European Peace Institute / News

-->On Tuesday, November 1st, IPI hosted a discussion with Mr. Pierre Krähenbühl, Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), that focused primarily on the plight of Palestine refugees today in the agency’s fields of operation, including Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza. This discussion is the latest event in IPI’s series featuring United Nations Humanitarian Coordinators and other senior humanitarian leaders from the field.

In response to the Arab-Israeli conflict, UNRWA was established by the General Assembly to contribute to the welfare and human development of Palestine refugees. When the agency began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of approximately 750,000 refugees. Today, over 5 million Palestine refugees are eligible for UNRWA services, which include education, health care, relief and social services, protection and microfinance.

The lack of political resolve in the region has cast a shadow over the population’s prosperity. Without hope, the risk of radicalization, particularly of youth, has become a worrisome reality. But through renewed support of Palestine refugees, faith in a better future can be restored and regional stability ensured. Indeed, the need for collaboration has never been greater.

Mr. Krähenbühl has 25 years of experience in human rights, humanitarian and development work. Appointed by the Secretary-General in November 2013, Pierre Krähenbühl became Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East on March 30th, 2014. As Commissioner-General, he serves at the level of Under-Secretary-General.

Speaker:
Mr. Pierre Krähenbühl, Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

Moderator:
Dr. Els Debuf, Senior Adviser and Head of Humanitarian Affairs at IPI

On Tuesday, November 1st, IPI hosted a Distinguished Author Series event featuring Shadi Hamid, author of Islamic Exceptionalism: How The Struggle Over Islam Is Reshaping The World. The conversation was moderated by IPI Senior Adviser for External Relations, Warren Hoge.

In his book, scholar and author Shadi Hamid offers a novel and provocative argument on how Islam is, in fact, “exceptional” in how it relates to politics. Exploring the profound implications this has for how we comprehend the future of the Middle East, Hamid also reflects on whether we should continue to expect history to gravitate toward secularism.

By addressing the vexing question of the role that religion plays in public life, he argues for a new understanding of how Islam and Islamism shape politics by examining different models of reckoning with the problem of religion and state, including the terrifying—and alarmingly successful—example of ISIS.

“We don’t have to like it,” he writes, “but we have to understand it—because Islam, as a religion and as an idea, will continue to be a force that shapes not just the region but also the West in the decades to come.”

IPI’s Distinguished Author Series brings critically acclaimed writers to IPI to present on international issues and to engage in a lively discussion with experts from the permanent missions to the UN and other members of the foreign affairs community in New York.

Economic connectivity has become a buzzword when talking about harmonization of the integration processes within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the European Union (EU)—the so-called “integration of integrations.” At a time when diplomatic relations between Russia and the West have deteriorated yet states remain linked by economic and energy interests, some see economic connectivity as a possible entry point for maintaining dialogue and rebuilding cooperation.

In response to this increased interest in economic connectivity, IPI, with the support of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland, organized a roundtable on this topic on December 14, 2015, in Vienna. This roundtable brought together representatives of OSCE participating states, executive structures, the private sector, civil society, and academia.

This meeting note provides an overview of the roundtable and offers some ideas on possible ways to further develop the idea of economic connectivity, including the following:

• Economic connectivity could build on common interests between Russia and the West.
• The issue of economic connectivity cannot be seen in isolation from politics.
• Respect for a rules-based economic system could help rebuild neighborly relations.
• Greater compatibility between the EU and the EAEU should be based on pragmatic steps rather than a grand bargain.
• States that enjoy the benefits of free trade agreements with both unions should play the role of a bridge between them.
• Economic confidence-building measures can help forge common interests and joint projects that bring mutual benefits.

Download

Over the past two decades, an abundance of legal and policy frameworks in the multilateral system have focused on women’s security and empowerment. Women, however, continue to be poorly represented in formal peacemaking activities, and they suffer disproportionately from the indirect effects of conflict. The credibility of the multilateral system itself depends on progress in this area, due to compelling evidence that inclusive societies are more likely to be peaceful and stable.

On the sixteenth anniversary of Security Council Resolution 1325, this policy paper explores key challenges and developments related to women, peace, and security. This is the first in a series of fifteen policy papers produced by the Independent Commission on Multilateralism (ICM), a two-year project launched by IPI in September 2014 to identify how the multilateral system can be made more “fit for purpose” for twenty-first-century challenges.

