3P Moves to the Alliance for Peacebuilding

We are delighted to announce that, as of July, 3P Human Security has moved from Eastern Mennonite University to become a program of the Alliance for Peacebuilding, in Washington DC.

3P Human Security grew out of initial responses to 9/11 at Eastern Mennonite University by faculty, staff and students around the world who wanted to bring the insights of conflict analysis and peacebuilding to the world of security policymaking.

As our program has grown, we have partnered with a wide range of think tanks and organizations in Washington, DC - and the Alliance for Peacebuilding (AfP) has been our closest partner in reaching out to the U.S. government to offer a peacebuilding point of view on current security challenges.

We look forward to working closely with the AfP team to continue our research, educational programs, multi-stakeholder roundtable dialogues, and outreach efforts in Washington. This move enables 3P to work more organically with a larger community of peacebuilding organizations, and helps strengthen the bridges we are trying to build between civil society voices and the policy making process in Washington, and around the world. We look forward to building on our past work together, and to creating new, dynamic programs in the future! 

Warm Regards,

Lisa Schirch, 3P Human Security Director

Melanie Greenberg, Alliance for Peacebuilding President

Making Development more Effective in Conflict-Affected Countries

The New Deal:

3P and the Alliance for Peacebuilding are working with international coalitions to help ensure countries implement reforms in international development aid strategies based on the New Deal for Engagementin Fragile States. In the U.S., 3P and AfP helped form a new Subgroup on Conflict-Affected and Fragile States, part of InterAction's larger Aid Effectiveness Working Group operating since 2009. The Subgroup brings together U.S.-based civil society experts on the peacebuilding-development nexus to advise USAID as it seeks to implement changes in the way it approaches development in conflict-affected contexts, including one of the New Deal 'pilot projects' launched by Liberia, the U.S., and Sweden. 3P and AfP helped convene several meetings and dialogue for the Subgroup this summer to advance the development effectiveness agenda.

The role of global civil society:

Internationally, global civil society stakeholders on this issue organized themselves into a 'Core Group' of Southern and Northern peacebuilding practitioner and policy organizations to relate with the official inter-governmental body of donor and host nations implementing the New Deal, called the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding (IDPS). 3P and AfP are active members of the civil society Core Group, working hard to make sure governments implement the peacebuilding approaches mandated by the New Deal in an inclusive way that empowers conflict-affected societies to chart their own course out of fragility.

The post-2015 development agenda:

We are also working to make peacebuilding principles part of the foundation of the new global development agenda that will replace the Millenium Development Goals when they expire in 2015. 3P and AfP are currently participating in the international Core Group's effort to draft position papers and plan outreach events aimed at increasing the political momentum for peacebuilding principles to be featured in the post-2015 framework.

3P Offers Workshop for Cote d'Ivoire Delegation

In August, 3P Program Manager John Filson welcomed a judge, an artist, a civil society activist, and a journalist from Cote d'Ivoire who were visiting the United States to learn more about U.S. perspectives on and approaches to conflict resolution and reconciliation, both in international affairs and also in grassroots communities in the U.S. The Institute of International Education through the State Department's International Visitors Leadership Program hosted the delegation.

John offered a seminar for the delegates about the theories of change that guide 3P's policy work in Washington bringing the voices and analyses of local civil society stakeholders in settings of conflict around the world into the U.S. policy-making system. John also discussed some of the ways the perspectives on peacebuilding and human security of U.S. non-governmental actors differ from the models and approaches to prevention and security used by U.S. government agencies. The delegates shared their own perspectives on the nature and methods of peacebuilding in Cote d'Ivoire and the West African region, and how they relate to Western paradigms. 

New Report Comparing Human Security Paradigms

Human Security Roundtable

In May, 2012, 3P co-sponsored a special roundtable meeting that brought together senior representatives from the United Nations, the World Bank, the European Union, the US Department of State, USAID, Defense Department, NGOs, academics, and grantmakers to discuss the various ways these institutions are defining and operationalizing concepts like Human Security, Protection of Civilians, Citizen Security, and others.

3P Director Lisa Schirch compiled a new report based on the May meeting titled, “From Protection of Civilians to Human Security: Comparing and Contrasting Principles, Distinctions, and Institutionalization.” The report summarizes how key institutions and experts are defining and operationalizing these concepts to identify important distinctions in how they are understood and used. Interpretations and expectations of roles these various institutions play are in conflict in some cases. By describing and mapping institutional approaches and definitions, the report aims to provide information that will enable enable problem‐solving and further dialogue to clarify and
reduce tensions between approaches.

