| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 06-May-03 05:57 AM
Hi all,
What follows is taken from the latest issue of New Business Age Magazine. This is based on a talk program Mr. Jyoti gave to about 60 young Nepali entrepreneurs/businesspeople in late March 2003 in Kathmandu.
Enjoy the article.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
***********************************************
Peace Building & Role of Business
by Padma Jyoti
At this juncture in our history nothing is more important
than peace and political stability for Nepal, the Nepali and its business.
I was in Switzerland late February for a seminar for a group of Nepali participants on Conflict Resolution and Peace Building. We were twenty persons from all political parties, the civil society and of course Nepal Communist Part (Maoist). All of us participated in individual capacities. We stayed one week in a tiny village Montézillon, where there was no TV, no newspapers, and no radio. There was only snow all around us.
Experienced experts and knowledgeable professors shared with us their practical experience of conflicts in other parts of the world and concepts, which help in building peace.
The seminar had another important benefit. This gathering also gave us a good opportunity to interact with each other and understand the perspectives of each of the major players in Nepal. In fact we held a special session just among the Nepali participants. We even came out with a joint statement.
I want to share my experience of Montézillon and some of the lessons we can learn from conflicts and peace from other parts of the world.
Swiss experience
Nepal and Switzerland both multicultural, landlocked and small countries next to large neighbours. Jura Canton problem in Switzerland solved through and by the people, using referendum and ultimately constitution amendment. The Swiss political culture helped a smooth and peaceful solution
n The Swiss solve all problems through constitutional amendment! May not be suitable for all other countries
South Africa: a seemingly hopeless political situation changed miraculously
Conflict to Talks
Objective factors required to pressurise both sides to go for political settlement rather than pursue a military solution. For example, political or economic crisis, international situation
Then subjective conditions required. A belief that negotiated settlement will deliver a mutually acceptable result
Preparation for change is necessary. Talks without preparation is not fruitful
Leaders, who can take risks and who command trust, needed. Like Mandela, de Klerk
Ceasefire
Ceasefires are important
Otherwise talks become hostages of battlefield
War is self perpetuating, peace breaks the cycle
War intensifies hostilities
War destroys material and relationship resources
War uses up democracy dividend, it makes people skeptical about democracy
Details are important with complete understanding of obligations, times, boundaries
What we have in Nepal is a declaration of ceasefire. The declaration has to be converted into a working ceasefire
What to do about the forces of both sides is an important issue; otherwise unemployed fighters become bandits and rebels, a headache for the society
Funding for ceasefire
Peace Negotiations
Talks about the talks (Irish phrase): pre-negotiation setting the framework and the process, not the issues themselves, which are tackled later
Bad process lead to failure
No matter what happens, a door must be kept open
Peace negotiations:
Promote ownership of the process and the product
Build trust and goodwill
Be inclusive to protect the process
Decide the rules of negotiation
Prepare and train for negotiation
Participation of women helps
Sustain momentum of negotiation
Use devices to ensure progress
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 06-May-03 05:58 AM
Use sunset and sunrise clauses to get acceptable compromises
Sunset: clause lapses after a period. Both sides can claim advantage one in the short-term and the other in the long-term
Sunrise: for future dispensation. Deferred implementation in the interest of the transition. Both sides can claim advantage one in the short-term and the other in the long-term
Avoid talking through press. Talk to each other on the negotiating table
Single root causes should be seen in multi-dimensional arena
Perception of cause changes during conflict
Peace agreements should also improve quality of life for the people
Both sides must be able to claim victory in talks. Peace process has to deliver tangible benefits both for the protagonist and the antagonist.
Democracy and Governance
In Africa democracy even triggers violence because winner takes all and the prize is too high
Switzerland is peaceful not because of its people but because of its institutions
Majoritarian (Westminister) democracy vs. Consensual (Swiss): two models
Consensus democracy more suited for a multi-cultural society
But let us leave the subject of models of democracy to experts in political science. In Nepal we have been disappointed in how democracy did not lead to good governance. It is said that countries fail not because of a lack of natural resources but because of bad governance.
Democracy & Governance: 4 levels of consolidation
1st level: Constitutional institutions
division of power
government follows rule of law
regular, correct elections
orderly transition of power
2nd level: Representation
party system: hegemonical vs. pluralist
party organisation: democratic vs. family controlled
equal influence of economic organisations
3rd level: Elite Behaviour
access: merit based vs. social privilege
exploiting vs. serving
long term commitment ( there is instant coffee, but no instant politics! )
4th level: Civic Culture
Education
Free mass media
Notion of the state: big father vs. producer of public good
Next Steps
Now let us see what we as business persons and organisations can do in Nepal at this moment. We in Nepal went through political change and constitution making twelve years ago. The process seems still incomplete or inadequate.
Three major players involved: Maoists; Palace; Political Parties. But there is a fourth force the people, who want to see peace and an end to the fight only for power. We must not ignore this fourth force.