Based on extensive consultations with representatives of states, various UN entities, and civil society, as well as subject-matter experts, this paper details recommendations laid out in the ICM’s final report, published in September 2016. To improve multilateral engagement on women, peace, and security, it recommends several major shifts:

• Reimagine traditional approaches to peace and security, from conceptions of peace and security to the identification of key actors and the goals of peace processes.
• Achieve a unified, holistic, and coherent approach to improve women’s security and participation, from shifts in social norms to improvements in education and increased women’s representation in politics and policymaking.
• Build an inclusive and legitimate multilateral system that embraces the women, peace, and security agenda as key to its credibility and effectiveness.

For other IPI news, events, and publications about women, peace, and security, see here.

Download

On Wednesday, October 26th, IPI together with UN Women cohosted a policy forum on the influence of women’s participation in peace processes—from negotiations to peace agreements, power-sharing arrangements, and throughout political transitions. Speakers discussed the challenges, opportunities, and prospects for improved gender representation in ongoing peace processes in Colombia, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere.

Women’s participation can have a strong positive influence on the success of peace processes and the conclusion and durability of peace agreements, as the 2015 Global Study and High-Level Review of Resolution 1325 both documented. Women’s impact on peace processes is not limited to gender equality. There is a growing need for women’s involvement in technical areas related to peace agreements, such as power-sharing, security arrangements and transitional justice.

At this event, panelists shared their contributions on the importance of women’s participation in mediation and peace processes. They shared findings that move beyond the peace table to examine when and how women are included in power-sharing arrangements and throughout long-term political transitions. For example, in cases where neither the peace agreement nor the subsequent electoral framework provided for the inclusion of women, gender representation in parliament remains unusually low.

Drawing on direct experiences advising in various peace processes, panelists also reflect on how to broaden participation and how to influence the gatekeepers who pose obstacles to women’s inclusion.

Opening Remarks:
Purna Sen, Director of the Policy Division, UN Women

Speakers:
Thania Paffenholz, Director of the Inclusive Peace and Transition Initiative, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva
Christine Bell, Professor of Constitutional Law and Assistant Principal (Global Justice), University of Edinburgh
Virginia Bouvier, Senior Advisor for Peace Processes at the United States Institute of Peace and Adjunct Professor at the School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University (Via Video)

Moderator:
Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, Senior Policy Analyst, IPI

On Tuesday, October 25th, IPI together with the Permanent Missions of the Netherlands and Italy cohosted a screening of the documentary film The Destruction of Memory.

The Destruction of Memory is based on a book of the same name by Robert Bevan. Over the past century, cultural destruction has wrought catastrophic results across the globe. This war against culture is not over—it has been steadily increasing. In Syria and Iraq, the ‘cradle of civilization,’ millennia of culture are being destroyed. The push to protect, salvage, and rebuild has moved in step with the destruction. Legislation and policy have played a role, but heroic individuals have fought back, risking and losing their lives to protect not just other human beings, but our cultural identity—to save the record of who we are.

The screening will be followed by an interactive discussion. Interviewees in the film include the Director-General of UNESCO, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, along with diverse and distinguished international experts whose voices combine to address this urgent issue.

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Ms. Lise Gregoire, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the United Nations
H.E. Mr. Inigo Lambertini, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Italy to the United Nations

Speakers:
Ms. Karima Bennoune, UN Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights
Mr. Tim Slade, Documentary Director and Producer
Ms. Bonnie Burnham, Senior Advisor of World Monuments Fund

Moderator:
Mr. Warren Hoge, Senior Adviser for External Relations

Spanning a period of twenty-one years, the Vietnamese “boat people” exodus was the last major refugee crisis of the Cold War. The international response agreed on in Geneva in 1979 was in line with Western Cold War values, but by 1988 it had begun to unravel. The new international response took the form of the Comprehensive Plan of Action for Indochinese Refugees (CPA), which was in place from 1989 to 1996.

This paper offers a detailed look at the process of negotiating the CPA, its contents, how it was received, and its implementation. At the time it was agreed, the CPA was revolutionary in two ways: first, it was comprehensive, and second, it was predicated on the right of Vietnamese boat people to land and to be processed for refugee status. As a result, the CPA both saved lives and marked the transition from blanket recognition of refugee status to individual status determination—all in a region whose countries had not ratified the Refugee Convention.

