Report Workshop 1. Sustaining peace at local level This workshop centred around the question: how can development actors be more effective in sustaining peace at the local level? The following issues were addressed: What is the potential role of local governance in sustaining peace in fragile countries? Considering the current practice in different fragile countries, what are the challenges and opportunities for local governance in sustaining peace? How can development partners effectively support local governance in sustaining peace in fragile countries? Seth Kaplan Expert and lecturer at Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies and author of the book Fixing Fragile States. In fragile contexts, local governments present the biggest opportunity for national change. In highly fragmented states with weak national institutions it may be easier to build on a set of urban areas than attempt any topdown approach nationally. Local authorities generally have 1) more cohesion 2) political dynamics that focus on results and less on identity 3) more possibilities to improve basic public services 4) greater accountability mechanisms 5) stronger mechanisms for managing conflict and 6) greater incentives for performance. Therefore, strategically empowering local governments across a territory offers a more practical way to reduce fragility. But they need enough power and the right mechanisms to ensure good leadership. Potential role of local authorities: Local authorities are better able to engage with non-state actors than the central state. Religious groups, traditional institutions, ad-hoc organisations, companies, and so forth all have an important role to play in improving public services, stimulating socio-economic development, and building social cohesion. Including them in governance processes leads to services that are attuned to the needs of the population, more revenue from taxes and sustained and shared growth. Ultimately this will strengthen social cohesion and government legitimacy. Local authorities also have more scope to enhance accountability than the national political arena in many cases and develop values of good governance. But this requires that civil society is cohesive and robust enough to hold their leaders accountable. Where they are not, more effort is needed to ensure inclusiveness and representation of local authorities. Local authorities can support cohesive populations to govern themselves in a way that may not possible nationally (e.g. Lagos in Nigeria, see also: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ africa/2014-08-20/africas-city-hill ). Local governments can be key actors in managing conflict (Balkans and many African cities). Here, their role is to actively manage group cleavages, promote equitable power and resource sharing, while at the same time avoiding
the growth of grievances. However, trade-offs between stability and addressing grievances are inevitable. Mediation can help, but to sustain peace agreements, some common institution is needed that is trusted to settle disputes fairly (e.g. recognised elders, traditional courts, joint committees). Challenges in some cases, conditions at local level can be as bad as or even worse than those existing nationally. In cases where political or economic inequalities are such that they spark grievances, a redistribution of power or resources may be required - however this may be politically difficult. In cases where a lack of formal state capacity at the local level is a major obstacle (for improving the rule of law, distributing services, etc.), the focus should be on strengthening this capacity, while non-state actors need to be better leveraged. The challenge is to promote inclusiveness across a wide range of policy areas and at the same time manage resistance from existing or former winners. Dion van den Berg Senior policy advisor at Pax for Peace The three functions of local governments (service delivery, socio-economic development and social cohesion) are fundamental and apply to stable democracies as much as to areas of war and fragile contexts. However, in the latter contexts, these tasks are truly more difficult to perform because of a collapse of (national) state structures, the presence of armed groups, hate speech, discrimination or prosecution of certain groups, forced migration, and tendencies to divide rather than to unite. Although in authoritarian settings performance by the local state representatives may be adequate, the democratic ambitions of citizens cannot be ignored: there are stable democracies, there are no sustainable, stable dictatorships! Despite the difficult context, there are examples where local government, civil society organisations and citizens unite and try to uphold local democracy, basic human rights and human security and are more resilient against threats related to war and violent conflict. Places where such strong local government-citizen partnerships developed, have been labelled islands of civility. Inclusiveness, human rights, participation, transparency are key elements. The islands of civility are also have a bigger political relevance as symbols of hope, and as alternatives for nationalism, sectarism and divisive ideologies. Examples are: Tuzla: during and after the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Tuzla managed to survive thanks to its non-nationalist policy and practices. Syria: in the early days of the revolution in Syria, local councils developed in the liberated areas, supporting and facilitating bottom-up democratisation a key component of the deep revolution envisaged by the citizens. Unfortunately, many of these councils were taken over (or put aside) by local militias. South Sudan: the Local Government Act provides the legal framework for local councils (Boma), even though the state bodies have not invested in that level of local democracy. Interesting examples at Boma-level exist of enhanced resilience and mitigation of tensions related to vast flows of displaced persons across the country. 2
Challenge A dilemma for us is: when we focus on the local situation, how can we achieve impact at the national level? Especially when a local situation is so specific to one situation that duplication is difficult. Wilma van Esch Head of the Rule of Law and Peacebuilding division, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Local governments are closer to the citizen and provide more relevance to the everyday life of citizens. In fragile and conflict-affected settings, however, the state is either absent/weak or omnipresent and oppressing citizens. As a consequence, the local government level is very much suffering as well. In both cases, the social contract between the citizen and the state is absent, which often leads to a lack of safety and security. Marginalisation of women, youth and other groups leads to more conflict. The ministry of Foreign Affairs supports SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) at all levels, including the local level. But inevitably, change in the end has to come about through changes in and by society. What donors can do though, is raise awareness of the possibilities and train the most important stakeholders: the (local) politicians, the (local) government institutions and the citizens, so that they are capacitated to voice their concerns in constructive ways. As a donor, we should be well aware of the situation (political economy analysis), build trust by being present for the long run and working with the different actors. We also want us and our implementing partners to be flexible and be able to adapt to a changing situation (adaptive programming). Camil Duraković Former mayor of Srebrenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina In a post-conflict situation, what is needed is mutual respect and continuous inter-ethnic dialogue with shared benefits, rights and obligations for each of the ethnic communities in local communities. Some of the approaches to promote social cohesion as a mayor of Srebrenica: Visits and attention towards villages with different ethnic background. De-radicalisation by understanding different narratives of history, conflict, return and daily politics. Struggle against segregation through encouraging joint non-formal activities: sports, art, culture. Cooperation through business between farmers, producers, distributors from different ethnic groups. This approach requires leadership that promotes cooperation between former enemies by stressing the common interest and future of both parties. Leadership that brings people together is the most important lesson ánd challenge. 3
Discussion Inclusive governance and trust Inclusiveness, trust and social cohesion were mentioned as the main precondition for sustaining peace. But how to ensure this in fragmented contexts where cohesion between citizens is weak and trust in the state is weak? The experts agreed on the need for inclusive participation of citizens in governance processes as well as promoting dialogue to explore/clarify the different narratives and find a common narrative. This requires good leadership which is appreciated by all citizens, a leadership that is inclusive and allows everyone to express themselves. Political representation remains important too. If a part of the citizens feel not represented by the leadership/power in place and the intention of the leadership is not of an inclusive nature, social inequalities may be enforced by favouring only part of the population. Megan Price (Knowledge Platform Rule of Law): when is reciprocity between citizens and the state effective? Seth Kaplan: if citizens feel represented by the state and democratic principles such as accountability, transparency, communication and cooperation are present and incorporated in governance mechanisms. Mariette Baptist (the Heron): How to recognise progress in terms of social cohesion? Seth Kaplan: look at indicators such as mutual respect in society - to what extent are different views accepted, either between citizens or by the state? state and its institutions are. Thus, there is a need for strong and legitimate institutions, transparent legal procedures, inclusion and security provided by the state. Engaging with local partners Dion van den Berg: international interventions should have a political reconstruction plan beforehand: 1) work on democracy from the bottom up 2) do not allow the progress to be hijacked by new elite 3) politics first. The work done by Dutch NGOs at local level in fragile settings should take place within a policy framework (set by MFA) with a clear vision on engagement with politics at national level in the country of intervention. If not, work done at local level can be boycotted by the national government, making scaling up rather impossible. Moreover, the international community should engage on time. A waitand-see approach has proven not to be effective. E.g. Syria: should the international community have provided more support to the local initiatives in the early days of the revolution, as promising bridge heads for democracy? Wilma van Esch: for donors to engage with non-state actors in fragile settings, it is very important to understand the context well and make sure that it is the right non-state actor, no hidden agenda. Mariette Baptist: How to programme for trust and peace, how to deal with mistrust? Seth Kaplan: Insecurity increases fight for power which leads to fragmentation in society, hence weakening trust in society. In short, trust and mistrust depends on how stable the
Kamaran Palani (Peace and Freedom Organisation Iraq): the changing nature of conflicts in the Middle East, especially in Iraq, poses a serious question to the dominant approaches of conflict management and humanitarian assistance in situations of fragility. The case of Iraq shows that there is a significant shift from democratisation and peacebuilding to a stabilisation approach which means mainly military and short term objectives. Thus, non-states actors, such tribes, militias, religious figures and institutions are increasingly becoming an integral part of stabilisation approaches. However, there isn t much knowledge and consensus about how to engage with these non-state actors in humanitarian assistance and peacebuilding. The actors that development partners have to rely on during difficult moments of the conflict, may later perpetuate or create another conflict if they hold on to their powers and are not willing to integrate into legitimate, democratic state institutions. Too often, the focus is on short term stability, but peace interventions should have a long term plan. 5
RECOMMENDATIONS: SUSTAINING PEACE AT LOCAL LEVEL 1. Think strategically about decentralisation and local governance: how does a focus on the local level fit a broader strategy that aims to reduce fragility state-wide? Ensure that what is done in one place fits into the larger strategy, e.g. upscaling peace: scaling up horizontally by connecting pockets of cohesion and vertically by keeping the dialogue going. 2. Efforts need to be sustained over a long time horizon yet balance short, medium and long term goals. 3. Build in processes that can counter the disadvantages when cohesion at local level is weak (e.g. strengthen accountability mechanisms when these are weak, seek ways to handle issues such as migration that disrupt cohesion locally) 4. Take into account that no government level functions in isolation. By focusing on the local level we shouldn t omit the central level. 5. Be aware of the local situation (political economy analysis), build trust by being present for the long run and work with all local governance actors. 6. Donors as well as implementing partners need to be flexible and able to adapt to a changing situation (adaptive programming) 7. Give more attention to places where local government and citizens already unite in their search for democracy and human rights in fragile settings. 8. The day to support local initiatives in the most effective way was yesterday, and most certainly today! Reconstruction and transitional justice are too late if we wait for the day after (the signing of a peace agreement, or a regime change). 9. Support public leaders that promote inclusiveness and dialogue on the basis of shared benefits, rights and obligations for all groups in the community. 10. Be sensitive and careful in selecting non-state actors as partners for stability, taking into account the impact on long-term peace. 6