A Tool for Nation Building

8/6/2019 A Tool for Nation Building

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-tool-for-nation-building 1/18

Conflict Resolution:

A Tool for Nation Building

Anjana Dayal de Prewitt, MS.

I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends – AbrahamLincoln

IntroductionPeace education has been studied around institutions of higher education for

the last fifty years. This paper is an exercise in peace education in that it

provides a systematic analysis of armed conflicts and their effects versuscreative problem solving that include diplomacy and negotiations and mutual

respect and dignity. The paper is divided into two parts: a framework for

peace, and a case study on Afghanistan to illustrate the practicality of the

approach. The paper recommends a way forward: (a) cost-benefit analysis of

the on-going conflicts, (b) finding common grounds and (c) adopting a shared

vision. It concludes with a case study

Background

Conflicts have been part of the human race right from the beginning of time.

When we look at ancient history, human beings always found themselves inmidst of certain conflict/s. As per the Old Testament, the first children, Cain and

Able had differences on how to please God and one ended up killing the other.

The Tanakh, the Bible and the Qur'an talk about innumerous battles that took

place for innumerous reasons. From the Greek context, the Iliad celebrates

war, where passion, pain and glory of warriors is depicted. The Hindu

mythology talks about the great war of ‘Mahabharata’, where hundred

‘Kauravs’ fought with the ‘Pandavas’, the five brave and upright brothers.

Medieval and modern histories demonstrate how the human race indulged in

wars time and time again. Whether, it was the World War I, World War II, the

armed conflict in the Balkans, Kashmir, Somalia, Civil War in the United States,the genocide of Rwanda and many others, human blood has been shed.

Throughout generations, nations have tried to establish their power by killing

the fellow human beings on the other side and not to forget losing their own in

the process. Sometimes, it is greed for resources such as money, oil, land or

even food and sometimes it is the scarcity thereof that leads a population to an

internal conflict or war with another state. Inequality too, when done in excess

or for too long, has a part in provoking violent retaliation. We fight because our

1



religions are different, our ethnicity is not the same, our beliefs contradict each

other, our personal agendas do not match but every time the human blood is

shed, it is red on each side.

At times, people voluntarily go out to fight and other times they are forced to

combat. Often, there are combatants who participate in a war because they

need the resources but they lack the right training or even the understanding

why the war is being fought.

In a conversation, a soldier said, “diplomacy and dialoguing is more effective

and powerful than any weaponry”. Observing armed conflicts as a common

person, as a humanitarian worker and now as a family member of a soldier,

author recommends peace over brutal killings, dignity over torture and

dialoguing over wars.

The Framework

The framework suggests that a close relationship between countries in conflict

and military resourceful countries continues until this day may build the

strength and well being for both countries. Such is the case between the

United States and Japan. As long-standing military allies and increasingly

interdependent economic partners, this two countries have cooperated closely

to build a strong, multifaceted relationship based on democratic values and

interests in world stability and development. The relationship between the two

nations is reinforced by economic, scientific, technical and tourist exchanges.

The traditional cultures and values of the two countries have not changed

much since then but surely perceptions have. This sections discusses thechallenges found in resource poor conflict affected countries.

ChallengesIn this section the challenges that war presents before, during and after it is

fought are discussed: changing face of war, effects on economy, loss of place,

impact of civilians, the missing, re-integration of ex-combatants, reconstruction

of communities and cultural interferences.

Changing face of war

The evolution of warfare can be divided into five generations, 1st generation:

large armies, bows, arrows, swords, 2nd generation: gun powder, industrial, civil

war, WW1 and WWII, 3rd generation: Guerrilla warfare, 4th generation:

geographically associated terrorism and 5th generation: cyber terror. Although

there are more international rules for wars now, they are not always followed.

It is way more than the conventional ways of fighting a war. Every so often, the

2



weapons do not target the combatants on the other side but they target the

common people. The tactics direct at minds of people by spreading fear. The

aim, the center of gravity, the goal of modern war is the population.

To plan, analyze or write about war is very different than to live a war.

Unfortunately, more often now, the planners, analysts and writers of wars,

have never lived a war. In the ancient times, the rulers would lead the war but

now times have changed. Political and religious leaders control the wars now.

The Fourth Geneva Convention outlines the distinction between combatants

and non-combatants but how many times is it honored? And even if one truly

wants to follow the Geneva conventions and restricts the attacks to the

combatants, how does one identify the combatant? In today’s warfare, where a

young pregnant woman is a suicide bomber, where a child carries the gun, how

does one recognize a non-combatant? What happens when one side of

combatants hide where the civilians live and how do you justify killing of

hundreds of innocent women and children because one wants to target a

handful of combatants? Maybe it is time for an additional protocol to address

the rights and duties of those involved in unconventional conflicts.