We have to succeed this time and not become an example of a failed state in the world
We have to get the process right this time and not leave out any concerned group.
It is heartening to know there are countries and organisations willing to help Nepal at this hour of crisis.
A sense of nation exists in Nepal. This is an asset. (It did not in some other conflict ridden countries)
Grass roots support for peace needed. We have to bring out in open the feelings for peace that exists inside every Nepalis heart. Many foreign friends have told me; we ordinary Nepali tolerate everything and do nothing. Let us make peace process a national campaign.
What to do now:
Participate in peace committees, rallies, mothers group
Consult / work with other civil society groups. As business persons we have limitations, so working with others in the society is important
Use network of District Chambers of FNCCI and organisations you belong to.
Pressurise the three main players, especially the political parties
Keep them on track of peace process and negotiations
Act as a bridge between the major political players
Force the political parties to behave in line with peoples needs. Much as we are fed up with their past record, they still need to get involved in substantive issues. If you think coolly they are the ones who can balance extremists on all sides. Parties at present seem incapable of performance but if left out they can derail the process.
Start dialogues with the political forces
Integrate modern economic realities into ideologies, some of which are outdated and unworkable
Interact with political forces
Inform them about todays fast changing world economy and the vastly changed trade rules
Inform what investors need and about the dynamism of private sector
Examples of China, South Africa
Start economic activities and job creation in affected areas
Design a workable project get expert help
Create job opportunities
Tax deductible investments in affected areas
Minimize risks, at least break even
Show corporate responsibility
Channel funds from donors, government, private investment
Conclusion
I have stressed on peace so much because just like we need oxygen to live, business needs peace and stability. Right now in Nepal people are worried even about their existence as a sovereign nation. The time is running out.
I think the time has come for the business community to show its capability and organizational strength in a field, which is different from its normal activities but is vital for Nepal at this juncture in history.
THE END
|
| Poonte |
Posted
on 07-May-03 08:15 AM
"Participation of women help"
I hope the above statement was a matter of wrong choice of words on the part of Mr. Jyoti--for it makes it sound as if while the women's role is helpful, it may not be a necessity in the process of peace building; and I would be deeply disappointed if the trainers/experts of conflict resolution would partake in such an understatement.
The people working on peace building must keep in mind that women had played a key role in the conflict, either as direct participants, or as victims--they took part in active combat (at least on the Maoist side); they lost husbands and/or sons; they were victims of torture and rape; and, most importantly, they took care of the house and the community by taking charge of tasks that were traditionally designated for men while the men were away either fighting or absconding.There are perhaps many other aspects of the conflict that women played a role in, which are not immediately visible. Now, to consider women's role in conflict resolution/peace building as merely "helpful" is serving grave injustice to the women of Nepal.
I am also dismayed at the make-up of the negotiation teams vis-a-vis women's role in the negotiation process. After having made a hype about gender equality--particularly on the issues of women's right to own property and girl's right to equal education--the Maoist now have absolutely no representation of women in the negotiation team; and the government's decision to include Anuradha Koirala in the team--and I hope I am wrong on this--merely seems like a token gesture to pacify the women activists, rather than a genuine desire to include women in the process.
Where the women had played a key role during the conflict, it would be absolutely unfathomable to try to achieve a lasting peace without direct and prominent roles for women in the peace process. Men and women both played their respective roles in the conflict, and one could not have experienced/felt what the other did; so, it would completely miss the target if one tried to make decisions for the other now.
|
| baadal |
Posted
on 07-May-03 10:54 AM
to add to poonte's posting, i would like to point out that it is not simply that we would miss "the target if one tried to make decisions for the other." it is important to understand to look at how gender affects our society and in doing so we will also be addressing one of the roots of inequities.
structural social, economic, political and cultural inequities form the basis of expressions of political and social violence. hence, peace building processes cannot just concerns itself with the deactivation of the violence only. it is an opportunity to address the roots of violence that lies in the structural inequities -- an opportunity to address and include the different perceptions of men and women regarding the needs and interests in peace processes.
we also need to learn from the lessons of previous peace building process. we do not want to repeat instances of post-conflict gender inequity in peace building that was seen in peru, east timor to name a few places. as poonte pointed out women were actively involved in the Maoist conflict...gender roles were redefined as women took up arms; as they took over male roles while the men were away fighting, hiding or dead; took up traditionally male farmng roles in the absence of the male...similarly to the shining path in peru, nepali women are actively involved in the maoist movement in nepal. unfortunately, also similar to the peace building process in peru, the presence and the impact of women in nepal's peace is being downplayed. once again women are marginalized.
poonte points out the absence of female in the peace talks. and hopefully the wrong choice of words on mr. jyoti's part...it is critical that we realize that the participation of BOTH men and women are vital to a successful peace process, and not just that "women's participation helps." this is an opportunity for the leaders to take a step towards addressing gender inequalities, along with othe structural inequities, exsiting in our societies. and, i do hope that they will embrace it.
|