While all refugee situations are different, the CPA provides lessons and conclusions that could inform responses to other refugee crises:

• Initial discussions leading to the CPA depended on individual-led, field-driven initiative.
• In breaking from previous approaches to refugee crises, the CPA faced significant opposition.
• Involving the country of origin—Vietnam—was essential to implementing the response.
• The CPA benefited from a single agency—UNHCR—taking the lead.
• Despite the CPA, most countries in the region continued to reject the Refugee Convention.
• The mass information campaign conducted in Vietnam was crucial to the CPA’s success.
• One of the main achievements of the CPA was to address the population movement in general, including both refugees and migrants.

Download

On Wednesday, October 19th, IPI together with One Earth Future, and Inclusive Security, cohosted a policy forum on participatory policymaking and the women, peace, and security agenda. Speakers at the event shared their insights on national pathways to more inclusive peace and security, drawing on new research in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Philippines, Serbia, and Sierra Leone.

Click here to view the event video on Ustream>>

The number of countries creating national strategies to advance women’s participation in peace and security processes has more than tripled since 2010, from 18 to 63. National Action Plans for implementing Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and security were conceived to address the gap between prescriptive international frameworks and domestic realities. Nationally designed and owned, they reflect each country’s particular security needs and priorities for peace. How are these plans developed in practice, and what impact do they have?

This event explored new research from four conflict and post-conflict countries: the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Philippines, Serbia, and Sierra Leone. Panelists from government and civil society examined challenges and opportunities for national action on this front—from new security threats to “localization” of policies and roles for international actors.

The event also took stock of the effects of collaboration between government and civil society when developing and implementing these kinds of participatory peacebuilding policies. It offered lessons and insights for those looking to create and strengthen national plans for women, peace, and security in varied contexts around the world.

Speakers:
Julienne Lusenge, Director, Fund for Congolese Women
Maria Cleofe Gettie Sandoval, former Undersecretary, Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process, Philippines
Miki Jacevic, Vice Chair, Inclusive Security
Alexandra Amling, Researcher on Women, Peace, and Security, OEF Research

Moderator:
Marie O’Reilly, Director of Research, Inclusive Security

Opening Remarks:
Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, Senior Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute

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

An expert panel of leaders from the government, financial sector, and civil society came together at IPI’s Middle East Office (IPI-MENA) for a discussion of “Social Peace in Countries in Transition.” The participants agreed that solving the global pension issues will be a prerequisite to acheving peace for these countries, and beyond.

Lundeg Purevsuren, former Foreign Minister and Senior Adviser to the President of Mongolia and Samer Khanachet, Chairman of TAKAUD Savings & Pensions, announced their partnership with IPI on a new project to be based in Manama. The program will be a regional and global effort to tackle the challenges facing pension schemes in the economies of countries in transition.

The project was lauded by Naser Al Belooshi, advisor to the Minister for Political and Economic Affairs, who emphasized the need to take action in a concrete and result-oriented approach.

A number of factors are exacerbating the pensions crisis: people are living and working longer, and family sizes are smaller than in the past. “This sets a platform for generational tensions over limited public resources, in turn putting social peace in jeopardy in the long-term,”,Edward Whitehouse, manager of the World Bank Pension Reform Primer, said. “Pensions are part of a relationship between generations.”

It is IPI’s mission to manage risk and build resilience, so it is only appropriate that our think tank should host a discussion on how to achieve social peace, participants said. Mr. Lundeg, called for the international community to secure social peace by thinking “today about tomorrow.”

In response to a question from the Indonesian Ambassador, Chilman Arisman, on Mongolia’s transition process and its impact on inter-state relations in Asia. Mr. Lundeg highlighted the need for countries like his to adhere to democracy, neighborliness, and social peace.

Daw Nwe Nwe Win, representing Myanmar’s Ministry of Finance, urged TAKAUD, IPI and other international bodies to assist her country in its transitional challenges.

Nejib Friji, Director of IPI-MENA, highlighted the necessity “to cement a trilateral partnership between the government, the private sector, and trade unions” to achieve social peace while tackling the pension challenges. In that vein, Dr. Khanachet called for “wise and proper rules, regulations and laws” to adapt to the dynamic economic context. These regulations should be regularly revisited, he said.

Mr. Friji  referenced the final report of the Independent Commision on Multilateralism, which offers actionable items which can be adopted to remold the the multilateral system  to better address the challenges of the global era. “Pension solutions should be among the multilateral system’s new endeavors,” he said.

This discussion was held on the sidelines of TAKAUD’s “Middle East & North Africa Pensions Conference”  on  October 18th, under the patronage of the Central Bank of Bahrain.