Effects on Economy

Wars affect people in more than one way. It affects economy both positively

and negatively. On one side, many make big profits on weaponry production,

contracting and construction. Some local people are recruited for these

activities and are able to make money. But these profits do not reach to

majority of the population. For those who make its instruments, war is very

good business indeed, and, while the rest of the economy may be tanking,

things that go “bang” and kill people are on a roll (Hallinan 2003). There is amyth related to the positive effects of war on the economy because of the

boom in economy after World War II. Some even suggest that capitalism needs

wars, that without them, recession would always lurk on the horizon (Stiglitz

2003).

On the other side, a nation looses money drastically while investing on the

training, equipments, maintenance of the troops and other requirements. In the

war zones, the devastation and loss of infrastructure incurs major damage to

the economy for many years to come. With (a) thousands of people losing their

livelihoods, (b) hundreds of acres of land polluted with mines, and (c) current

and future workers impaired physically and mentally, there is a much biggercost to pay than any profit wars may bring to the global economy.

Loss of Place

Psychological and social effects of wars are enormous. Having interviewed

survivors of armed conflicts in South-Asia, the author would like to refer to a

phenomenon called, ‘the loss of place’ that these communities experience. The

term ‘place’ denotes humans’ subjective experiences of, and the meanings

3



attributed to, the locations, which they inhabit; have strong memories of; and

thrive in (Bott, Cantrill & Myers, 2003). Loss of place implies a loss of

confidence in the norms, networks, and mutual trust in the civil society that is

supposed to protect and facilitate collaborative actions among the citizens and

institutions (Perkins & Long, 2002).

For example, while the author conducted assessment of the psychosocial

support needs in Srinagar, Kashmir, key informants reported that due to the

on-going situation, they do not practice many old cultural activities anymore.

An old woman lamented that before the conflict started the marriage

ceremonies used to be much more exuberant. Family and friends would dance

and celebrate until very late at night but now out of fear, they try to finish the

ceremonies early so that guests can go back to their houses before it is too

late. Most reported that the valley was not as nearly as beautiful as it used to

be before the conflict started. In such communities, if the ongoing violence

does not stop, the coming generations will eventually loose the sense of

beautiful, serene, happy and vibrant Kashmir.

Loss of ‘place’ is true for all the situations where the local population is forced

to migrate to camps, where their houses and infrastructure is destroyed, where

the natural beauty is being shattered, and where the traditional cultural

practices are being lost to history. Instead of making the future generations

strangers to their own history, the world community needs to come together to

initiate a dialogue for a future for our children where they are closer to their

roots and proud history.

Impact on Civilians

The worse effects of wars are on children. Their education and developmentalopportunities are reduced drastically. Confusion and fear that arises from the

violence around them dominates their growth. More often, instead of becoming

teachers, doctors and social workers, these children are placed in a position to

fight their fear of violence with more violence. Little hands play with weapons

when they should be writing in a school notebook. They are left in unthinkable

conditions. Dallaire (2003) describes a scene after the Rwanda genocide about

a child around three years old, “He was caked in dirt, his hair white and matted

with dust, and he was enveloped in cloud of flies, which were greedily attacking

the open sores that covered him.” In the midst of killing in the name of ideals

and beliefs, children are orphaned and trafficked.

Families of combatants on both side live the terrors of war almost as much as

the combatants themselves. It is a constant struggle to keep the faith, to help

the little children to remember their father/mother who has gone to the war or

to stop questioning “why wars, why my family”. Needless to say, instead of all

the questions and fears, these families are proud of their dear ones who are

fighting for the cause that their group or their country believes in. But the

children fail to understand why their father/mother disappears for long period/s

4



of time. Occasionally, they fail to recognize their own father/mother who return

from the war. How heart wrenching situation it would be if tomorrow you came

back home and your own child treats you like a total stranger?

These families make a big sacrifice for the sake of their country but how many

times are these sacrifices actually for the well-being of their country? This

article does not question the validity of specific wars or advocate for one side

or other but it questions the need for wars versus the well-being of the people

that it is being fought for.

There is another important group of people that live war almost as much as the

combatants do, the humanitarian workers and/or the journalists. How ironic is it

that every so often, a person is killed, abducted or put in state prison because

of his/her desire to serve the people in need or to provide accurate information

to the rest of the world? For example, the staff of the International Committee

of Red Cross died in bomb explosion in Kandahar district in Afghanistan

recently. In many cases, compassion fatigue settles in even after a short

assignment and may last a lifetime.

The missing

In the midst of killing, abduction and imprisonment as ‘prisoners of wars’, many

are lost. All around the world, parents, siblings, spouses and children are

desperately trying to find lost relatives due to armed conflicts, other situations

of violence, internal and international migration. As a result of the armed

conflict in Balkans in 1990s, around 40,000 people went missing (Innovations

Report, 2008). In former Yugoslavian countries like many others, countless

families are still waiting for their loved ones to return. They are still struggling

to know the fate of their dear ones. Dead bodies were buried in mass graveswithout proper identifications and many graves were dug in order to trace the

missing persons. Every time a grave is dug in the region, the family of missing

experiences emotions that range from fear to hope. Until these families are

able to find out the fate of their missing relatives, they will not be able to put

closure to the grieving process and will not be able to move on in life.

