions for the members to consider, like how the UN might address intractable conflicts like the Syrian crisis, asymmetric warfare, and the very divides within the UN and among its members that paralyze action. “This is the type of conversation I want to advance during my Presidency,” he declared.

Yannick Glemarec, Deputy Executive Director of UN Women, elaborated on the shared conclusion of the three peace and security reviews that women’s engagement is critically important to sustaining peace. “We have now a huge body of evidence that shows that women’s engagement in peace and security will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of humanitarian assistance, will increase the success of negotiation efforts, will accelerate the economic revitalization, and will dramatically reduce the likelihood of relapse into violence.”

Mr. Glemarec, an Assistant Secretary-General, also quantified the impact women have on peace processes with statistics from the Global Study on the Implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325. “Women’s engagement in peace and security increases the likelihood that peace will be sustained by 20% over a period of two years, and 35% over a period of 15 years,” he said.

Sarah Cliffe, Director of New York University’s Center on International Cooperation, talked about Sustainable Development Goal 16, which says that peaceful and inclusive societies, with accountable justice institutions, are central to achieving sustainable peace.

Leaving a less violent world for future generations is a desire shared worldwide, she said. “Goal 16 shows that the preoccupation with preventing violence and achieving peace is really a common preoccupation across all societies, not only the most vulnerable.”

To prevent the lapse and relapse into conflict, the UN will need better cooperation between its peace and security organs, and those focused on development, she said.

A priority of Goal 16 is institution-building, and she provided an illustrative example of the myriad of actors involved in giving a person legal identity.

To register just one person, cooperation in the development system means “engaging with new government partners, like ministries of justice and interior, with national planning and civil registration and statistical systems, with hospitals, with birth registration systems, with schools, with immigration, policing, efforts to recognize different forms of documentation.”

In conclusion, IPI Senior Adviser Youssef Mahmoud recalled the title of the High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operation’s report, “Uniting our Strengths for Peace: Politics, Partnerships and People.”

He outlined three practical ways we can move closer to a more peaceful future. “The first is communication, that enhancing the participation of people is not challenging the credibility or legitimacy of governments, on the contrary, people are partners,” he said.

“Secondly, we need to create fora that are safe and protected for people to voice without fear their view,” he said. “Three, we need to involve people in analyzing the problem and determining the solution. If we don’t understand the views of those we are supposed to serve how can we aspire to do anything sustainable?”

Ambassador Terje Rod-Larsen, President of the International Peace Institute, moderated the conversation.

Watch event:

La Fondation pour l’innovation politique souhaite relayer le prochain Petit-déjeuner de la science et de l’innovation, coorganisé par l’Association française pour l’avancement des sciences, l’Association des anciens et amis du CNRS et la Société d’encouragement pour l’industrie nationale. Il aura lieu le jeudi 26 novembre 2015 de 8h30 à 10h à l’Hôtel de l’Industrie, 4 place Saint-Germain-des-Prés, Paris 6e.

Cet article 26/11/15 : Petit-déjeuner de la science et de l’innovation sur le thème : « Le changement climatique : quels remèdes ? » est apparu en premier sur Fondapol.