The event was held as part of IPI’s Global Leaders’ Series.

Nejib Friji, moderated the conversation.

Related Coverage:
“Strong pension schemes key for a stable nation” (DT News, October 20, 2016)
“IPI MENA Hosts Panel on ‘Social Peace in Countries in Transition‘” (IPI MENA Press release, October 19, 2016)

In Arabic:
Al Bilad Newspaper, October 20, 2016
Al Wasat Newspaper, October 20, 2016

Representatives from member states, the UN Secretariat, and other experts from civil society organizations and think tanks discussed how to apply the recommendations of the 2015 High Level Independent Panel on peace operations (HIPPO) Review in Libya at an IPI Seminar, held on October 19, 2016. This discussion was held under the Chatham House rule of non-attribution.

This event was part of a series of workshops co-organized by the International Peace Institute, Security Council Report and the Stimson Center, to examine how the recommendations related to mandating, planning, and analysis in the 2015 HIPPO report and the follow-up report of the Secretary-General can be applied to country-specific contexts.

This closed-door workshop, which follows one held on Mali in April (meeting note available here), provided an opportunity to assess the evolving situation in Libya, discuss whether the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) is adequately equipped to deliver its mandate given current challenges, and discuss how the Security Council can continue to support the political process in Libya and the good offices role played by the mission ahead of the renewal of UNSMIL’s mandate in December of this year.

In calling for the sequencing and prioritization of mandates to ensure their achievability, both the HIPPO and the Secretary-General’s reports highlighted the importance of setting clear political objectives for missions. Participants discussed the current challenges to the political process in Libya as well as how UNSMIL, and other tools at the Council’s disposal, can be better tailored to support the efforts to reach a political settlement. Participants aimed to arrive at recommendations of how a new mandate for UNSMIL could reflect the prioritization of new objectives.

UN Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Tayé-Brook Zerihoun, delivered opening remarks. Ian Martin, Executive Director of Security Council Report, and Youssef Mahmoud, IPI Senior Adviser, moderated the workshop.

A meeting note will follow.

Of the eleven countries most affected by terrorism globally, seven currently host UN peace operations. In countries affected by terrorism and violent extremism, peace operations will increasingly be called upon to adapt their approaches without compromising UN doctrine. But to date, there has been little exploration of the broader political and practical challenges, opportunities, and risks facing UN peace operations in complex security environments. This has created a gap between the policy debate in New York and the realities confronting UN staff on the ground.

This policy paper aims to bridge this gap by examining the recent drive to integrate counterterrorism (CT) and preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) into relevant activities of UN peace operations, as well as the associated challenges and opportunities. It seeks to expand the scope of discussions beyond whether peace operations can “do CT” to how they can better support national governments and local communities in preventing terrorism and violent extremism.

Based on extensive conversations with UN officials, member state representatives, and practitioners, the paper offers a number of recommendations. At the level of headquarters, the UN should:

• Improve its capacity to analyze and respond to the factors and grievances leading to radicalization and violence;
• Enhance system-wide dialogue, coherence, and policy guidance; and
• Prioritize objectives and capacities related to CT and P/CVE in mission mandates.

To make field missions more effective, the UN should:

• Preserve and expand the space for dialogue with all parties;
• Enhance capacity for early warning and response;
• Integrate CT and P/CVE into compacts with host governments where relevant;
• Enhance mission engagement with civil society, women, and youth;
• Design integrated strategies to prevent terrorism and violent extremism;
• Promote partnerships between missions, country teams, and NGOs;
• Improve capacity to monitor, evaluate, manage risk, and learn;
• Employ caution in labeling programs as “P/CVE”; and
• Improve training and raise the awareness of mission staff.

Download

On Tuesday, October 25th at 1:15pm EST, IPI is hosting a discussion on the UN Security Council and military interventions with Hardeep Singh Puri, author of Perilous Interventions: The Security Council and the Politics of Chaos.

IPI Live Event Feed

Perilous Interventions is a timely publication, in which one of India’s most experienced, able, and eloquent diplomats, who presided over the UN Security Council and its Counter-Terrorism Committee, provides an insider’s account. The book takes a clinical and forensic look at the dominant narrative of the Arab Spring and analyzes some of the factors that contributed to the crisis—the use of military force, the arming of rebels, the unraveling of countries, and the resulting desperate migrations. The lively account explores the international community’s actions in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Ukraine, along with India’s own misadventure in Sri Lanka in the 1980s. It illustrates how the Security Council can inadvertently undermine the very thing it is expected to ensure— international peace and security.