Are wars really worth of putting innumerable innocent people in a situation

where they are stuck, where parents, wives and children do not know whether

to mourn for their dear one or to wait for them? Can we, as the human race,

pledge that we will stop punishing millions of innocent people by opting for

more creative problem solving rather than killing and destroying?

Re-integration of ex-combatants

The worst residue of the wars remains in the minds of ex-combatants. Once the

combatants cease to fight and come back home, there begins a new struggle

for them, their families and the communities. People back home falsely expect

the combatants to forget the memories of the war, the memories of

devastation, pain, fear, brutality and killing. It sounds contradictory but many

5



soldiers carry feelings of guilt of killing fellow human beings even though they

were considered enemies. “Studies have shown that the attempt by society

and soldiers to banish war memories is detrimental to the healing of ex-

combatants” (Mogapi 2004). Therefore, it is essential to provide ex-combatants

safe space to express their feelings in a non-judgmental environment. They

should be supported but not forced to talk and in no way be stigmatized.Families back home must be prepared to meet this new person who has

learned lessons of life, which are nearly impossible to learn in comforts of

home.

In certain contexts, there are state run comprehensive programs for re-

integration of soldiers and in many countries they do not have such programs.

There are also several non-profit organizations around the world that work

tirelessly to ensure smooth integration of ex-combatants in their communities.

Despite the efforts, reports suggest that there is an increase in the suicide rate

amongst soldiers in countries such as the United States. It is a collective

responsibility of all in the respective societies to assist the soldiers to have asmooth transition from the world of violence to the world of peace, which is

their right, not a luxury.

Reconstruction of communities

Once the combat is finished and combatants leave the scenario (sometimes

temporarily), there remains destruction, devastation and ruins. Reconstruction

of communities after a war includes not only rebuilding of the infrastructure but

also restoration of the shattered psychosocial fabric. This task becomes even

more difficult if the reconstruction work is going on in midst of a war. Where an

insurgency exists, the more common scenario, the population will be pulled by

two competing forces and the one that shows respect and understanding will

have a head start (Therriault & Wulf 2006). It is crucial for the humanitarian

workers and other nation building groups to gain the trust of the people that

they are serving. Building trust is easier when there is (a) effective

communication (use of local colloquial language and metaphors) between

communities and outsiders, (b) assistance is provided with dignity, (c)

assistance is culturally appropriate, (d) local communities actively participate

in the planning and implementing the reconstruction activities and (e) there is

a clear exit strategy for the outsiders and the local population is aware and

convinced of it. If local leaders are trained to facilitate the reconstruction

activities with the local population, it takes less effort to reach common goals.

During the 2004 South-Asian tsunami, the author worked with several

communities in Sri Lanka. At times, the communities did not want to work

together because of religion, ethnicity or other historical differences, which

hindered their recovery process. Therefore, the author and her team identified

common grounds to bring the conflicting communities together to facilitate

their recovery process, by including the community members from the two

6



communities. In the beginning of the negotiations, both communities stressed

on the differences but as we spent more time and emphasized on the shared

needs, they began to identify some common ground.

Cultural Interferences

To be able to find common grounds, it is essential to recognize and go beyondthe cultural nuances. All people view the events of life through their own

cultural filters. These filters are the result of the values, attitudes, and beliefs

that dominate the culture in which they live (VanOtten 2005). These cultural

filters can prevent people to be tolerant towards the cultural practices of

others. Sometimes our culture, our beliefs make us suspicious towards the

people who do not have similar culture and beliefs. Instead of trying to

appreciate where they are coming from, we form a prejudice based on our own

fears, experiences and cultural filters. Instead of taking time to clarify our point

of view in a way that others understand, many times we loose our patience and

aggress. History witnesses that, at times, years after the war, the two

combating groups became friends and realized that the other warring party

was not so evil after all. Sometimes, it is too late though.

For example, one of the worst warfare in the history of the world was between

Japan and the United States. After the Japanese attacked on the naval base at

Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in 1941 and the US horrendous revenge in 1945 of the

atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the firebombing of Tokyo, the

two countries shared emotions of hatred and animosity. But eventually under

the Allied control, as the reforms took place in Japan, MacArthur gradually

shifted political control over to the Japanese culminating in the 1952 Treaty of

San Francisco which officially ended the occupation. (Countrystudies.us)

This framework was the beginning of a close relationship between both

countries that continues until this day. As long-standing military allies and

increasingly interdependent economic partners, Japan and the United States

cooperated closely to build a strong, multifaceted relationship based on

democratic values and interests in world stability and development. The

relationship between the two nations is reinforced by economic, scientific,

technical and tourist exchanges. The traditional cultures and values of the two

countries have not changed much since then but surely the perceptions have.

If it is possible today, it was possible then and is possible in other contexts too.

