Mitigating the Consequences of Violent Conflict: What Works and What Does Not?

Mitigating the Consequences of
Violent Conflict: What Works
and What Does Not?

O C TO B E R 2 0 1 2

The purpose of the second International Expert Forum, “Mitigating the
Consequences of Violent Conflict: What Works and What Does Not?,” which was
held at IPI on June 6, 2012, was to take stock of the consequences of ongoing
violent conflict and means to prevent and reduce them, including peacekeeping
operations and special envoys. The ambition was to identify patterns and
formulate lessons learned and policy implications in the short, medium, and long
term. The forum was divided into three sessions: mapping the trends and causes
of violence against civilians; mapping the challenges and impact of peacekeeping
This meeting note was drafted by operations; and mapping the challenges and impact of special envoys.
Robert Muggah, principal at the
SecDev Group and research director Introduction
at the Igarape Institute, and Birger
Heldt, director of research at the Identification of the causes and consequences of violence against civilians in
Folke Bernadotte Academy. It war, post-war, and non-war settings is a growing global preoccupation across
reflects the rapporteurs' interpreta- advocacy, policy, and research communities. Scholars from the public health
tion of the discussion and does not and social sciences are mobilizing a range of technologies to bear witness to
necessarily reflect the view of all the consequences of armed conflict—from passive surveillance and household
participants. surveys to crowdsourcing and satellite mapping. These and other efforts are
The International Expert Forum was beginning to give a clearer picture of the extent of human suffering in the
originally launched at IPI in New midst of chronic violence. Moreover, a chorus of actors spanning the security
York on December 15, 2011. It is a and development sectors—within and outside the United Nations—is calling
joint collaboration of the Folke for a more concerted focus on the protection of civilians.
Bernadotte Academy, IPI, the The introductory session of the second International Expert Forum was
SecDev Group, and the Social opened by Susana Malcorra, chef de cabinet, of the Executive Office of the UN
Science Research Council (SSRC). Secretary-General. She drew attention to the critical, if changing, role of the
The second International Expert UN in preventing and reducing organized violence in armed conflicts and
Forum was held at IPI on June 6, post-conflict settings. The UN lends moral consciousness and leverages wide-
2012. ranging experience in this regard; it has important convening powers; it has
capacities to exercise its Good Offices; and it has a long experience obtained
from setbacks and successes. It is also working with increasing coherence and
coordination. Its comparative advantages include its legitimacy in contested
spaces but also the wide range of agencies and instruments at its disposal from
peacekeepers and peacebuilders to human rights, humanitarian, and develop-
ment experts.
The opening presentation emphasized the importance of putting national
priorities and capacities first. The UN is attempting to rebalance the ways in
which national and local capabilities and ownership are supported. The
organization acknowledges the importance of reconstituting the social
contract binding states and their citizens but also the centrality of host govern-
ments and societies in organizing and managing the process. With over sixty

2 MITIGATING THE CONSEQUENCES OF VIOLENT CONFLICT

years of experience working on issues of interna- communities.
tional and internal armed conflict, the UN has • Harness knowledge and expertise of returning
acquired a series of insights into how these diasporas, make sure they see their role in an
objectives can be achieved. These include the need emerging country.
to do the following:
• Expand and solidify regional relationships and
• Adopt multiple perspectives or lenses when partnerships. There is a need to strengthen or
reading conflicts since there are many "truths" in create regional coordination mechanisms; trust
determining their causes and consequences. in the region is important, and sometimes lack of
• Privilege local ownership of the recovery agenda. trust is an important source of conflict to begin
The UN should not want peace more than the with. Moreover, regional cooperation can assist in
actors themselves, and the UN needs to successfully dealing with joint issues such as
understand that local agents have the best infrastructure, environmental issues, etc.
information. • Promote the empowerment of women and
• Achieve a balance between attaining rapid protection from discrimination. Organized
stability and security and addressing underlying sexual violence is sometimes a tactic of war, but
causes. If security is elevated over justice, then few peace accords make a reference to it. We have
reconciliation may prove more difficult and a long way to go in this regard. Moreover, we need
security gains more fragile; meanwhile, processes to improve employment opportunities for
to combat inpunity can generate instability. women.
• Promote inclusive politics. Constitution-building The ensuing discussion ventured into areas such
and institutional support are crucial for opening as coordination, data gathering, emerging threats
up countries’ political space. and obstacles, and how the UN is assisting nations
• Avoid looking at countries with a foreign in transitions. For instance, while the UN has taken
mindset. Institution-building processes need to steps to enhance its capacity to deploy civilians, a
be adopted to local conditions and cultures; major gap continues to be the UN’s capacity to
institutions cannot be built in a couple of years. recruit, train, deploy, and manage civilian special-
ists. Even more important, states affected by
• Combine disarmament, demobilization, and
chronic organized violence lack core capacities.
reintegration (DDR) processes with reconcilia-
There is a large need to build local civilian capacity
tion (R) processes.
to address the needs of societies in transition. More
• Make security services the right size, and improve positively, there is some evidence of regional
accountability. Security sector governance and entities and south-south alliances beginning to fill
DDR must take place in the context of local the gaps, though much more investment is needed
ownership, as it lays the foundation for a new in this regard. The example of IGAD’s work in
social contract. The UN is well positioned to South Sudan was cited as a positive case. Timor-
carry out such tasks. Leste is also widely regarded as a success story, and
• Solve the DDR and security sector reform (SSR) we need to calibrate how to retain some presence so
challenges. DD is often more successful than R; that Timor does not relapse. The UN is working
making programs sustainable is of critical hard to improve this string of work and is
importance. Often program designs are based on committed to working on issues like this during the
available resources rather than actual needs. coming five years.
• Consider the needs and aspirations of young The international system is not well equipped to
people. This is of central importance, as manage contemporary threats. Sometimes it is
illustrated by the events in the Arab world. We struggling with social, economic, environmental,
need to understand this dynamic and adapt UN and peace and security challenges without taking
programs accordingly. into due consideration that they are interconnected
• Ensure that essential quick impact projects are yet totally different threats. The international
rooted in the needs and priorities of local diplomatic architecture is still ill-equipped to
address contemporary transnational threats related

