The Role of Foreign Assistance
in Conflict Prevention

>> USAID Home >> Conflict Prevention >> January 2001 Conference

Download the paper from this session: - Word - PDF - HTML Listen to audio clips from this session  January 2001 Conference Report TOC     Session III: Addressing the Root Causes of Conflict and Building the Basis for Cooperative Order and Free Societies A. Addressing the Root Causes of Conflict Conflict prevention depends upon the construction of civil societies in which people appreciate the positions of others. Appreciation is achieved through appropriate patterns of interaction. For the United States (or the international community) to successfully promote societies in which this acceptance exists, a new paradigm should be adopted. Current development strategies rely upon outdated models that equate power with control and that hold an institutionally focused view of the world. Behavior, driven by individual or communal perceptions of the world, will only be changed if perceptions are changed; people will not act differently until they think differently. The new paradigm, encapsulated by the concept of relationships, should be an expansion of, rather than a break with, the current model. This new model should also include a defined process of interaction that promotes citizens as political actors who will maintain a sustained presence, and thereby exert popular power. If development work is to be effective, the adoption of this new paradigm is essential. With the advent of a new administration and a new understanding of the global arena (i.e., post-Cold War politics), the development community has the perfect opportunity to shift its perspective and strategy. The existing model, the politics-power paradigm, offers an institutionally based view of the world and focuses on politics as the seat of power. In this model, power is equated with control. Interaction thus becomes a strategic chess game, where each side attempts to outmaneuver the other, rather that a cooperative effort to solve problems and address issues. A paradigm change is mandatory if development strategies are to be altered; perceptions influence action. A new paradigm will evoke new approaches to development work and conflict prevention. Rather than completely abandoning the power-politics paradigm, the present paradigm should be enlarged to incorporate the dual manifestations of power: power as control and power as the collective will of the people. Citizens are political actors. The challenge for the future thus becomes, how can citizens become empowered to assume this role and exercise their sustained presence to exert popular power? Relationships are the fundamental concept guiding the new paradigm. The five components of relationships are: Identity - things that cause people to kill (e.g. race, ethnicity, religion) Interests - desires Power - as control and as popular power Misperceptions and perceptions Patterns of interaction Crucial to the new paradigm are processes of interaction. Specifically, the new paradigm is an inquiry into how processes of interaction work (i.e., what happens when people interact) and why they fail. Relationships provide unique insight into how people interact and, when dissected, can be used as an operational tool to analyze conflicts. The ability of the five-point relationship model to examine potential conflicts is predicated on the following two facts: Group relations are a continual process of political interactions. Interactions are multi-level processes that change over time. The use of relationships as an operational tool has the ability to inform two different aspects of conflict prevention: Diagnostic--an examination of the five components of relationships will permit the analyst and the mediator to discover the core, the "who, why, what, and how," of a conflict. Practical--the analysis of a conflict's core enables a mediator to teach groups to interact differently, thereby changing the adversarial nature of the interaction into one that is more amicable, or at least to an interaction where both parties understand the other group's position. Fundamental to the successful evolution from adversarial to non-adversarial group interactions is indigenous ownership of the process. Successful techniques of interaction cannot be exported; they should be formulated by those involved in the interaction. Processes of interaction must have established rules to enable individuals to interact peacefully. These rules, or techniques, cannot be dictated by outsiders. The process of creating the rules that guide interaction serves a dual purpose: It enables the feuding parties to sit together and discuss their problems. Through discussion, former adversaries develop a basic trust upon which they are able to build voluntary cooperation and a new future. The ability of feuding parties to sit and discuss their grievances enables the community to heal together and to put the past behind them. This is especially true after violent episodes (e.g., community discussions in Rwanda following the genocide). Although outsiders have a minimal role to play in processes of interactions, they can play a vital role as mediator and stimulator during the dialogue over past injustices and injuries. It lays the foundation for democracy--people learn different ways of interacting, thereby providing new forms of expression and alternative plausible resolutions (i.e., non-violent solutions) and can realize the power that they, as individuals, have. Any discussion of the patterns of interaction, especially one in which the ability to change those patterns is debated, rightly begs two questions: Are all issues negotiable? Should all conflicts be stopped? While the answers to these questions involve complex issues ranging from personal beliefs to codified definitions of national interests, several things should be kept in mind: Hate and fear - not actual material constraints - are the common barrier to the successful resolution of a conflict. Relationships can change definitions to broaden the paradigm, thereby allowing groups to settle their disputes without resorting to violence. Conflict is not necessarily bad or detrimental. All deadly conflict should be ended, however, as it is injurious to the society in which it is occurring. Furthermore, most present violent conflicts are old conflicts that have been waged for years; war has become a business. It is imperative to invest in capable societies to prevent further outbreaks of violence and to rehabilitate societies that have been destroyed by interminable conflicts. Crucial to the success of the reformation of patterns of interaction is that there be no time constraints on the process. Funding from sympathetic donors should reflect the protracted nature of interaction and dialogue to encourage sustained dialogue. Time limits jeopardize the success of a project. The United States and USAID are encouraged to adopt this new paradigm to deal with conflict. The fundamental goal continues to be stopping violent conflict before it erupts, but success demands a change in how conflict is perceived and what strategies are best suited to combat it. The three most basic and immediate actions undertaken by the United States should be the following: U.S. organizations should support grassroots organizations that enable