Way ForwardWhen as adults, when we see our child in a fist fight with another child over

something, almost of all of us try to intervene and help them understand that

probably fist fight was the not the most appropriate solution to whatever the

situation was. At the same time, when we look at our mutual problems, which

are more complex, we tend to forget to practice what we preach. From time to

time we, intelligent and mature adults, fail to handle our problems,

7

http://plasma.nationalgeographic.com/pearlharbor/

http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/hiroshima.htm

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm

http://www.uni-erfurt.de/ostasiatische_geschichte/texte/japan/dokumente/19/19510908_treaty.htm


http://history1900s.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/hiroshima.htm

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/tokyo.htm



http://plasma.nationalgeographic.com/pearlharbor/



disagreements and conflicts in the most appropriate way. And like the two

fighting kids, try to blame the other for provoking another. Can we as

Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and others or as Sri Lankans,

Americans, Indians, Serbians, Cubans, Germans, Israelites and others honestly

say that nothing could have and/or can in future prevent the bloodshed of our

fellow human beings? As a way of moving forward, this section discusses: costbenefit analysis, finding common grounds and shared vision.

Cost-benefit analysis

The paper recommends to those who advocate that wars will lead to some kind

of well being to their specific countries and/groups to analyze the potential

benefits of any war against the cost being paid. Cost of the current wars

around the world is (a) immeasurable resources, (b) hundreds of thousands of

lives (c) physical, psychological and social wounds, (d) destruction and

devastation in affected areas, (e) future adverse effects of wars such as

unexploded ordnances and finally (f) increased hatred, which may lead to

several other wars. What benefits are worth of this price? Can an ideology be

truthfully promoted at this cost?

For the sake of the benefits of the future generations, for the ideals one is

proud of and for the legacy one wants to leave, to rethink is not too much to

ask for.

Finding Common Grounds

Since the cultural filters are very different from each other, there will be

conflicts but we need to change the ways of conflict resolution. Honesty is

likely to pay for itself in that first contact; polite education of the other party

can only benefit in the long term. However, it is a two way street. Establishing

the boundaries of our Allies’ and our own cultural and legal characteristics will

only come with first showing respect for the local boundaries in customs and

culture (Therriault & Wulf 2006).

When we begin to look beyond our cultural filters and linguistic interferences,

deep inside all societies advocate for forgiveness, peace and love. For example

the word jihad, which is known around the world but has different meanings

and connotations to different people. ‘Jihad’, which literally means striving and

generally occurs as part of the expression jihad fi sabil illah, striving in the path

of God (Streusand & Tunnell IV 2006). If to be a ‘Jihadi’ means striving in the

path of God, every religious person is a Jihadi, regardless of religion or

nationality. And if Jihad is in the path of God, then every true Jihadi will go

towards love and forgiveness because God is forgiving and loving.

The holy Quran says, “In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate”.

Jesus was not advocating for revenge and hatred when he said, “Whoever hits

you on the cheek, offer him the other also; and whoever takes away your coat,

do not withhold your shirt from him either”. The Dalai Lama posits love and

8

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/dalailama401724.html

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/dalailama401724.html



compassion are necessities, not luxuries. Without them humanity cannot

survive. Buddha said, “Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this

is the eternal rule. Rabbi Menachem Mendle said, “Our only way out is to learn

compassion without cause. To care for each other simply because that ‘other’

exists”. Mahatma Gandhi objected to violence because when it appears to do

good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

We cannot to start a process of coming together until we forgive, accept and

empathize with each other. It would be easier to find common grounds if we

look at shared needs. In order to find common grounds we need to (a) refine

and use our diplomatic skills more than ever, (b) negotiate while respecting

each other’s leadership (c) utilize a collaborative process to convince each

other with tolerance, (d) prepare to be flexible and (e) where agreeing is not

possible, agree to disagree deferentially.

Assiduous dialoguing is essential to reach a mutually acceptable pact for

parties involved. The focus of such process must be the ‘issues’ and not groups

of human beings. Nonetheless, agreements are sustainable only if they are

understood and acceptable at the grassroots. A bottom-up approach is

recommended to set the framework for negotiations and once the agreements

are reached comprehensive top down methods are required to ensure that a

common understanding and commitment is attained at all levels of the

relevant factions.

Shared Vision

Let’s take a moment to visualize that all the resources, power and wisdom that

is being spent on wars around the world is diverted to feeding the hungry,

providing shelters to the homeless, giving appropriate health care to the sickand bringing smiles to faces covered with dirt and wet with tears. The author

recognizes that no matter how beautiful this vision is, it not practical and

probably cannot be realized in a short span of time.

As responsible citizens of the world we must try to move towards this vision.

Especially, now, when many players in the world are equipped with Nuclear

weapons. We cannot continue to risk our future. Recently, a young graphic

designer in a conversation expressed his fear about a potential nuclear war. He

said, “If the world leaders do not learn to negotiate and there is a nuclear war,

the world would go back to stone age”. His fear is not based on any research

but is important because it represents the fear and mistrust of millions of youtharound the world on their leaders.