3

to global financial market shocks, climate change, intentional violence and victimization at the sub-
and a wide range of threats to peace and security. national level. This kind of diagnosis can serve at
Indeed, sometimes the UN and other international least two purposes: providing a comprehensive
entities struggle to meet these challenges in record of mass atrocities and violations of human
isolation, not recognizing how their causes and rights post facto and helping to predict violence
consequences can be related. The overall challenge dynamics. The insights are sobering and clarifying,
is to find a way for the international community at as they correct long-held assumptions and
large to deal with these threats, rather than relying anecdotal evidence on the prevalence of violence
on unilateral responses alone. that have come to inform policy. The panelists set
What has changed is not just the diversity and out a far-reaching agenda that raised a number of
spatial character of peace and security risks, but fundamental questions about the definition of
also their rapid temporal manifestation and spread. armed conflict and the implications of organized
Some participants noted that traditional violence.
approaches are fast being overtaken by events and The first session chaired by Dr. Robert Muggah
becoming increasingly irrelevant. There is also a considered the global characteristics of organized
need for early warning mechanisms to deal with violence. He discussed the main findings and
these emerging threats, to allow for sufficient time insights from the recent research mapping out the
to prevent and react. For example, the Arab Spring onset, duration, and intensity of conflict and non-
highlights the ways in which previously marginal- conflict violence. What is increasingly recognized is
ized groups—including youth and women— that a vast majority of the global burden occurs not
emerged to challenge the status quo. One important in countries affected by armed conflict but in those
question is how to create real participation for these that are ostensibly peaceful. More than 525,000
groups: employment is part of the answer, but it is persons are killed by intentional violence each year
not enough. What is needed are ways to meaning- of which 55,000 die from combat-related causes in
fully channel these groups’ energies in the right war. More than 395,000 persons are killed as a
direction, to rebuild the social contract. result of homicide in non-war settings and another
The UN is beginning to rethink its assumptions 21,000 from extrajudicial killings. Most violent
and tool-kits and explore new ways and means of deaths are concentrated in Latin America and the
working in societies confronting turbulence and Caribbean, as well as central and southern Africa,
transition. It acknowledges that it is contending and there is a worsening situation in the cities of the
with twenty-first century problems with twentieth south. The panelists reflected on what is “new” and
century tools. It recognizes that the demands often “old” about contemporary organized violence. It
outsize its capacities to deliver and that changes are was agreed that organized violence in a range of
needed to increase its coordination and effective- “fragile settings” is increasingly simultaneous,
ness on the ground. overlapping, and integrated, and as a result it is
challenging our classification systems. Imputing
Mapping the Challenges of intentionality or motive is challenging when there
is a blurring of political and economic interests.
Organized Violence in Many security, humanitarian, and development
Contemporary Conflict: agencies are actively reflecting on what this
changing face of violence means legally, conceptu-
Data and Trends ally, and operationally.
There has been a dramatic expansion in quantita- Sexual violence was described by Dr. Ragnhild
tive and qualitative research on the costs of Nordås as one of the most significant challenges of
organized violence over the past decade. The most our time. Indeed, the UN Secretary-General has
comprehensive datasets are now used not just to repeatedly called for more data collection and
measure the frequency and severity of deaths at the analysis of the incidence, trends, and patterns of
national level on an annualized basis, but also to rape and other forms of sexual violence in
examine spatial and temporal characteristics of situations of armed conflict. But there are difficul-