Speaker:
Hardeep Singh Puri, former Permanent Representative of India to the UN, former Secretary-General of the Independent Commission on Multilateralism, and former Vice President of IPI

Moderator:
Warren Hoge, Senior Adviser for External Relations, IPI

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

On October 11-12th, IPI held an event in Reykjavik to discuss the legacy of the historic meeting between the President of the United States Ronald Reagan and the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev of exactly thirty years earlier, and to see if and how the “spirit of Reykjavik” could inspire leaders of today to return to negotiations on arms control, reduce tensions between Russia and the West, and reignite the hope of nuclear weapons-free world.

The meeting took place in Höfdi House in the Icelandic capital where Mr. Gorbachev and Mr. Reagan had met for two days of intense negotiations in October 1986. American and Russian negotiators, who witnessed the event, stressed how “Reykjavik changed everything,” and how it marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War. They recalled the statement that the two leaders had agreed to, namely that “nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought; our countries will not seek military superiority.”

Video messages were sent from George Shultz, who was US Secretary of State at the time, as well as Mikhail Gorbachev. In an impassioned statement, Mr. Gorbachev expressed concern and alarm at the current world situation. He warned that, “unless international affairs are put back on a normal track and international relations are demilitarized, the goal we jointly set at Reykjavik will become more distant rather than closer.” (Watch their full statements here.)

In opening remarks, the major of Reykjavik, Dagur Eggertson, and Iceland Foreign Minister Lilja Alfredsdottir recalled the impact of the meeting on their city and country, and the inspiration that it still holds today. Terje Rød-Larsen, President of IPI, praised the work that Iceland did at that time—with only ten days to prepare—to “make the impossible possible.” He also observed that the choice of location was instrumental for setting a mood that fostered openness and trust.

During a full day of discussions, participants—including current and former diplomats, politicians, arms control experts, academics, and representatives of civil society – recalled the negotiations that went on thirty years ago, and what lessons could be learned for today. Among the points raised was the importance of leadership, treating one’s adversary with decency and respect, and the need for trust. The need for dialogue, even—or especially—in difficult times was emphasized. Concerning the specifics of mediation, several participants underlined the importance of a suitable negotiating environment (like Höfdi House), as well as the combination of both high- and expert-level discussions.

In addition to looking at the past, the event focused on security and cooperation today, particularly relations between Russia and the West. Suggestions were made on how to de-escalate tensions, de-militarize relations, and return to diplomacy. There was also a focused discussion on conventional and nuclear arms control. Several participants warned that the unpredictable and unstructured relationship between nuclear powers created the most dangerous situation since the Cuban Missile Crisis. They suggested that although the time may not be ripe for high-level negotiations, preparations should be made so that ideas can be put forward when there is sufficient political will.

Over lunch, the participants were given a presentation on Iceland’s geo-strategic position between NATO and Russia by President Gudni Th. Johannesson.

Looking ahead, speakers warned of the increased complexity of nuclear issues because of a growing number of states that possess nuclear weapons, as well as malign non-state actors trying to acquire them. The danger of cyber threats to nuclear security was also raised. Participants underlined the need for greater education on arms control, as well as more active engagement of youth in initiatives designed to build trust and confidence.

While the situation today was characterized as unstable, bright spots were highlighted including cooperation among the great powers in the Iran nuclear talks. Participants were encouraged by former Icelandic President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson to never give up, and to keep alive the “spirit of Reykjavik” and the dream of a nuclear weapon-free world. “The Reykjavik summit of 1986 shows that we can change the world,” said Mr. Grimsson.

Related Coverage:
“Time to return to the Spirit of Reykjavik (1986)” Remarks by Ambassador Sergey Batsanov, October 13, 2016
“The Legacy of the Reykjavik Summit – The Road Ahead” (InDepthNews, October 13, 2016)
“Gorbachev calls for peace: Is there a path forward?” (Christian Science Monitor, October 12, 2016)
“Acting Under Secretary Tom Countryman Travels to Reykjavik, Iceland” Media Note (US Department of State, October 11, 2016)

In Russian:
Pozner Online, October 17, 2016
Gazeta, October 11, 2016
TASS Russian News Agency, October 10, 2016
Interfax, October 10, 2016
Lenta, October 10, 2016

At an IPI seminar in Reykjavik, Iceland yesterday, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev said via video, “I would like to emphasize something, with all the emotions I have in my soul: the worst thing that has happened over the past few years is the collapse of trust in relations between the major powers, which, according to the UN Charter, bear primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, and which still have enormous stockpiles of nuclear weapons and must reduce them, up to and including their elimination.”

“Nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” Mr. Gorbachev said. “I think it sounds even stronger today than at that time.”

With today’s US-Russian relations at a new low, can his meeting with Ronald Reagan at the Reykjavik summit 30 years ago—which history views as the beginning of the end of the cold war—serve as an inspiration for arms control and reducing tensions today?

This question is the topic of the IPI seminar, “The Legacy of the Reykjavik Summit,” organized with the Foreign Ministry of Iceland, taking place October 10-11, 2016.

Mr. Gorbachev’s full remarks, below.

George Shultz, who was US Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan, also gave opening remarks.

On October 11-12, 1986, the President of the United States of America Ronald Reagan, and the General Secretary of the Communist Partyof the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, met in the capital of Iceland, Reykjavík, to discuss a radical plan: redirection of nuclear-armed missiles and a move towards a nuclear free world. The meeting was a breakthrough in relations between the USSR and the United States, and is widely considered as the beginning of the end of the Cold War.

Thirty years later, tensions between Russia and the West are at their highest since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Instability in other parts of the world, like the Middle East and the South China Sea, is also creating new risks, and leading to a new arms race.

Can the anniversary of that historic meeting at the Höfði House in Reykjavík thirty years ago provide an inspiration to de-escalate tensions between NATO and Russia? Can it help to promote non-proliferation, and reignite the hope of a nuclear free world?  Participants at this meeting include former and current diplomats, arms control experts, historians, and representatives of civil society.

See full meeting agenda

On Thursday, October 13th at 1:15pm EST, IPI together with the US Holocaust Memorial Museum are cohosting a panel discussion on the continuing challenge of preventing mass atrocities in an era of global transition.

The next secretary-general of the United Nations will take office at a time when mass killings of civilians are increasing. Global patterns of mass atrocities are also changing, as non-state actors like the self-proclaimed Islamic State and Boko Haram perpetrate large-scale violence against civilians. It is essential that the new secretary-general create a clear agenda for preventing and responding to such atrocities that can gain the support of both the UN system and its member states.

The event will provide a forum to discuss these new trends and the evolving challenge of preventive action.

Speakers will focus on new trends in mass atrocities worldwide, recent developments in global policy efforts to prevent them, and the challenge ahead for new leaders in the United States, at the United Nations, and elsewhere. The following key questions will be addressed:

• How have mass atrocities evolved since the end of the Cold War?
• What are the key challenges that face global policymakers who seek to prevent mass atrocities?
• How can the United Nations work with the United States and other actors to reinforce policy efforts to prevent and respond to mass atrocities?

Speakers:
Jeanne d’Arc Byaje, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Rwanda to the United Nations
Naomi Kikoler, Deputy Director, Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, US Holocaust Memorial Museum
Scott Straus, Professor of Political Science and International Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison

Moderator:
Adam Lupel, Vice President, International Peace Institute

On Wednesday, October 5th at 1:15pm EST, IPI is hosting a policy forum to discuss the book, South Sudan: The Untold Story from Independence to Civil War, written by Ms. Hilde F. Johnson, former Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General to South Sudan.

IPI Live Event Feed

In July 2011, South Sudan gained independence from Sudan and became the world’s newest country. Yet just years after this momentous decision, the country was experiencing renewed civil war and political strife. Through her work with the UN, Hilde F. Johnson was witness to the many challenges South Sudan faced as it struggled to adjust to its newfound independence.

In the book, South Sudan: The Untold Story from Independence to Civil War, she provides an insider’s account of South Sudan, from the independence celebrations of July 2011 to the outbreak of the conflict in December 2013. Her access to contacts at the highest levels of government, accompanied by her deep knowledge of the country and its history, make this a unique eyewitness account of the turbulent first three years of the world’s newest – and yet most fragile – country.

Opening remarks:
Mr. Warren Hoge, Senior Adviser for External Relations, International Peace Institute

Speaker:
Ms. Hilde F. Johnson, author of South Sudan: The Untold Story from Independence to Civil War; former Special Representative of the Secretary-General to South Sudan; and former Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF

Discussants:
H.E. Mr. Fodé Seck, Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Senegal to the United Nations (TBC)
Mr. Ian Martin, Executive Director, Security Council Report

Moderator:
Ms. Sarah Cliffe, Director of New York University’s Center on International Cooperation

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-weksaj").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-weksaj").fadeIn(1000);});}); ©framez./EHFG

On September 29th, IPI organized a panel discussion on “Desperate Migration and Health” at the European Health Forum in Gastein, Austria. The panel was designed to highlight the health needs of people on the move, and identify remedial action to reduce vulnerability.