In today’s age of globalization, where there is much greater interdependence

between states, it is the best time ever to develop a shared vision. Whether

rich or poor states, developed, developing or under-developed countries, all

hold overlapping dreams that can constitute a shared vision, such as (a)

Economic prosperity and international trade opportunities, (b) Freedom to

9



serve God according to local traditions, (c) Opportunities for optimum growth

and development for children, and (d) Well being, respect and independence. It

might be difficult and painstaking but it can be done.

Case Study: Afghanistan War This case study illustrates the ‘how’ of the framework discussed in the paper.

The author recognizes that in complex state of affairs in Afghanistan, merely

peaceful negotiations and restoration activities may not present a

comprehensive answer and other military and political tactics are needed for a

long-term solution. Having said that, greater understanding for cultural

interferences would enhance the mutual tolerance and pave the way for

building a strong nation that inspires global peace. In addition, some roots of

this war are connected to history prior this war and other international

conflicts, the case study focuses on issues related to Afghanistan only and

looks at conflict resolution based on the ‘here and now’.

Current Situation

For eight years, the NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) forces are

assisting the Afghan population to fight against the AL Qaeda and the Taliban

forces and strengthen the democracy in the nation. According to President

Obama, the initial goal was to dismantle, disrupt and destroy Al Qaeda and

capture Osama Bin Laden because of whom 3,000 Americans were killed on

September 11 2001. The positive impact of the foreign presence is the

rebuilding and development of the nation through which the NATO forces aim

to win the hearts and minds of people.

Afghanistan constitutes of variety of ethnic groups, i.e. Pashtun 42%, Tajik

27%, Hazara 9%, Uzbek 9%, Aimak 4%, Turkmen 3%, Baloch 2%, other 4% who

mainly speak ‘Pashtu’ and Afghan Persian and are mainly Sunni Muslims. The

Afghan population has experienced war for hundreds of years. Sometimes, it is

war with the invaders like British or Russians and at times it is conflict between

the local tribes. In addition to the armed conflicts, Afghanistan supplies 90% of

the opium to the world, where only a handful people enjoy the big profit. Some

Afghan products like shawls and carpets have reached the international market

but need more promotion in order to benefit the local people. Consequently,

the country is one of the poorest in the world, the literacy level is very low and

the nation is still pretty much divided on based on tribes.

Challenges

• Lack of clarity amongst the target population: Even though, the NATO

forces are assisting the local population against the Taliban forces,

Taliban also includes the local people. On one hand, there are civilians

10



who want to get rid of the Taliban coerce, on the other hand some

civilians provide shelter and critical information to Taliban that has grave

results on NATO mission. This complicates the situation for the NATO

forces and even though, they do not target non-combatants,

unfortunately innocent people die due to their attacks, but all

considerations are taken to avoid this at all cost (anonymous source).Every time there is collateral damage, there is a negative impact on

relationship NATO forces are building with the local civilians.

• Cross-cultural interferences: General McChrystal (2009) says in his

report, “Afghan’s social, political, economic and cultural affairs are

complex and poorly understood”. If the educated and well-trained

officers feel that way, how much more must be the ignorance of the local

population towards the perceived intruders who look different and talk a

different language. It has been a huge challenge for the NATO personnel

to build trust at the community level because most of them do not speak

the local language and lack understanding of local culture and norms.For the same reasons it is not easy for the willing Taliban members to

negotiate with NATO forces. For the local population, it is much more

convincing when somebody talks to them in their own language, refers

from Holy Quran and looks and dresses like them.

• Depleting resources: As every day goes by, more human lives, material

resources and time are lost on both sides. On one hand, international aid

assists in rebuilding the infrastructure and on the other hand war causes

more damage. United States is the biggest funder for the NATO

operation in Afghanistan. As per Belasco (2009), approximately 20% of the total funding for military purposes is allocated to Operation Enduring

Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan. Belasco further states, “In case of

Afghanistan, spending rates are growing for operations because of rising

troop levels, increasing hostilities, and more spending to upgrade Afghan

Security forces”. In the midst of the on-going recession, allocating more

funding for war can be challenging for any nation.

• Unclear priorities: In midst of this war, there are four main groups (a)

NATO forces, (b) Combatants from the other side (mainly Taliban and Al

Qaeda), (c) the national government and (d) the local communities and

their leaders. Ideally, the ‘a’, ‘c’ and ‘d’ should have common goals andpriorities but it seems that is not so. President Karzai wants support for

development of his country and security for his countrymen but his own

government’s credibility is questioned by many in Afghanistan and

internationally. Fear of Taliban and profits of opium trade also influence

the loyalty amongst the local population.