ties in tracking sexual violence, and as such it tends include air attacks, mortars, vehicle bombs, suicide
to be overlooked, misunderstood, and sometimes bombs, gunfire, execution, and execution with
overstated: under-reporting as well as over- torture. For instance, it was found that air attacks
reporting are common. There is also a real absence have the highest rates of killed women and
of solid and reliable baseline data to allow for an children, indicating how indiscriminating such
assessment of how much sexual violence actually attacks are. While such research does not allow for
increases in times of war instead of just an assess- a determination of intentionality, it does offer
ment of the absolute amount of such violence. If insights into the likely consequences (and determi-
any real global assessment is to occur, more nation of proportionality) of particular weapons
temporal, typological, perpetrator, and environ- systems.
mental information needs to be collected, even if a Another kind of index being developed is called
caution is warranted regarding intrinsic biases. We the “civilian targeting index,” which focuses on the
need better data in order to make better policy. ratio of battle deaths among civilians as compared
One promising research initiative described by to overall deaths. It attributes deaths arising in
Dr. Nordås seeks to generate a comprehensive armed conflicts to specific armed groups of all
cross-national dataset mapping out global trends in types—more than 500 worldwide. It then considers
sexual violence. Partly financed by the Folke the extent to which groups are intentionally and
Bernadotte Academy, the data include event-based systematically targeting civilians. Curiously, the
information 1989-2010 and is designed to generate data suggest that most non-state armed groups
information and analysis to shape early-warning (more than 60 percent) do not routinely target
efforts and facilitate preventive interventions. The civilians. However, preliminary analysis suggests
dataset considers sexual violence in many of its that the “duration” and “scale” of armed group
forms (e.g., rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, involvement in a given armed conflict does seem
forced abortion, sexual mutilation, and sexual correlated with the likelihood of increased targeting
torture) occurring in armed conflicts of varying of civilians. Another finding is that the larger the
intensity and with multiple actors (states and rebel scale of organized violence, the lower the relative
groups). It also considers trends in post-conflict level of civilian targeting, suggesting that many
settings. While preliminary, early results suggest groups are in fact adhering to the Geneva
that only a minority of armed groups are involved Conventions. Another interpretation is the one
in perpetrating sexual violence and that rates are suggested above for sexual violence: in intense
often higher than anticipated at war’s end. This may armed conflicts, fighters are more focused on
be because during intense armed conflicts, fighters survival and have fewer opportunities to exercise
are more preoccupied with staying alive, and atrocities against civilians.
therefore have fewer opportunities to exercise The discussant Dr. Chetan Kumar reflected on
sexual violence. Anticipating these trends may help the changing nature of violence and the implica-
to predict when and where sexual violence is more tions for programming and the considerable
likely to occur. challenges associated with post-conflict transitions.
Dr. Michael Spagat discussed the distribution and A key shift is a movement away from all-out
intensity of fatalities and targeting of civilians in warfare and armed conflict to lower-level and
wartime settings. New geo-referenced conflict data recurrent types of violence. Dr. Kumar drew
is becoming available and present new opportuni- attention first to so-called “transitions”—a complex
ties for micro-level—instead of national level— process of political, economic, and social change
empirical research. Examining large event-based that falls between armed conflict and nonconflict.
datasets such as the Iraq Body Count (IBC), Dr. Often it entails a series of recurrent and inter-
Spagat has developed a set of basic ratios that he locking conflicts. In such settings, the objective
and co-authors describe as “the dirty war index.” It may not be to “resolve” the conflict but rather to
divides female and child victims killed in war contain and stabilize it. Yet, we still know little
settings (the numerator) by all fatalities (the about the conditions for violence in transitions, and
denominator) and parses them out according to the how to prevent violence.
type of weapon involved. Types of killings classified

5

Dr. Kumar also singled out another type of do prevent and reduce violence and whether
insecurity he described as “turbulence,” itself rooted alternate approaches were needed. For instance,
in a combination of economic, social, and political DDR may make conflict less likely at the national
factors. During such incidents localized social level, while at the same time making violence more
protests may spiral out of control and assume prevalent at the local level.
national proportions. Many policy makers and researchers working on
A number of operational responses and practices peace and conflict issues are increasingly revisiting
are required to address these transitions and their assumptions and examining the wider
turbulences. Many of the required tools are signaled dynamics of organized violence. Questions were
in the World Bank’s World Development Report raised regarding the extent to which violence
2011—including reform and the formation of against civilians is linked to strategic goals, and to
broad and inclusive political coalitions to manage what extent it is ephemeral. It was also suggested
change. Recent experience suggests that reforms that there is a need to look at different types of
and reform initiatives can be instrumental in organized violence—one-sided, interpersonal,
bringing security. Dr. Kumar emphasized the communal—and the extent to which they overlap.
importance of supporting the formation of lead There is now much more data available for
actors that can create coalitions capable of examining underlying trends and exploring cause
delivering reforms rapidly: cohesive communities and effect relationships. At the same time it is
are better at dealing with such challenges, though it important to define what kinds of violence we are
is very challenging to achieve such coalitions. He talking about and analyzing so that we do not mix
drew attention to the need to reorient attention to up these categories, which may have very different
the importance of local governance, including local causes, dynamics, and solutions. It was also pointed
law enforcement and local knowledge networks. out that detailed and geo-referenced data now
Along with inclusive, resilient, and responsive being produced can be used to name and shame
governance, Dr. Kumar highlighted other factors perpetrators, but that it also shows that most groups
that can promote protection. For example, border do not carry out violence against civilians, and that
control remains a major priority, one that requires women and children are the groups most exposed
smarter border management. Likewise, community to deaths due to explosive weapons. Campaigns of
level mediation is critical, including interventions sexual violence and mass atrocities are the
that bring public security and civil society groups exception—not the norm—in armed conflicts.
together. Ultimately, an integrated approach must
prevail, one that is less palliative and more systemic Contemporary Challenges
in nature. and Evolving Roles in
The ensuing discussion highlighted the ways in UN Peacekeeping
which the UN is beginning to recognize that
fragility, transitions, turbulence, and other forms of Peacekeeping and peace support mandates have
insecurity are a “new normal.” It highlighted the adopted an ever-expanding set of expectations
good news that the UN is no longer the only actor related to the protection of civilians. They have
in dealing with these challenges. An important shifted from being a specific set of actions advanced
question raised concerned what the necessary next by the UN to monitor and enforce a ceasefire to a
steps are for the UN. A reactive approach is insuffi- wider set of activities entailing a range of actors
cient: once turbulence sets in, it is exceedingly from the UN to regional organizations with far-
difficult to know where it is going to lead. As such, reaching expectations to promote the rule of law
the UN needs to rethink its models. One partici- and justice. During the past twenty years a number
pant suggested that it is important to avoid of UN-led and non-UN led peacekeeping
piecemeal prevention and adopt instead a more operations have sought to promote humanitarian
comprehensive approach to preventing and objectives, though few applied force to halt
reducing conflict and organized violence. Others genocide and mass atrocities. UN operations are in
questioned the extent to which SSR efforts can and that respect very different from non-UN led