Jessica Reinisch, Director for the Centre for the Study of Internationalism at the University of London, provided an historical overview of the relationship between migration and health. She recalled that a campaign to control cholera in the mid-nineteenth century was one of the first reluctant attempts at internationalism. She reminded the audience how, after the first and second world wars, refugees were viewed as a threat—not only for the spread of disease, but also for the “political contamination” of ideologies. She noted that the narrative of “double contagion” is evident among sections of the media and politicians today.

Davide Mosca, Director of the Migration Health Division at the International Organization for Migration, highlighted the vulnerability of people on the move. He pointed out that the legal regime covering the estimated 245 million migrants is weak. Furthermore, he observed that while everyone has the right to health there is not universal health coverage: many migrants therefore fall through the cracks. He therefore called for more concerted action, including in the context of the Global Compact on Migration, to address the health needs of migrants.

Julie Lyn Hall, Director of Health and Care at the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, outlined six groups of people whose health is affected by migration. Three are visible: those on the move; those who settle; and those who are stuck in transition. She described three other less visible groups: those who return; host communities; and people who are left behind in areas of high migration. She stressed the need for “future proofing” the health needs of migrants through long-term strategic planning in order to manage the situation more effectively.

Miriam Rabkin of the Columbia University Medical Center highlighted the gap between health needs and health services for migrants. She stressed the need for continuity of care for migrants with chronic diseases. She noted that the main burden for dealing with the health needs of migrants and refugees is falling on lower-income countries. General support for their healthcare systems would therefore benefit the populations of those countries as well as displaced people. Rabkin stressed that in the future, discussions on the health needs of migrants should involve migrants.

Bernd Rechel of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies presented data that showed little increase in the number of migrants coming to Europe over the past five years. He also debunked the myth that migrants are heading to countries that have the most generous healthcare systems. He stressed the need for more data to ensure evidence-based policies, more evaluation of good practices, and greater access of migrants to health care. He warned that marginalizing migrants will increase the risks and costs of healthcare, both to the affected groups and to the rest of society.

Several speakers stressed the need to address the psycho-social needs of people on the move, as well as volunteers and health workers helping refugees and migrants.

The panel and public concluded that greater focus is needed on the health needs of migrants. It was suggested that an inter-disciplinary group – involving medical experts, civil society, migrants, and relevant inter-governmental organizations – should be formed in order to provide recommendations on the issue, for example in support of the Global Compact on Migration.

On Tuesday, September 27th, IPI together with the United Nations Office for West Africa and the Sahel, and the Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations, cohosted a policy forum event to share and discuss the conclusions and recommendations of a regional conversation on “Investing in Peace and the Prevention of Violence in West Africa and the Sahel” held in Dakar, Senegal on June 27-28, 2016.

Click here to view the event video on Ustream>>

The Dakar seminar addressed the nature of violent extremism in West Africa and the Sahel-Sahara sub-regions—as perceived by those affected by it. It examined approaches to the phenomenon that promoted a shift from simply addressing the factors that drive and sustain violence to strengthening those associated with peaceful and resilient societies—including social, economic, and political inclusion, as well as improved state-society relations. Participants discussed the policy implications of such a shift, and made a number of recommendations on how best to invest in peace in order to prevent violence and its various manifestations. They also examined how the UN and its partners can best support national governments and local communities in this endeavor, including by developing a shared regional perspective on the implementation of the UN Secretary-General’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism (A/70/674).

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Mr. Olivier Zehnder, Deputy Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations
H.E. Mr. Fodé Seck, Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Senegal to the United Nations

Speakers:
Mr. Mohamed Ibn Chambas, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General and Head of the United Nations Office for West Africa and the Sahel (UNOWAS)
Ambassador Jean-Daniel Bieler, Special Adviser for Central Africa, Human Security Division, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland
Ms. Djeinaba Touré, Je M’Engage, Mauritania
Mr. Aslam Souli, Vice President, National Youth Initiative against Terrorism, Tunisia
Mr. Ahmed Labnouj, Interpeace, Libya

Moderator:
Dr. Youssef Mahmoud, Senior Adviser, International Peace Institute (IPI)

West Africa and the Sahel-Sahara region are faced with peace and security challenges that weaken states and affect state-citizen relations. The emergence and proliferation of violent extremist groups aggravate the climate of fear and insecurity, and the actions of these groups affect peace efforts, sustainable development, and human rights. Over the past decade, efforts to address violent extremism have consisted primarily of a series of security measures largely inspired by strategies used to fight terrorism, which have been inadequate and at times fuel violent extremism. This experience has led international organizations and states to adopt more preventive approaches, such as those detailed in the UN secretary-general’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism.

