peacebuilding syndicate2

8/3/2019 peacebuilding syndicate2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/peacebuilding-syndicate2 1/12

1

Name : Fajar Fiqh

Muhammad Q Rusydan

Nasrudin

Seruni

Siti Novita Rosanti

1. INTRODUCTION

Peacebuilding activities start when hostilities end or usually marked by ceasefire or

peace agreement. Peacebuilding is the continuation of peacemaking and peacekeeping. The

aim of peacebuilding is to rebuild country and put in place measure to address root causes of

conflict in order to prevent the occurrence of conflict.

Peacebuilding can be as a short terms and long terms actions. In the short terms,

function of peacebuilding is to stabilizing peace process and preventing relapse violent

conflict. In the long terms action, peacebuilding address the root causes of conflict and lays

the foundation for social justice and sustainable peace. There are two types of peacebuilding;

post-conflict peacebuilding and preventive peacebuilding.

In this paper, we would like to analyze the implementation of peacebuilding which

took place in Afghanistan.

2. THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Peacebuilding

According the United Nations (UN) document An Agenda for Peace1, peacebuilding

consists of a wide range of activities associated with capacity building, reconciliation, and

societal transformation. Peacebuilding is a long-term process that occurs after violent conflict

has slowed down or come to a halt. Thus, it is the phase of the peace process that takes place

after peacemaking and peacekeeping.

1 Boutros-Ghali, Boutros. An Agenda for Peace. New York: United Nations 1995

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/reconciliation/

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/transformation/

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/peace_processes/

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/peace_processes/

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/transformation/

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/reconciliation/



2

Fetherston has catalogued several definitions, which go further to describe the

subtance of peacebuilding:

1. Peacebuilding is a positive, continues cooperative human endeavour to build

bridges between conflicting nations and groups. It aims to enhanceunderstanding

and communication and dispel the wandering rocks of distrust, fear and hate.2

2. Pacebuilding is the deliberate and systematic build-up of interactions, dense and

durable, iniating a state in which the resumption of conflict would be improbable.3

3. Peacebuilding policies prescribe action aimed at eliminating the social and

economic sources of tension that are among the causes of war.4

Peacebuilding also can be definite by three key aspects. First, peacebuilding must be

multi level process ranging from the strategic level at which diplomats and heads of state

operate to their inter-communal and inter-personal level at which violence is manisfated.

Second, peacebuilding is mainly about interactions, co-operative behaviour, trust and

confidence, positive attitudes, and other slippery concepts. Third, if conflicts are inevitable

and potentially constructive, peacebuilding aims to prevent them from leading to violence.5

Peacebuilding is understood as an overarching term to describe a long-term process

covering all activities with the overall objective to prevent violent outbreaks of conflict or tosustainably transform armed conflicts into constructive peaceful ways of managing conflict.

Peacebuilding aims at preventing and managing armed conflict and sustaining peace after

large-scale organized violence has ended. Peacebuilding scope covers all activities that are

linked directly to this objective over 5-10 years. Peacebuilding should create conducive

conditions for economic reconstruction, development and democratization.

There are two types of peacebuilding. First, Post-conflict peacebuilding held right

after the violence conflict stop. This peacebuilding only stop violence in short-term. Second,

Preventive peacebuilding, can stop violence in long-term period because in preventive

peacebuilding the peace builder try to eliminate conflict from its grass roots.

2 International Conference on peacebuilding. Summary of Conference Proceedings. Shannon International

Airport, Ireland, 28 April-3 May 1986, p.143

UNITAR, The United Nations and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security, (Lancaster: Martinus

Nijhoff, 1987), p. 2504 R.A Co ate and D.J Purchala, Global Peace and The United Nations System: A Current Assesment , Journal of

Peace Research, 27:2, April 1990, p. 127-85Major D.M. Last, From Peacekeeping to Peacebuiding: Theory, Cases, Experiments and Solutions,Royal

Millitary College Working Paper, Kingston , Ontario, May 1999, p.6



3

There are three phases of peacebuilding: (i) the prevention phase aiming at preventing

armed conflict; (ii) the conflict management or peace-making phase aiming to end armed

conflict and reach a peace agreement; and (iii) the post-conflict peacebuilding phase, or post-

settlement phase. The term post settlement would be more appropriate as the term post-

conflict is somewhat at odds with the notion that conflict is inevitable in any society and can

be constructive.

2.2 Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR)

DDR has two goals; there are short-term goal, and long-term goal. The goal of DDR

in the short-term is the restoration of security and stability, through the disarmament of

warring parties. Long-term goal of DDR is to sustained social and economic reintegration of

ex-combatants into a peaceful society. However, the DDR programs are not comprehensive

development projects; they are temporary actions which facilitate the transformation from

war to peace.

Disarmament is aim to collect small weapons and lights arms from the ex-combatant

and military forces. Disarmament is important not only for the material improvement of

security conditions, but also for psychological impacts. The public destruction of weapons is

an important tool in promoting the DDR program and as a fact that the disarmament programis well done.