11



• Lack of uniform structure: Afghanistan has strong leadership at the

ground level amongst the tribes but leadership at national level needs

further strengthening. Therefore, each village has to be dealt with

separately as one government unit to reach an agreement. In different

areas, people speak different languages have different cultural

frameworks and the terrain and climate may differ as well. Diversity inthe country further makes the work of NATO forces more challenging.

Way Forward

In his first address at the United Nation General Assembly in September 2009,

President Obama articulated, “The time has come to realize that the old habits,

the old arguments, are irrelevant to the challenges faced by our people. They

lead nations to act in opposition to the very goals that they claim to pursue—

and to vote, often in this body, against the interests of their own people. They

build up walls between us and the future that our people seek, and the time

has come for those walls to come down. Together, we must build newcoalitions that bridge old divides—coalitions of different faiths and creeds; of

north and south, east, west, black, white, and brown”.

Looking at the history of Afghanistan and its people’s involvement in armed

conflicts, there is no military solution to this problem. This is the best time for

the diplomatic approach in the Afghanistan war context. The current

leadership, at least on the NATO side, recognizes the importance of

negotiations and dialoguing. Salient points in the NATO commander’s report

include (a) more troops are required in order to protect the civilians, (b)

offering them (willing insurgents) a way out with reasonable incentives to stop

fighting and return to normalcy, (c) recommendation for the troops to socializewith local population more to enhance mutual understanding, (d) involvement

of more humanitarian workers in the nation building process and (e) target the

corruption in the government and the violent insurgents equally and thus

winning the confidence of the local population.

The different sects of insurgents must be encouraged to spell out their goals to

the local population so that negotiations can be planned and carried out in an

effective manner. If, at least, the liberal factions of the insurgents reciprocate

to this process, it will be a win-win situation for both sides. The ‘issues’ or the

‘threats to the well-being’ of the population must be target of this war and not

the human beings.

Cost Benefit Analysis

For almost a decade, billions of dollars, priceless lives of NATO soldiers and

local people are lost. There are long term mental health and psychosocial

issues for combatants, local civilians and the families of the combatants (NATO

personnel as well as the insurgents) back home, destruction of already scarce

infrastructure in the country, further destabilization in Pakistan, compromise

12



with the image of USA internationally (US being the biggest funder to the NATO

efforts in Afghanistan). Time is another important resource that is being lost

everyday there is no resolution to the situation.

McChrystal (2009) rightly points out in his report that more military resources

are needed but to protect the civilians and not to kill. If the Afghanistan mission

does not focus on peaceful negotiations as the main conflict resolution option,

the war might (a) go on for a long time, (b) intensify the conflict itself and (c)

spread in larger geographical areas. Whereas, if a agreement is reached

between the primary stakeholders, the resources can be geared towards

rebuilding communities that will gain the trust of the local people. Once there is

a sense of ownership amongst the indigenous population for the mission, (a)

local people too are accountable for rebuilding efforts, (b) re-building efforts

can be carried out more efficiently, (c) sustainability of projects is enhanced

and (d) local population will be actively engaged in the mission efforts rather

than supporting the insurgents.

Finding Common Grounds

a) A modern version of this “work with the tribes” approach is still the

best answer (Ignatius 2009). In order to find common grounds, it is

crucial to spend substantial time and energy with the local population

and trying to understand their priorities such as meeting their basic

needs and ensuring safety for their dear ones, which also coincides

with the NATO goals. People conducting these meetings must be

familiar not only with the language but the with the local metaphors,

culture and priorities. At the same time, they should be able to

convey the goals of NATO forces and their exit strategy. These teamsmust have representation for the minority groups in the communities

such as women, elderly or other under-represented groups.

b) To make the Afghan leaders including the Taliban leaders more

receptive at the international forum, it is important for the Afghani

people to take the lead in decision making at the ground level. For

example, for construction of a school building, the local people should

be the one deciding the timing and site of the construction, style of

education (co-education or separate schooling for girls and boys) and

sustainability strategy for the project. While the local population sits

in the driving seat, the NATO forces can facilitate the process.

c) Good future for children is a key priority for any nation and education

is one of the ways of ensuring it. Through education and vocational

skills, the new generation will have more options to take care of their

basic needs and well-being of their families. If the Afghani children

receive good education right from the beginning and are grounded in

the values of peace and international harmony, the probability of

13



them joining the insurgency is reduced. Increased portions of

international resources (both in terms of money and expertise) must

be spent on schooling and edification of children and youth of the

country in order to shrink the influence of the insurgents. It is

important to recognize that children are the best conduits of

information back home. In terms of education, it is important to notonly to focus on the primary school system but also improve the

overall literacy by improving the adult education as well.

d) Western consumers love hand made artifacts such as carved wooden

furniture, beautifully embroidered ‘Pashmina’ shawls, and the classy

Carpets. Afghani people have a natural flair for elegant artifacts and

if encouraged through economic remuneration, it will (a) boost their

economy, (b) reduce the drug trade and (c) meet the demands of the

western consumers.