operations. partnership peacekeeping in terms of UN and non-
This session chaired by Dr. Birger Heldt, featured UN operations, focusing on Africa. Williams noted
the insights of practitioners and scholars regarding that the previous decade was one of good news in
the impact of the UN’s peacekeeping operations in this respect, and that there are encouraging signs
alleviating the consequences of war. It explored for the future. If partnership peacekeeping works,
how UN peacekeeping has adapted to maximize its the international community will have more
efforts and impact, including enhanced partner- options when it comes to protecting civilians. The
ships with regional and sub-regional organizations issue is now how one can make this partnership
on the ground and through joint operations, and to work even better. However, there is a lack of
what extent these partnerships have been understanding about how to choose between
successful. different types of partnerships. For instance, the
UNAMID-UNISOM partnership has not been
The first panelist, Ms. Erin Weir, reflected on the
ideal. Williams suggested that in order for the
evolution of the protection of civilians agenda both
partnership to work, three challenges must be
in New York and in the field where peace
overcome: economic, technical, and political. In
operations are underway. On the one side, there
terms of the economic challenges, there is an
appears to be considerable dynamism and innova-
inequity in financial arrangements, which leads to
tion in the use and deployment of protection tools
one side financing the operations. A more effective
and concepts in the area of protection of civilians.
partnership requires more equal financial burden
Yet, there are important conceptual gaps. One
sharing. Turning to technical challenges, the
concern relates to the limits of the use of force:
inequality of military assets in quantitative and
protection—not victory—is the objective. For
qualitative terms, but also logistics and bureau-
instance, use of force may lead to regime change
cracy, hinders effective partnerships. Finally,
(i.e., victory), although it was never intended. A
political challenges are the most important ones
second big gap concerns harm reduction: when
and cover issues such as the following:
force is used, things get broken. When is this
acceptable? When is it really necessary to use force, - the indeterminate nature of Chapter 8 of the UN
and what steps should be taken to make amends Charter in terms of what a strategic partnership
when unintended consequences arise? should really entail;
Ms. Weir pointed to some examples of the - the diversity of the world's regions and the
operationalization of the protection agenda at the different natures of the challenges, meaning there
field level. Regarding military tools, there is a is a need to reflect on how to create a partnership
proactive approach being adopted by DPKO in system where all regions receive equal priority;
eastern DRC and South Sudan due in part to - the lack of shared analysis, and a consequent lack
increased expectations and pressure generated by of consensus on the conclusions from such
the New Horizons report. Positive changes have analyses, and therefore also a lack of consensus
been created by this, but the application has been regarding what courses of action to pursue;
inconsistent across peacekeeping operations, partly - the lack of common concepts of what
for logistical reasons. Yet, even though advances peacekeeping operations should entail; the AU
have been made regarding the protection of has one concept, the UN has another, etc. For
civilians, military force is not the answer. It is example, the AU deploys peacekeeping
therefore important to examine civilian tools. One operations in ongoing conflicts and carries out
example is the promotion of community liaison peace enforcement, whereas the UN's
assistants—locally hired staff that speak the local peacekeeping operations have a much stronger
languages, know all the facts on the ground, and focus on post-conflicts.
link civilians to peacekeepers. However, these and
Dr. Williams also described three, positive
other actors can actually increase the vulnerability
templates. First there are spearhead or vanguard
of civilians and both short- and long-term strate-
operations, where some type of Western coalition
gies are therefore needed.
paves the way for a UN operation, such as in Haiti
Next, panelist Dr. Paul Williams considered or Timor-Leste. Second, in firefighting missions