Demobilization of armed groups is another fundamental step in the improvement of

security conditions at the end of an armed conflict. Progressive disarmament reduces the

mistrust that fuels a security dilemma between the fighting factions, allows aid workers to

intervene more effectively, and allows peaceful social and economic activities to resume.

The purpose of the demobilization phase is to register, count and monitor the

combatants and to prepare them for their discharge with identification documents and, at the

same time, to gather necessary information for their integration into the community. It

includes medical screening and aid, covers maintenance supplies for the combatants and

generally also transport for when they return to their home regions. The objective of

demobilization is to reduce or completely disband armed forces and other armed elements

taking part in a conflict.

Reintegration is the process by which ex-combatants acquire civilian status and gain

access to civilian forms of work and income. Reintegration for ex-combatants, as well as for



4

returnees and internally displaced persons (IDPs), is particularly difficult in post-war

situations. It is only possible to speak of reintegration to a limited extent, as war and violence

considerably change the perceptions and abilities of ex-combatants.

3. CASE STUDY

The disputes in Afghanistan can be said as urban areas. In particular urban areas often

take place over other issues such as housing ownership, electricity, crime or trade. In this case

of Afghanistan, the focus is on three types of disputes:

1. Over land and water, two of the most important resources in Afghanistan;

Land Disputes

Land disputes evolve over time and without due process can become part of the fuel that fans

conflict, particularly where grievances are exploited for political/military ends. The land

situation is perhaps at its most complexes in the north, where some informants identified it as

the single most pressing issue.

Land is the issue in the north. Every commander that comes starts giving out

land to his people with legal documents. There are multiple claims to land andmany of these disputes involve big commanders. If they just involve ordinary

people they can be solved at a local level, usually in the form of compromise,

but these are only the small disputes. Often land is controlled by commanders

who have no wish to let go, then they threaten, they kill.6

The origins of many current conflicts lie in the fault-lines left from successive phases

of state building. The person most responsible for the consolidation of the modern Afghan

state was Amir Abdur Rahman Khan (1881-1901). He dealt with the resistance he met from

rival Pashtun tribes by moving them to the non-Pashtun areas of the north and north-west and

then co-opted them by giving them the task of ruling over the local inhabitants. This laid the

foundations for many present day land disputes there, which centre principally on the Pashtun

enclaves. Resistance from the Hazara tribes of the central mountains was more brutally dealt

with: they were conquered with the support of Pashtun tribes, who in return were given much

of Hazarajat’s best valley land, along with grazing rights to the mountains. The Hazaras

6 ICG interview, Mazhar-I Sharif, August 2003



5

became the under-class of society. Many were forced to seek work in neighbouring countries

or to migrate to the cities where they became the labourers. This situation essentially

prevailed until the Soviet invasion. Hazarajat, a remote mountain area of little strategic value,

then became semi- autonomous. The conflict that spread throughout the countryside stopped

the Pashtun nomads from following their normal migratory routes, and with no government

forces to worry about, the Hazaras reclaimed their rights to both hill and valley, often

expropriating Pashtun property. Increasing poverty led to the ploughing of many hillsides that

had previously only been used as grazing land.

Urban land disputes add another dimension. Land and property that was expropriated

from either exiles or residents in the course of reforms was initially nationalized and in many

cases allocated for use by government institutions. After 1992, when the assets of these

institutions became spoils of war, such property was occupied or even sold by commanders

or their followers. Given the continued absence of the legal owners, it was customary to

falsify property deeds in order to lend legitimacy to this widespread profiteering, which

continues to this day.7

Water Resoures

Water is an even scarcer resource than land in Afghanistan and is similarly governed

by complex social relations. The landowners in a community often provide water, or the

means to obtain water, to the rural poor and receive services in return.

Alongside the problems of too little water are the problems of too much. Loss of

vegetation cover has led to increased flooding, river erosion, and landslides. Ill-thought out

schemes to combat erosion have sometimes exacerbated conflict, with protection walls saving

land on one river bank only to cause even worse erosion on the other. Water can not only be a

source of conflict in itself but also the means by which other conflicts are pursued, for

example depriving someone downstream of water because of a land dispute. This was noted

as a particular problem among Pashtun communities in the Kunduz area. The destruction in

2000 by the Taliban administration of a series of powerful pumps that had allegedly been

installed by Iranian farmers in the bed of the Helmand River, on the frontier between Iran and

Afghanistan – one factor in the countries nearly going to war – illustrates how water can

provoke conflict in a volatile political environment.

2. Between ethnic groups (often closely linked to land or water)

7 ICG Asia Report No.64



6

The rise of ethnic conflict is inextricably tied up with factional conflict. Indeed, many

people say it is only the factions that are the problem and that ordinary people have no

difficulty living together. To some extent this analysis is supported by the fact that in a

number of areas a change in the political landscape has, over time, led to a decrease in

conflict without the use of specific processes of reconciliation. This was mentioned in

relation to hostility towards Pashtuns in Kunduz23 and also in Hazarajat, where the strong

tensions reported in the 1990s between Hazaras and Sayyid are now said to be much reduced.