e) Because of the traditional tribal system and constant conflicts in thecountry, it has not been able to develop an effective administrative

system and therefore, has not been able to gain the trust of its

people. According to reports, corruption is an integral part of the

government to point that the correction centers have now become

the operation centers for the insurgents. Unless local government is

equipped to govern their people in a way that the local population is

satisfied and their ends meet, it maybe a little challenging for the

NATO forces to exit successfully. Therefore, in addition to the

capacity building of local security forces, it would be beneficial to

conduct communication, management and administrative programs.

f) Ambassador Said T. Jawad, as quoted by Slaikeu (2009), points out,

there are three distinct ideological groups within the Taliban, only

one of which (the “capital T” leaders are affiliated with al Qaeda) is

“irreconcilable and will not rest until their main objectives of

eliminating the West and its allies are met”. This suggests, that there

are factions of Taliban who would be ready to talk. Gen. McChrystal

recommends an option to the insurgents to give up fighting and come

back to normalcy, where livelihood and protection may be provided.

Re-integration of soldiers, if implemented cautiously, would benefit all

sides, (a) for the NATO forces and the Afghan government, there willbe a reduction in the number of insurgents, (b) insurgents will be

reunited with their families and will be able to lead a normal life and

(c) once the insurgency is reduced, way for development and

progress in the nation will be strengthened. Re-integration of ex-

combatants would require strong commitment from all sides to

prevent another disaster.

14



g) All sides are praying to God for victory. So, whose side is God after

all? When human beings decide to kill innocent people, God is on the

sad side! Spirituality is common between the leading NATO nations,

civilian population and the Taliban. Despite religious differences

between the warring parties, there are similarities as well, one of

which is that all believe in one almighty God who is most merciful andloving. Religious leaders can formulate five points (not very difficult)

that are common to all and direct towards the desired goals. This

Holy quest will inspire this generation to God who represents

forgiveness, tolerance and love.

Adopting A Shared Vision

A shared vision must be defined based on mutual interests, shared needs and

common goals. To define such a vision, all the parties need to be au fait with

each other’s colloquial speech. The international community, especially, the

leaders need to invest significantly to understand the cultural filters as theymake major decisions that affect population in diverse contexts.

In this context, if the Afghan leaders, NATO leaders and the Taliban leaders

decide to come together to win a peaceful future for their people, they must

learn to see through each other’s cultural filters, they must speak in a tongue

that all the ears involved comprehend. Two major religions involved in this case

are Christianity and Islam. According to both, God is a forgiving God. Both the

NATO countries and Afghanistan want education, health care and economic

prosperity for their respective countries. With rising terrorism, all the

stakeholders involved want peace and security in their regions. Therefore, a

share vision can be formulated based on forgiveness and acceptance thatensures peace and security through education, health care and economic well-

being.

Once successful negotiations are made with few groups of insurgents and they

receive positive reinforcement for the same, it will encourage others to do the

same. This process will require substantial amount of learning about the

insurgents and their goals, inclusion of local elders to lead the process,

developing a list of options, long-term commitment and another level of

diplomacy.

Summary This paper addressed the detrimental effects of wars on the combatants, their

families, and communities in the war zone. It relied on qualitative research

methods: (a) key informant interviews and (b) focus groups, two case studies

and (d) personal experience. The paper proposed a three-fold way forward as

an alternative approach for conflict resolution. It emphasized on managing

conflicts by greater appreciation for each other’s culture and focusing on

15



shared needs to define strategies that enhance the well being of the nations

involved.

Conclusion

It does not matter which side wins the war in the end, it is the civilians involved

and the families of the combatants who lose. Conflicts are and will remain partof the ever-dynamic global society but ways of conflict resolution must be

modified in the age of nuclear weapons to prevent irreversible damages. The

on-going wars will not stop until the warring parties cannot negotiate and

understand each other’s positions. Therefore, it is time for the international

community to take concrete steps to towards creative problem solving through

diplomacy and dialoguing.

“He will judge between the nations and will settle disputes for many peoples.They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruninghooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for

war anymore.” – Isaiah 2:4

References:

Afghanistan Demographic Profile. Index Mundi. 2008. (accesed on September

30, 2009). Available from

http://www.indexmundi.com/afghanistan/demographics_profile.html

Barth E. F. Peace as Disappointment: The Reintegration of Female Soldiers in

Post-Conflict Societies: A Comparative Study from Africa. International Peace

Research Institute (PRIO), 2002. (accessed on September 30, 2009). Availablefrom http://www.peacewomen.org/resources/DDR/AfricaBarth.html

International Committee of Red Cross (ICRC). Basic Rules of The Geneva

Conventions and Their Additional Protocols (1983). Geneva, Switzerland:

International Committee of Red Cross.

Belasco A. The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror

Operations Since 9/11 CRS Report for Congress. (2009). Washington, D.C.:

Congressional Research Service. U.S. Congress.