7

Western forces play an enforcement role, examples intensive and ongoing dialogue among partners,
of which include Côte d'Ivoire, Sierra Leone, and shared standards, and improved interoperability,
the DRC. Third and finally, there are the over-the- but that these issues are now dealt with in an ad hoc
horizon operations—or out-of-area operations—in manner. Mr. Haeri emphasized the importance of
that a region deploys troops in another region of keeping a distinction between what constitutes AU
the world, such as the US Joint Task Force in Liberia and UN peacekeeping, as they are two different
and the EU force in the DRC and Chad. Yet, and in types of peacekeeping.
Dr. William’s assessment, many of these operations The second discussant, Ambassador Liberata
constitute “band-aid” solutions. Mulamula, focused on what works instead of
Dr. Williams continued to discuss what the AU focusing on negatives when it comes to organized
and the UN want from partnerships. On the former violence and UN response. Ambassador Mulamula
question it was suggested that the AU wants highlighted the centrality of national and local
recognition as an important actor. But it also wants “ownership” in relation to UN peacekeeping—
to become eligible for assessed economic means for though noted this was easier said than done. She
peacekeeping operations from the UN, and it wants emphasized the importance of Africa, in particular,
long-term UN support for the AU peacekeeping both owning its problems and owning its solutions:
architecture. The UN, on the other hand, desires African solutions for African problems. And in
partnerships in order to enhance its crisis response; reflecting on the ever changing and expanding
to promote an approach that does not privilege mandates of UN peacekeeping, Ambassador
Africa at the expense of other nations; and to Mulamula asked to what extent the UN is even
ensure good value for money while remaining doing peacekeeping anymore: from a more narrow
sensitive to the spirit and contents of the UN and traditional focus on enforcing ceasefires, there
Charter. These different goals—or lack of a is an ever more wide-ranging agenda involving
common vision and basic values—have resulted in peacemaking, peacebuilding, and peace consolida-
an ad hoc approach. tion. There are many practical challenges to
The first discussant, Mr. David Haeri, indicated ensuring local ownership. On the one hand, it
that history indicates that “success” is a political requires much more than simple consultations
matter and is only afterwards shaped by the between the UN and AU partners. Indeed, the case
military and civilian capability of troops and associ- of MONUC which, over the past decade shifted
ated technical assistance. He emphasized the from a narrow mandate to enforce a ceasefire to the
critical place of sustained and long-term commit- “protection of civilians” and “stabilization,” was
ment from the UN together with international, described as a case in point. Ambassador Mulamula
regional, and national engagement. And while UN called for a more collaborative approach than is
peacekeepers are often regarded as guarantors of often described in theory and called for an
transitions and of a sustainable peace, this has only approach that was more bottom-up and drew on
been a feature since the early 1990s. Mr. Haeri local capabilities. Along with other panelists,
stressed that it is difficult to quantify what works, Ambassador Mulamula noted emphatically that
and what does not, when it comes to the protection there were few genuine partnerships.
of civilians, and that there is a large need to think of It was noted by one participant that MONUC and
unintended consequences. He also suggested that MONUSCO have been at the frontiers of R2P, and
there is a need to build more expertise on DDR, maybe even have been experimental in terms of
Rule of Law (RoL), and SSR, and more carefully protecting civilians. Moreover, it is not uncommon
consider natural resources as drivers of conflicts. for peacekeeping operations to evolve towards
The field-level protection of civilians was more enforcement, more nation building, and more
described as a key problem for peacekeeping consolidation over time. From that perspective
missions, and it was stressed that it is important to MONUC is not unique and, in fact, closely
be honest about these issues and discuss them more resembles ONUC of the early 1960s or even
but also have reasonable expectations of what can UNPROFOR of the early 1990s. In addition, there
be achieved in these regards. Concerning partner- is in practice a division of labor in that the UN
ships, it was stressed that there is a need to have focuses on post-conflict peacekeeping with


elements of nation building, whereas non-UN Has impartiality (evenhandedly implementing the
peacekeeping is much more likely to intervene peacekeeping mandate) been confused with
during ongoing conflicts, while at the same time neutrality (doing nothing), and if so, has this
adopting narrower, more traditional peacekeeping conceptual confusion hampered the discussion and
tasks. While this may be due to the limited financial clarity of thinking? Has the responsibility to protect
resources of regional actors, it raises the question of doctrine muddied the waters? How can troop
whether there is a working division of labor among contributing countries be encouraged to enforce
UN and non-UN peacekeeping operations. Such a the peace when they are not interested in doing so?
division of labor was also suggested in the Brahimi At a minimum, panelists agreed that there is a need
Report some twelve years ago. to go back to the original idea of peacekeeping as
Among the UN operations, two stand out in founded in the aspiration of collective security.
terms of their robust methods for addressing Indeed, its very structure is not designed to allow
genocide and atrocities carried out by armed for “interventionist” activities, and the protection of
groups. First is UNPROFOR in Bosnia that civilians mandate is without prejudice to the
established protected zones, delivered humani- peacekeeping mandate.
tarian aid, and on occasions used force beyond self
defense. The second prominent example is The Role, Challenges, and
MONUC, which may be said to be at the front line Tools of Special Envoys
of robust proactive use of armed force by UN
operations against armed groups spoiling the peace A critical instrument in the “protection” arsenal of
and/or committing atrocities. UN operations have the UN is the special envoy. There are in fact
rarely deployed for the stated primary task of multiple types of special envoys, the most
protecting civilians from genocide or atrocities and prominent being Special Representatives of the
used force beyond self defense to achieve those Secretary-General. The role of these envoys varies
goals from the outset. Rather, the operations have in length of deployment, mandate, functional scope
evolved. Close cases include UNAMID deployed in of their activities, and, to a considerable extent,
2007. While having a focus on protecting civilians their personal attributes and leadership styles. The
from human rights abuses, it did not develop a final session, chaired by Mr. Youssef Mahmoud,
robust practice of using force reactively or considered the experiences of special envoys and
proactively. In contrast, multilateral non-UN some emerging research on the scale and distribu-
interventions deployed primarily to halt ongoing tion of SRSGs and the effectiveness of their
genocide/politicide and atrocities are rather interventions. The discussion was focused particu-
common throughout history and include larly on their practical experiences and the critical
INTERFET (Timor-Leste), EUFOR DRC/ role of their own background and the support
ARTEMIS (DRC), RAMSI (Solomon Islands), systems they operated within.
MIFH (Haiti), KFOR (Kosovo), among others. A The first speaker, Dr. Jamal Benomar, considered
preliminary insight offered from these cases is that his own experiences as a special envoy. He
multilateral interventions have worked well when emphasized that there is no handbook to guide
robust and applied to small countries or territories mediation and dialogue. There are no clear resolu-
and avoided siding with any of the conflict parties. tions, and there is no one single way to proceed: the
Also, some kind of division of labor between UN scope and scale of intervention varies from place to
and non-UN missions appears to have emerged. place. He also stressed that the UN is now starting
The participants singled out some contradictions to develop mediation capacity and working to
and challenges emerging in the course of the develop a handbook. Yet, it is occurring at a time
presentations. For example, how can the UN when the UN role is ever more diminished in
maintain a consent-based approach when the state mediation.
is often a key perpetrator of organized violence Notwithstanding decades of special envoy
against civilians? What is peacekeeping when there activity, Benomar stressed the importance of
is no peace to keep? How can civilians be protected adopting humility and acknowledging the limited
when the UN is expected to maintain impartiality? state of knowledge on what works and what does