change. U.S. citizens should be encouraged to function as political actors; providing leadership in a non-threatening manner usually limits resentment toward and threats against U.S. entities and interests. U.S. entities should encourage sustained dialogue and should demonstrate this commitment by adopting new donor behavior (e.g., funding long-term projects). The present U.S. aversion toward funding long-term projects needs to be addressed and reversed. B. Building the Basis for Cooperative Order and Free Societies Voluntary cooperative behavior begets societies without violent conflict. Therefore, USAID, in its development role in various countries, should engage a new model of local development with local direction, rather than rely on "upstream" determination. Since World War II, the United States has become increasingly centralized. This centralization process has become tied to control and power. Due to the appearance of mass communication (i.e., the Internet) and large-scale activism (i.e., NGOs), individuals have discovered their capacity for self-governance. The notion that power is principally linked to the state needs to be reworked to include the reality that people have the capacity to govern themselves. The fundamental question for development agencies then becomes, how do they make it happen? Traditional mechanisms for development, especially USAID's congressionally designated funds, employ a top-down flow of both money and determination. This is in stark contrast to the advent of local awareness that individuals have not only the right to, but also the ability for, self-determination. Effective development approaches will require a revamped understanding of, and strategies for, development work. Cooperative behavior is principally composed of the following components: A constituting processes which allows individuals to congregate, discuss, and arrive at a consensus. Constituting processes are local constitutional processes that generate a commitment to a communally determined set of core values and goals; they assign rights, duties, and responsibilities. Participating in constituting processes enables citizens to act as citizens rather than in the limited role of vote caster and consumer. A citizen who participates in constituting processes is partaking in the development of a democracy. Linking character and institutions. People view opportunities as a result of the institutions under which they live. To change the way people think of opportunity, it is imperative that their environments be modified. Focusing on enabling environments. The current system of incentives in U.S. foreign assistance -- as well as in developing countries - often impedes the implementation of self-governing communities. Implementing positive institutional incentives to create proactive change is imperative if USAID is to help communities realize effective self-governance. Blind acceptance of state level governments is no longer acceptable; it is imperative that U.S. institutions move toward building systems of governance that are able to effectively address local and regional issues. Local knowledge and practice should be built into policy. Local knowledge is founded upon years of experience, interaction, and trust. It cannot be mastered overnight by a foreign assistance worker. Assignments lasting between three and four years are not sufficient for development assistance personnel to master and become effective in local systems. Small is not always ideal. Larger systems are also vital; the issue is to know which type of system is necessary and how to preserve local autonomy and self-governance when integrating into a larger network. Creating a new public administration that is practical, democratically centered, and indigenous is imperative. The new public administration needs to assist in the development of citizens as citizens and the construction of self-governing communities. NGOs can play a vital role in the creation of a new public administration. They are often able to effectively address citizens' needs through mechanisms that are not provided by the government. It is imperative that NGOs be aware of the repercussions of their activities and presence. NGOs must not appropriate local power, but rather aid in the creation of self-governing communities. Successful cooperative behavior must be indigenous and not excessively dependent upon external funds. "Blueprint" thinking (i.e., one plan determined to be adequate for all similar problems) is dangerous and counterproductive. Such thinking denies the uniqueness of each individual community and their respective issues. The concept of cooperative behavior can be employed to evaluate the disintegration of societies and their subsequent solutions. In Rwanda, for example, did the government employ violence to maintain a semblance of control over natural social self-governing boundaries? Was the right to self-governance a critical part of the settlement process? The ultimate goal guiding the installation and support of cooperative behavior is the eventual transition of a weak government devoid of political authority into a nation with a strong system of governance. A country, however, is not just the existence of a government. Rather, a national identity, forged through dialogue and popular participation in the creation of institutions, is mandatory for the existence of a nation. Once people "own" the national institutions, they will be more inclined to resolve conflicts within these established boundaries, rather than resort to violence. The real challenge is how to institute these fundamental changes. To overcome the resistance to change, the following initiatives should be considered: Stimulating sustained national debate on U.S. foreign policy to better define itself. Restructuring USAID's reward structure to encourage local capacity for self-governance. Supporting research on self-governance to augment current knowledge on how self-governing systems function. Establishing a USAID leadership institute to train local leaders and USAID workers on the intricacies of self-governance. AUDIO CLIPS FROM THIS SPEECH Click here for audio clip#1 of Harold Saunders. [RealAudio non-streaming file, 137k] Transcription of audio clip#1: "We will not have a theory or practice of conflict prevention or resolution unless we take off lenses that reflect the paradigm from the past and put on new lenses that reflect the paradigm that will bring this world into focus." Click here for audio clip#2 of Harold Saunders. [RealAudio non-streaming file, 148k] Transcription of audio clip#2: "My plea, along with Jane [Holl Lute] is that we broaden the paradigm. I deliberately use the word 'broaden' because I don't think the world moves from one paradigm to another jerkily. The past is always persisting and stays with us. We don't throw it away, because a lot of it's useful. On the other hand, if we're going to broaden our lenses, widen the angle, we do need to think of some new things." [This audio clip requires RealPlayerTM. The RealPlayer software is available for free download from RealNetwork at http://www.real.com/player/index.html.]

:  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  :  What's New : FOIA Requests : Privacy Policy : Email This Page : Plug-ins : FAQs : Help Desk : Contact Us : Site Map Last Updated on: April 02, 2001