Bodden, C., & Hilliker, M. “Community mapping exercises provide enhanced

participant interaction in visioning processes”. Journal of Extension, 1999, 37(6), 3-8

Federal Reseach Division. Country Studies: Japan. 2008. Country Studies/Area

Handbook Series sponsored by the U.S. Department of the Army. Library of

Congress. (accessed on September 3, 2009). Available from

http://countrystudies.us/japan/132.htm

16


http://www.peacewomen.org/resources/DDR/AfricaBarth.html



http://www.peacewomen.org/resources/DDR/AfricaBarth.html




Dallaire R. Shake Hands With The Devil: The Failure of Humanity in Rwanda.

2003. Arrow Books, United Kingdom.

Dayal, A. Mission Report, International Committee of Red Cross, New Delhi,

India. April, 2008

Hallinan C. War Is Good Business. (2003). Conn Hallinan’s Space Page.(accessed on September 6, 2009) Available from

http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/11171

Ignatius D. Britain’s Afghan Wisdom, 2009, The Washington Post (op.ed).

(Accessed on September 29, 2009). Available from

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2009/09/23/AR2009092303680.html?sub=AR

“Institute for Missing Persons gives hope for peace in the Balkans”. Innovations

Report (2008). (Accessed on September 6, 2009). Available from

http://www.innovations-

report.com/html/reports/social_sciences/institute_missing_persons_hope_

peace_balkans_123345.html

McChrystal S. Commander’s Initial Assessment ,2009, NATO International

Security Assistance Force, Afghanistan. (accessed on September 27, 2009).

Available from http://shadowspear.com/vb/showthread.php?22046-

Commander-s-Initial-Assessment-30-August-2009-66-pages-LTG-Stanley-

McChrystal

Mogapi N. Reintegration of soldiers: The missing piece. 2004. Intervention

Journal. ( accessed on September 27, 2009) Available from

www.interventionjournal.com/downloads/.../221_225_Mogapi.pdf

Obama B. H. “Obama’s Speech to the United Nations General Assembly”. New

York Times (Septemeber 23, 2009). (accessed on September 24, 2009).

Available from

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/us/politics/24prexy.text.html?

pagewanted=3&_r=1

Perkins, D. D., & Long, D. A. “Neighborhood sense of community and social

capital: A multi-level analysis”. In A. T. Fisher & C. C. Sonn (Eds.) Psychological

sense of community: Research, applications and implications (pp. 183-203).New York: Plenum Publishers. 2002

Porter K. “ The Relationship of the United States with Japan”. About.com: US

Foreign Policy(Accessed on September 3, 2009). Available from

http://usforeignpolicy.about.com/od/countryprofile1/p/usjapan.htm

17


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/23/AR2009092303680.html?sub=AR


http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_sciences/institute_missing_persons_hope_peace_balkans_123345.html



http://shadowspear.com/vb/showthread.php?22046-Commander-s-Initial-Assessment-30-August-2009-66-pages-LTG-Stanley-McChrystal



http://www.interventionjournal.com/downloads/.../221_225_Mogapi.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/us/politics/24prexy.text.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1












http://www.interventionjournal.com/downloads/.../221_225_Mogapi.pdf






Prewitt Diaz, J.O., & Dayal, A. Sense of Place: A Model for Community Based

Psychosocial Support Programs. The Australasian Journal of Disaster and

Trauma Studies. 2008, 1, 12-28.

Restoring Family Links (RFL)/ Family News Service (FNS), “Guidelines for

Psychosocial Support” , New Delhi, India: International Committee of Red

Cross/Indian Red Cross Society, 2008 (Unpublished document)

Rosa B. The Christians and the Problem of War. A few considerations on one of

the most important ethical problems for Christians of all times, Bluffton, Ohio:

Bluffton College 1957.

Slaikeu K. A. Winning the War in Afghanistan: An Oil Spot Plus Strategy forCoalition Forces. Small Wars Journal. 2009 ( accessed on September 30, 2009).Available fromhttp://www. smallwarsjournal.com/blog/journal/docs-temp/227- slaikeu .pdf

Stiglitz J. “The Myth of the War Economy Markets Loathe Uncertainty and

Volatility. The Guardian January 22, 2003 (accessed on September 29, 2009)Available from http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115

Streusand, D.E. & Tunnell IV H.D. Choosing Words Carefully: Language to Help

Fight Islamic Terorism. Military Intelligence PB 34-06-2, 2006, 32, 2, 2.

(accessed on September 30, 2009). Available from

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/mipb/2006_01.pdf

Therriault S. & Wulf R. Cultural Awareness or If the Shoe Does Not Fit . Military

Intelligence PB 34-06-2, 2006, 32, 2, 6. (accessed on September 30, 2009).

Available from http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/mipb/2006_01.pdf

VanOtten, G.A. Culture Matters Military Intelligence PB 34-05-1. 2005, 31, 1, 1.(accessed on September 30, 2009). Available from


18

http://www/

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115




http://www/

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115




Documents

A Tool for Nation Building