9

not. He highlighted the importance of ensuring ality of SRSGs, their experience, their style, and the
cultural continuity. He pointed to the challenges of way they work in teams and in relation to the UN.
recognizing local compacts, agreements that may The final intervention by Mr. Giandomenico
not always be in line with UN standards. In Picco considered the central place of agency in
discussing the situation in Yemen, he noted the shaping the direction of peace agreements as well as
multiple and overlapping conflicts and the the limitations of claims to “impartiality.” Mr. Picco
importance of reading between them. But he also noted, along with others, that the world has
stressed that the UN had certain advantages, changed. Mediation during the Cold War was more
including being regarded as an honest, or at least straightforward. Since the 1990s, it has become
impartial, broker and could also play a role in fiendishly more complex. Building on personal
influencing more progressive norms in peace experience Mr. Picco stressed the importance of
agreements. understanding the “narrative” of those involved in
The next speaker, Dr. Manuel Fröhlich, consid- mediation and the importance of individual agency
ered the findings of recent research on the role of and working relations with superiors in shaping the
SRSGs in relation to peace processes. Dr. Fröhlich direction and outcomes of mediation. He also
traced the evolution of special envoys and their highlighted the ways in which “minilateralism” has
expansion.1 He highlighted the growth of SRSG and come to shape mediation over the past two decades.
HLA functions since the 1950s—from an average of In addition, Mr. Picco suggested that neutrality is
ten to fifteen between 1950 and the 1980s to ninety- not important. Instead, the actors just need to know
five in 2011. In fact, there have been roughly 358 which “camp” a mediator belongs: no actors want
SRSGs (1946-2011) from ninety-nine different neutral mediators, and no mediator can be
countries. The steep increases were attributed to completely impartial anyway.
conflicts in Africa and transnational issues such as The ensuing discussion touched upon the issue of
climate change. The top contributing countries for the division of labor among SRSGs, whether it is
SRSGs included the US (53), Norway (27), Sweden time for a new agenda for peace, and what may be
(24), UK (23), Algeria (18), India (18), Italy (18), the role of mediators in the future. In addition, the
Pakistan (16), France (13), Switzerland (13), and challenges caused by the fragmentation of conflict
Canada (13). It should be noted that in some cases, parties were discussed, in particular with regard to
there were multiple SRSGs in a single country. whether the UN is equipped to deal with fragmen-
Overall, most deployments of SRSGs were to tation and whether there are relevant lessons from
Burundi, Cambodia, Cyprus, Haiti, Iraq, Kosovo, cases in the past that could be applied to current
Liberia, Middle East, Somalia, Sudan, and Western and future cases of mediation.
Sahara.
Dr. Fröhlich also considered the particular Concluding Reflections
influence of SRSGs on the incidence of armed
conflicts. Although findings are temporary, he This International Expert Forum featured many
noted a strong correlation between declining takeaways and key concepts, such as “coordination
intrastate conflict and SRSG presence though could and coherence,” “social contract,” “band-aid,”
not (yet) determine a causal effect. Indeed, he “partnerships,” “local micro-level data,” “dynamics
stressed that structural factors (i.e., the environ- of violence against civilians,” “influence of local
ment) are the most important (75 percent), but that conditions,” etc. For instance, research indicates
SRSGs appear to play an important role. These that localized forms of violence are shaped by
statistics suggest how little—or how much—one changes in the military balance of power. Civilians
should expect SRSGs to achieve. He also noted that are often punished for perceived disloyalty. One
there are other critical micro factors that determine implication, then, is that no matter how challenging
the influence of SRSGs. These relate to the person- it may appear, the peacekeeping goal should be to

1 The first special envoy was Folke Bernadotte in 1948 based on a General Assembly Resolution and selected by the permanent five members of the Security Council.
Next was Francesco Urrutia (1957) from Colombia in Israel/Jordan. Others in the 1960s included Adrian Pekt (Guinea),Johan Beck-Friis (Thailand), Eduard
Zellweger (Laos), and Herbert de Ribbling (Oman). Also Pier Spinelli (Portugal) was requested to mediate in Jordan in 1964. The Secretary General came up with
the concept of UN “presence” in lieu of peacekeeping force.