The report is structured as follows:

1. Summary Points of Agreement and Difference

2. Description of Key Principles

3. Comparing Institutional Principles

4. Institutional Responses to “Protection of Civilians”–UN, US agencies, NGOs

5. Institutional Responses to “Civilian Security” – US State Department

6. Institutional Responses to “Citizen Security” – World Bank

7. Institutional Responses to “Human Security” – UN, European Union, GPPAC

8. Participants in the Human Security Roundtable and Speaker bios

To read the full report, please click here

3P plans to continue facilitating this important dialogue and widen the circle of stakeholders. Participants may convene for a second roundtable later in the Fall to follow-up on issues raised and deepen the discussion.

CSO Delegation to DC: Pakistani Peacebuilding Approaches

 Pakistani Delegation: 
Culturally-Based Approaches to Peacebuilding
Pakistani civil society is developing a range of innovative approaches to address extremism and conflict in their country to better foster peace. Drawing on local cultural and religious traditions, civil society finds positive ways of building support for peace and human rights. US policy can learn from these indigenous interventions to be more effective at supporting peace in the region.

3P invited and hosted a Pakistani delegation to share their culturally-based approaches to peacebuilding in Pakistan.  Ali Gohar, a former Fulbright fellow at Eastern Mennonite University, shared from his article, linked here, on how jirga processes are evolving in Afghanistan and Pakistan, highlighting their role in restorative justice and conflict transformation.

Filmmaker, anthropologist and human rights advocate Samar Minallah shared how she uses films portraying positive leadership and elements of tribal culture that support women's and girls' empowerment. Click here to watch her video Allaho, widely watched throughout Pakistan and Afghanistan's tribal areas on mobile phones to highlight the value of girls and girl education.

3P published two policy briefs to coincide with the Pakistani delegation visits:
Culturally-based Approaches to Peacebuilding in Pakistan
Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Drone Strikes

Event: Aid Effectiveness in Fragile States

May 10, 2012

Development Effectiveness in Conflict-Affected Countries – 

A Look at the New Deal and the Future of the Millennium Development Goals

Last year in Busan, Republic of Korea, 35 major donor and host country governments, including the United States, endorsed the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States in order to make development aid more effective in “Conflict-Affected and Fragile States” (CAFS). It elevates local priorities in international aid systems and calls for more inclusive relations between country governments and civil society so local people can chart their own course out of violence and poverty. It also adds an important conflict lens to the future framework that will eventually replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) after 2015, as most “fragile states” have yet to reach a single MDG.  

The New Deal calls upon donor and host nations to change the way they manage bilateral and multi-lateral aid and development strategies in a way that builds greater mutual trust, allows genuine country ownership and leadership, and is built on "legitimate" inclusive politics and government-civil society relations in the host country that emphasizes the security of citizens and access to justice so societies can chart their own path out of conflict and fragility.

(From Left to Right): John Filson, 3P Human Security Program Manager; Neil Levine, Director of USAID Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation; Dayna Brown, Director of the Listening Project at CDA Collaborative Learning Projects; Andrew Tomlinson, Director and Representative at the Quaker U.N. Office in New York.

Such principles are not new. What is new about the New Deal is the level of political will behind the calls for reform that give these ideals much more traction than in in the past. They have already resulted in tangible changes underway in donor and host country aid systems. Another novel development is the degree of collaboration and coordination among g7+ (fragile state) governments, who have joined together as a major collective force to make the New Deal a reality. 

More than 70 Alliance for Peacebuilding (AfP) members participated in this panel discussion as part of AfP's Annual Conference.

Neil Levine, the Director of USAID's Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation and one of the leaders of U.S. efforts to implement New Deal principles, spoke about concrete changes the United States has made since Busan, including the April 21st announcement of a strategic partnership with Liberia and Sweden as a pilot project to implement New Deal principles. Dayna Brown, the Director of the Listening Project at CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, discussed the significance of the New Deal from a civil society point of view, noting important changes the peacebuilding and development communities have been advocating for for a long time. Finally, Andrew Tomlinson, the Director and Representative at the Quaker United Nations Office of New York placed the New Deal in the context of international conventions on development and the post-2015 framework that will come after the Millennium Development Goals, and pointed to key concerns that will need to be addressed by the international community if the New Deal is to play a truly pivotal role in the long-term. 3P's Program Manager John Filson Moderated the discussion.

