Misplaced Analogies: 'Coordination' and 'Learning' in the Building of Peace

Breakout session on ‘Post-conflict reconstruction and Peacebuilding’, third talk: Johanna Boersch-Supan, D.Phil. Candidate, Politics and International relations, Oxford University.

Breakout session on ‘Post-conflict reconstruction and Peacebuilding’, second talk: Bjorn Muller-Wille, Royal Military Academy , Sandhurst. As part of a trend to improve the coherence and effectiveness of multidimensional interventions donor states are increasingly willing to invest development assistance in conflict areas; resulting in a strong interest in determining which instruments contribute to a broad array of short term 'stability,' political and security objectives as well as a collection of longer term sustainable development and peace building solutions. These activities have tended to be grouped under the label of the 'stabilisation' agenda and most donor states have faced common challenges in institutionalising and operationalising the growing body of aspirations inherent in this. This has raised questions about which instruments work, what objectives they might reasonably serve and under what conditions they might realistically achieve results. States have also struggled with the process of managing and integrating stabilisation activities delivered by very different government departments and across international institutions. These challenges have contributed to a much broader trend in which donor states and international organisations have sought to professionalise working 'on', rather than just 'in' conflict. It has also focused attention on the role of, synergies between and the overall effectiveness of development activities (broadly defined), the generation or provision of security, institutional capacity building and political outreach in achieving 'stabilisation outcomes'. This paper unpacks many of these issues in the specific contexts of Southern Afghanistan. It places the challenge of evaluation in three 'baskets' — difficulties in establishing 'strategic' and 'operational' priorities; difficulties defining and prioritising 'instruments' and reconciling 'action' with strategy and, thirdly, the difficulties derived from the nature of the operational environment and the ambitious nature of international aspirations. The Afghan case study explores the evolution of NATO's Regional Command South's (RC(S)) operational plans, the development of the RC (South) national contributors' own plans and the range of challenges that have been encountered in monitoring and evaluating both organisational performance and the delivery of higher order objectives. Having identified these challenges it draws attention to the way in which some of these have been addressed and what currently comprises best practice.

Breakout session on ‘Post-conflict reconstruction and Peacebuilding’, first talk: Dr Stuart Gordon, Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. 'Stabilisation' has emerged as a powerful policy discourse guiding international interventions in conflict areas. The UK has been amongst the forefront of states adopting and developing the 'stabilisation' model and has adapted government policy, processes and structures in its efforts to deliver 'stability' in both Iraq and Afghanistan's Helmand Province. Its experience in Helmand in particular is likely to shape both future UK approaches and that of other donor states. Consequently this paper focuses principally on the British experience of stabilisation in Afghanistan's Helmand Province, addressing two elements: firstly, the development, content, perceived distinctiveness and significance of stabilisation as a distinct policy discourse. Secondly the nature and practical policy implications of stabilisation in southern Afghanistan, particularly for humanitarian actors.

Breakout session on ‘Peace and Transitional Justice’, third talk: Lydiah Kemunto Bosire, D.Phil. Candidate, Politics and International Relations, Oxford University. The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in July 2002 created a permanent forum for prosecuting those held 'most responsible' for crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, and brought fresh promise to management of past, ongoing, and future conflicts. The ICC's intervention in ongoing conflict is thought to bring peace, even while the mechanisms by which the ICC might result in such peace remain unclear. The contested role of the ICC in Uganda is an example: while at one point the Court was credited for bringing the Government of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army rebel group to the table, at a later point the Court was blamed for derailing that same peace process. This paper draws on fieldwork conducted in Uganda in 2007 and 2008 to assess the role the ICC played in the Juba peace talks between the Government of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army. Based on interviews with elites involved in the peace process, the paper suggests that the role of the ICC cannot be understood outside the interests and motivations of elite agents.

Breakout session on ‘Peace and Transitional Justice’, second talk: Chris Mahony, D.Phil Candidate, Politics and International Relations, Oxford University.