In this context, the International Peace Institute (IPI), the UN Office for West Africa and the Sahel (UNOWAS), and the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs co-organized a regional seminar in Dakar, Senegal, on June 27 and 28, 2016. This meeting brought together sixty participants from fourteen countries, including political leaders, members of civil society, and religious and traditional authorities, as well as representatives of the media, the private sector, governments, and regional and international organizations, to explore alternative measures to address the violent extremism affecting the region.

Participants agreed on a number of recommendations with regards to how the UN and its partners could more effectively prevent violent extremism in West Africa and the Sahel-Sahara subregions, in support of national governments and local authorities and communities and with the active participation of citizens. These recommendations include the need to focus on political participation, improved state-citizen relations, and inclusive dialogue as the primary mechanisms for prevention. They also agreed on the importance of local and regional preventive initiatives, and the need for institutional initiatives to prevent violent extremism to build on existing ones at the regional level, while recognizing the central role and responsibility of states in prevention.

Download in French

Download

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

Kristalina Georgieva, the Vice President of the European Commission, told an IPI Global Leader Series audience that while the world had been unprepared for the rapidity of modern change, she believed human and institutional versatility could meet the challenge of catching up.

“I would argue that we can be reasonably positive because humans are incredibly adaptive and creative, and we can find solutions,” she said. But she warned that “we are underestimating the significance of this speed of change and complexity.”

She spoke of the dangers posed by technological changes that were bringing advances but also spreading inequality at a time when the global population of needy was growing exponentially, enabling the emergence of a resort to terror by the young and idle.

“I lose sleep over this phenomenon,” she said, “the combination of jobless technology and demographic explosion.”

At one point in her September 22nd appearance, she broke from the subject of her talk to comment on rumors that she might be nominated by a country other than her own to be a candidate to be the next secretary-general. The question has arisen because there already is an official Bulgarian candidate, Irina Bokova, the director-general of UNESCO, who has not placed as high as expected in the four straw polls of the Security Council conducted thusfar.

“I am not seeking or willing to be nominated by another country,” Ms. Georgieva said. “This is my country, I love it. There is no way I will do anything that puts me at odds with being a Bulgarian.” She paused and then added, “We have given birth to more than one qualified candidate so what’s wrong with that?”

On the subject of change, she noted that “the combination of science, connectivity and the ability to mobilize civil society brings things that are incredibly good, like the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals.”

But, she said, “the risk this enormous change brings is the multiplicity of shocks. Shocks come from economic crises that cross boundaries very quickly, natural disasters, and unfortunately one of the most significant drivers of shocks are conflicts tearing apart the lives of millions of people.”

She said that a new and increasingly dangerous phenomenon in the twenty- first century was the ominous presence of non-state actors who “have no interest in becoming recognized governments” and living by recognized standards. “They just want to wreak havoc and destroy livelihoods of people around us, and scare us,” she argued. “When you take this one step further with violence and terrorism, that picture of a pretty world with new technology gets a little murkier.”

She listed four primary needs:

• Foresight
• Agility and adaptability
• Efficiency and managerial excellence
• Political will for change, political will for action

Speaking from her own experience in humanitarian and development work both at the European Commission and at the World Bank, she spoke of the need for structural change to keep pace with change. “That, of course, means bringing down the silos between institutions,” she said, “bringing down the barriers between humanitarian first responders and development to work together.”

“This, of course, also has to be done in the direction of peacebuilding, security, human rights so we have a horizontal build that allows us to make the best out of the resources we have and be more agile when we use them.”

So how do you solve the world’s governance problems?, she asked in closing.

“There are two ways: one is realistic, one is fantastic,” she said.

“The realistic one is extraterrestrials come from space, take over our institutions and fix them. And the fantastic way is that people do it themselves.”

Introducing Ms. Georgieva and moderating the meeting was IPI President Terje Rød- Larsen, IPI’s President.