Peacebuilding practitioners and scholars, members of the Alliance for Peacebuilding (AfP) at the 2012 AfP Annual Conference May 10 - 12 in Washington, DC

Neil Levine, Director of the Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation at USAID

Event: CPRF Human Security in Practice

May  8, 2012

This month's Conflict Prevention & Resolution Forum (CPRF) organized by Search for Common Ground (SFCG) and 3P took place on May 8th at Johns Hopkins SAIS.  The forum addressed the evolving concepts of human security, civilian protection, community safety, and citizen security which are taking shape in various contexts.

(L to R): Lisa Schirch, Director, 3P Human Security; Ambassador Takasu, Special Advisor on Human Security to the UN Secretary General; Mary Kaldor, Director Civil Society & Human Security Research Unit at the London School of Economics; Sean McFate, Asst. Professor, Department of International Security Studies at the National Defense University; William Tsuma, Program Manager for Preventive Action and Human Security, GPPAC.

Panelists described how the United Nations, the U.S. government and civil society organizations (CSOs) are operationalizing "human security" and related terms in their work and structures. The panel also discussed various terminologies emerging from each context and examined the similarities and differences between approaches. 

 This event is a part of the Conflict Prevention and Resolution Forum (CPRF) series.


Speakers:
Ambassador Yukio Takasu
Special Adviser on Human Security to the United Nations Secretary-General

Mary Kaldor, London School of Economics

Mary Kaldor
Director, Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit at the London School of Economics

Sean McFate
Assistant Professor, Department of International Security Studies at the National Defense University

William Tsuma
Program Manager, Preventive Action and Human Security at the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC)

Moderator:
Lisa Schirch
Director, 3P Human Security
 

William Tsuma, GPPAC

High-Level Roundtable on Human Security 

An afternoon rountable discussion was hosted by the Connect U.S. Fund and co-sponsored by 3P Human Security, the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC), the Alliance for Peacebuilding (AfP), and the Prevention and Protection Working Group (PPWG).  The discussion featured panelists from the morning event as well as  representatives from the State Department, CIVIC Worldwide and the World Bank. The high level meeting provided an opportunity for representatives from diverse sectors to see how other institutions are operationalizing human security frameworks, in some cases for the first time. 3P will publish a report later this summer based on the outcomes of this conversation, laying out the different conceptions being used by different parts of the U.S. government, inter-governmental institutions like the U.N. and World Bank, and international civil society organizations.

 

(Left to right): Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), Nancy Jackson; U.N. Secretary General Special Adviser on Human Security, Ambassador Yukio Takasu; GPPAC Program Manager for Preventive Action and Human Security, William Tsuma

Event: Afghanistan's National Solidarity Program

Afghanistan's National Solidarity Program:
Lessons Learned on NGOs and Government Partnerships in Development

 May 9, 2012

2:30 to 4:00pm

InterAction

 1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 210

Washington, DC 20036

 Speakers:

Clare Lockhart, Institute for State Effectiveness

Karim Merchant, former National Solidarity Program Operational Director

Topic: The National Solidarity Program provides a model for coordinating and aligning efforts of the Afghan government, international assistance, international NGOs, Afghan civil society organizations and local Afghan communities in governance and development. In light of the upcoming Tokyo Conference on International Assistance in Afghanistan in July, as well as broader discussions about Aid Effectiveness in Washington and through the Busan Process, this discussion will examine lessons learned about how to coordinate diverse stakeholders to support both governance and development.

RSVP: Lisa Schirch, 3P Human Security at schirchl@emu.edu

Co-sponsored by the Institute for State Effectiveness, 3P Human Security and InterAction

"Whole of Government" Meets "Whole of Society"

April 30, 2012

Where does "Whole of Government" meet "Whole of Society"?

Challenges in Afghanistan and Iraq, Somalia and Colombia lead top US military and political leaders to call for a "whole of government" approach to security including strengthened civilian capacities and civil-military cooperation. But civil society perspectives on what is driving and mitigating conflict are often left out of important policy discussions. A "whole of society" approach would include the interests and perspectives of diverse and independent sectors of civil society.

3P Human Security regularly teaches at West Point Military Academy, Quantico Marine Center, US Army War College and elsewhere to train military personnel on how to relate to an independent civil society that can best contribute to long-term human security when not forced or pressured to integrate with short-term national interests or counterinsurgency plans.In a new US army book Conflict Management and Whole of Government, 3P's chapter From Whole of Government to Whole of Society takes a look at how to walk the line of communicating with governments and military forces while maintaining independence to ensure civil society safety and access in challenging conflict-affected regions.