create robustly defended ceasefires (even localized in documenting atrocities for tribunals but also
ones) instead of siding with any conflict parties. for developing predictive modeling for preven-
Historically this has decreased incentives for rebels tion and early warning. An outstanding
to commit atrocities, since government forces are question, however, is how we get this informa-
no longer considered an acute threat and territory tion into the hands of senior policy makers.
is not at risk of being lost to the other side of the There was a consensus that many of the tools to
conflict. It may also provide breathing room for an respond to organized violence need to adapt.
unavoidable political solution to develop and for Most participants noted how narrow approaches
third parties to pursue diplomatic options. to minimizing violence that emphasize peace
The seminar highlighted how the landscapes of support and peacebuilding and enforcing
organized violence are diffuse and dynamic. ceasefires are giving way to more transformative
National-level assessments disaggregated by agendas promoting not just multidimensional
year are increasingly being supplanted by sub- peacekeeping, but local ownership, governance,
national assessments that offer more granular and architectures of peace. This evolving agenda
and geo-spatial assessments. What they are will demand new forms of cooperation, a
showing is a heterogeneous picture. Nonstate capacity to learn across different settings, and a
armed groups are not necessarily widely commitment to monitoring outcomes. It will
involved in killing civilians while state-based require partnerships that include regional
groups are. Not all armed groups are involved in organizations.
perpetrating sexual violence, but it appears that There was agreement that local ownership,
such violence often persists well after conflicts local resilience, and enhanced partnerships
end. It is critical that research continues to assess were essential but challenging. While
these variations. peacekeeping approaches have made important
The seminar raised questions about the defini- gains, it is still largely piecemeal and top down.
tions and classifications for “armed conflict” A recurring question was how to ensure a more
and signaled a new terminology to describe emphatic “regional voice,” while also managing
organized violence. Indeed, panelists and major technical, economic, political challenges.
participants alike raised important questions Participants agreed that reinforcing national and
about what is “armed conflict,” “postconflict,” local capacities was central, and would present
and “other forms of violence.” In some cases, one of the more important, if challenging,
other expressions seemed more appropriate to priorities for the UN in the coming decade.
capture the real dynamics on the ground, All of the presentations pointed to a major
including “transitions,” “turbulence,” “instabi- dilemma facing contemporary efforts to prevent
lity,” “fragility,” and other “situations of violence.” and reduce organized violence. On the one hand,
A new nomenclature is emerging—one that has there are unprecedented opportunities for research,
profound implications for how the international agency, and interventions. On the other, there are
community thinks about responses. formidable transnational risks, complex interests,
The seminar drew attention to new and and old and outdated assumptions and approaches.
innovative forms of applied research. The question facing the security and development
Researchers noted the rapid evolution of establishments is how to take advantage of these
datasets that account not just for events over new opportunities while minimizing the risks. At a
time, but also geo-spatial and environmental minimum, it will require acknowledging that the
units of analysis. These datasets move beyond UN is not necessarily the only, much less the
counting the dead and injured to account for a central, player. It will also require understanding
wider range of victimization and variables how power is more widely distributed. Finally, it
related to the types of weapons used in the event. will mean working proactively with regional
They focus not just on armed groups’ presence partners and building coalitions across public and
but also on their motivation and intentionality. private spheres.
Such datasets have a potentially important role

11

Agenda

Mitigating the Consequences of Violent Conflict:
What Works and What Does Not?

The International Expert Forum

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

09:00 – 09:15 Welcome and Introductory Remarks

Mr. Youssef Mahmoud, Senior Adviser, International Peace Institute
Dr. Birger Heldt, Director of Research, Folke Bernadotte Academy
Dr. Robert Muggah, Principal, SecDev Group

09:30 – 09:45 Keynote Address

Ms. Susana Malcorra, Chef de Cabinet and Under-Secretary-General, Executive Office
of the United Nations Secretary-General

09:45 – 11:15 Session 1: Mapping the Challenges of Organized Violence in Contemporary Conflict:
Data and Trends

This session discusses the main findings and insights from the recent research mapping out
the onset, duration, and intensity of organized violence. Particular consideration will be
given to the spatial and temporal distribution of mortality, organized violence, and associ-
ated displacement. Additional attention will be given to the risks giving rise to organized
violence (including targeted mass atrocities and sexual violence), trends, and future
challenges.

Chair
Dr. Robert Muggah

Presenters
Dr. Ragnhild Nordås, Senior Researcher, Centre for the Study of War, Peace Research
Institute Oslo (PRIO)

Dr. Michael Spagat, Professor, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of
London

Discussant
Dr. Ozonnia Ojielo, Coordinator, Conflict Prevention Team, Bureau for Crisis Prevention
and Recovery (BCPR), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

11:15 Coffee Break

12 AGENDA

11:30 – 13:00 Session 2: Contemporary Challenges and Evolving Roles in UN Peacekeeping

This session features the insights of practitioners and scholars regarding the impact of the
UN’s peacekeeping operations in alleviating the consequences of war. A particular focus will
be put on the contemporary challenges for UN peacekeeping and the evolving roles of
civilian, police, and military peacekeepers in confronting those challenges. In this regard, this
session will also explore how UN peacekeeping has adapted to maximize its efforts and
impact, including enhanced partnerships with regional and sub-regional organizations on
the ground and through joint operations and to what extent these partnerships have been
successful.

Chair
Dr. Birger Heldt

Presenters
Ms. Erin A. Weir, Protection and Advocacy Adviser, Norwegian Refugee Council
Dr. Paul D. Williams, Associate Director, Security Policy Studies Program, The Elliott
School of International Affairs, George Washington University

Discussants
Ambassador Liberata Mulamula, Senior Diplomatic Adviser to the President of the
Republic of Tanzania
Mr. David Haeri, Chief, Peacekeeping Best Practices Section, United Nations Department of
Peacekeeping Operations

13:00 – 14:45 Working Lunch

Session 3: The Role, Challenges, and Tools of Special Envoys

This session features insights from practitioners and scholars, but with a focus on the role of
special envoys—appointed either by the UN Secretary-General or in collaboration with
regional organizations—in alleviating the consequences of war. The role of these envoys
varies in length of deployment, mandate, functional scope of their activities, and, to a
considerable extent, their personal attributes and leadership styles. The session will look at
the main challenges for past and present holders of these posts and how the role of special
envoys has evolved over the years.

Chair
Mr. Francesco Mancini

Presenters
Dr. Jamal Benomar, Special Adviser to the UN Secretary-General and UN Special Envoy to
Yemen
Dr. Manuel Fröhlich, Professor of International Organizations and Globalization, Friedrich
Schiller University of Jena
Mr. Giandomenico Picco, Chairman and CEO, GDP Associates; former UN Assistant
Secretary-General for Political Affairs and UN Special Envoy to Lebanon

14:45 Closing Remarks

Mr. Youssef Mahmoud
Dr. Birger Heldt
Dr. Robert Muggah

13

Participants
Saiful Azam Abdullah David Cervenka
Deputy Permanent Representative of Malaysia Minister Counsellor
to the United Nations Permanent Mission of the Czech Republic to the
United Nations
Mireille Affa'a-Mindzie
Research Fellow Amine Chabi
International Peace Institute Counsellor, Peacekeeping, Peacebuilding, and
Conflict Prevention
Christian Altpeter Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Morocco
Research Assistant to the United Nations
Folke Bernadotte Academy
Sally Chin
Tahir Hussain Andrabi Head of Office, New York
Counsellor Oxfam International
Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the
United Nations Alberto Cutillo
Visiting Senior Fellow
Andrea Bartoli International Peace Institute
Dean
School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution Martha Doggett
George Mason University Chief
Americas Division
Bernd Beber United Nations Department of Political Affairs
Assistant Professor
Department of Political Science Alle Dorhout
New York University Political Counsellor
Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the
Robert Blair Netherlands to the United Nations
PhD Candidate
Department of Political Science Hugh T. Dugan
Yale University Adviser
Permanent Mission of the United States to the
Arthur Boutellis United Nations
Research Fellow
International Peace Institute Mari Etelapaa
Counsellor, Peacekeeping
Christian Burckhardt
Delegation of the European Union to the
Associate Policy Planning Officer
United Nations
Policy, Evaluation and Training Division
United Nations Department of Peacekeeping
Malcolm Green
Operations/Department of Field Support
First Secretary, Political Affairs
Tatiana Carayannis Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom
Deputy Director to the United Nations
Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum
Social Science Research Council Steen Malthe Hansen
Counsellor
Permanent Mission of Denmark to the
United Nations

14 PARTICIPANTS

Fabienne Hara Salem Matug
Vice President, Multilateral Affairs Adviser, Political Affairs
International Crisis Group Office of the Permanent Observer of the
African Union to the United Nations
Elchin Huseynli
First Secretary Colm Ó Conaill
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Azerbaijan First Secretary
to the United Nations Permanent Mission of Ireland to the
United Nations
Esmira Jafarova
First Secretary Kelvin Ong
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Azerbaijan Senior Political Affairs Officer, Team Leader
to the United Nations Mediation Support Unit, Policy and Mediation
Division
Ian Johnstone United Nations Department of Political Affairs
Professor of International Law
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Werner Puschra
Tufts University Director, New York
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Foundation
Rebecca A. Jovin
Policy Planning Officer Maureen Quinn
Policy and Best Practices Service (PBPS) Senior Adviser
United Nations Department of Peacekeeping International Peace Institute
Operations/Department of Field Support
Alice Revell
Arthur Kafeero Second Secretary/ Legal Adviser
Minister Counsellor Permanent Mission of New Zealand
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Uganda to the United Nations
to the United Nations
Sheri P. Rosenberg
Jehangir Khan Assistant Professor of Clinical Law
Deputy Director Director, Human Rights and Genocide Clinic
Middle East and West Asia Division Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
United Nations Department of Political Affairs
Mohamed Sarwat Selim
Naomi Kikoler First Secretary
Director of Policy and Advocacy Permanent Mission of the Arab Republic of Egypt
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect to the United Nations

Andreas Løvold Adam Smith
Counsellor, Political Affairs Research Fellow
Permanent Mission of Norway to the International Peace Institute
United Nations
Nishkala Suntharalingam
Kishore Mandhyan Political Affairs Officer, Office of Operations
Principal Officer Office of the Assistant Secretary-General
Executive Office of the UN Secretary-General United Nations Department of Peacekeeping
Operations

15

Jorge Tagle Martín Vidal
Counsellor Minister Counsellor
Permanent Mission of Chile to the United Nations Permanent Mission of Uruguay to the
United Nations
Stefano Tomat
Political Coordinator Saúl Weisleder
Delegation of the European Union to the Deputy Permanent Representative of Costa Rica
United Nations to the United Nations

Massimo Tommasoli Pawel Wierdak
Permanent Observer for International IDEA Counsellor
to the United Nations Permanent Mission of the Republic of Poland
to the United Nations
Oliver Ulich
Head, Partnerships Team Hikaru Yamashita
United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Senior Fellow, Global Security Division
Operations Policy Studies Department
National Institute for Defense Studies, Tokyo
Pim Valdre
Director of External Relations Micah Zenko
International Peace Institute Fellow for Conflict Prevention
Council on Foreign Relations

The INTERNATIONAL PEACE INSTITUTE (IPI) is an independent,
international not-for-profit think tank with a staff representing more
than twenty nationalities, with offices in New York, facing United
Nations headquarters, and in Vienna. IPI is dedicated to promoting the
prevention and settlement of conflicts between and within states by
strengthening international peace and security institutions. To achieve
its purpose, IPI employs a mix of policy research, convening, publishing,
and outreach.

777 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY 10017-3521, USA
TEL +1-212-687-4300 FAX +1-212-983-8246

Freyung 3, 1010 Vienna, Austria
TEL +43-1-533-8881 FAX +43-1-533-8881-11

www.ipinst.org

Mitigating the Consequences of Violent Conflict: What Works and What Does Not?

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Mitigating the Consequences of Violent Conflict: What Works and What Does Not? (20)

More from Professor Eric K. Noji, M.D., MPH, DTMH(Lon), FRCP(UK)hon (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Mitigating the Consequences of Violent Conflict: What Works and What Does Not?