Prior to the 1978 Saur Revolution, ethnicity was infrequently the cause of violent

conflict, and disputes were as likely to be within ethnic groups as between them. With the fall

of the Najibullah government in 1992, Afghanistan began to fragment. Some parts such as

Kandahar and many rural areas were controlled by a patchwork of different commanders.

Others, such as Herat under Ismael Khan and the northern area under the ethnic Uzbek

General Dostum, came under the control of a single powerful commander and remained

relatively prosperous and free of major conflict, though there was scant attention to such

things as human rights. Kabul descended into warfare, and a new wave of refugees left the

country. The struggle took on an increased ethnic dimension as Hazaras battled with the

largely Pashtun forces of the Saudi-backed fundamentalist Abd al-Rabb al-Rasul Sayyaf, and

Hizb-i-Islami leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar clashed with Jamiat commander Ahmed Shah

Massoud31. All parties committed human rights abuses, and once atrocities began, ethnic

polarization increased. As ordinary people were forced to take up arms, the distinction

between military and civilian became harder to maintain. The war increased the levels of

ethnic tension in ways that cannot be separated from political developments. The negative

role of the local media in increasing ethnic conflict was noted by many of those interviewed

in Mazar-i Sharif, who pleaded for a media that was independent and free of ethnic bias.8

3. Over family matters that spill over into wide conflict; as women are often seen as

repositories of family honor, issues of marriage, inheritance and property can be

immensely important.

Family disputes easily spill over and involve the wider community, whether between

or within ethnic groups. Whole valleys or urban neighborhoods can become embroiled in

conflict because of a dispute between two families. Marriage is still mostly a question of

relationships between families rather than individuals. Few are free simply to marry whom

8 Ibid



7

they please, though the degree of choice can vary from marriage even against wishes, to an

joint agreement between individual and family. Women in particular are seen as the

repository of family honor and have even less space than men to follow their own wishes.

Disputes over marriage and sexual relations can travel through generations and become the

most intractable to solve. It is these conflicts more than any other that communities seek to

keep out of the formal system. Parties have often been known to use the formal system not to

seek a solution but to inflict punishment on the other side. A number of women are wrongly

imprisoned for these reasons.

In December 2001, a number of prominent Afghans met under UN auspices in Bonn,

Germany to decide on a plan for governing the country; The Bonn Agreement was signed on

December 5 by representatives of several different anti-Taliban factions and political groups.

It established a roadmap and timetable for establishing peace and security, reconstructing the

country, reestablishing some key institutions, and protecting human rights. The agreement

contains provisions addressing military demobilization and integration, international

peacekeeping, and human rights monitoring.

The Bonn Agreement was the initial series of agreements intended to re-create the

State of Afghanistan following the U.S invasion of Afghanistan in response to the September

11, 2001, terrorist attack. Since no nationally-agreed-upon government had existed in

Afghanistan since 1979, it was felt necessary to have a transition period before a permanent

government was established.

It defined the responsibilities of the parties and set out a timetable and processes for

national political reconciliation that can, and should have, also framed local procedures. The

need was specifically acknowledged within the terms of reference of the Afghan Independent

Human Rights Commission, established pursuant to the Bonn Agreement. However, the

failure so far to secure the peace adequately, as evidenced by continued instability in some

parts of the country and deteriorating conditions in others, has deeply disquieted many

Afghans and stands in the way of any meaningful reconciliation. (Group, 2003)

4. ANALYSIS

Peacebuilding is the continuation of peacemaking and peacekeeping actions.

Peacebuilding is a process that facilitates the establishment of durable peace and tries to



8

prevent the recurrence of violence by addressing root causes and effects of conflict through

reconciliation, institution building and political as well as economic transformation.9

In this paper, we will analyze the peacebuilding action which conducted in

Afghanistan. Sometimes, local or internal conflict cab be solved by the government but in

Afghanistan, the government administration was broke down and corrupt. So, people have no

trust to the government offices.

Peacebuilding can be done by internal and external actors such as the government,

people (civil society), private sector, NGOs, IGOs, and other institutions. Peacebuilding in

Afghanistan is one of the examples of post conflict peacebuilding. Post conflict

peacebuilding mission usually established after the violence conflict finished and the

ceasefire reached. However, in Afghanistan is unique because the ceasefire was not reached

in there. The violence conflict finished in Afghanistan was marked by the signed of the Bonn

Agreement on December 1995. The Bonn Agreement contains of the way to rebuild

Afghanistan such as establishing peace and security, reconstructing the country, protecting

human rights, and reestablishing the institutions.

Peacebuilding in Afghanistan in the beginning was initiated by the traditional

institutions. Traditional institution at that time used the traditional mechanism like shura and

jirga to solve the problem. By making shura and jirga people can gather and sit together to

talk about their problems and open the debate. This initiative also supported by the NGO and

UN Habitat. Jirgas or shuras settle disputes without long delays and financial costs, and they

are accessible to the illiterate – the overwhelming majority of Afghans, who are unable to

make applications to court, read or understand the laws, or do the paperwork.10

From the mid-1990s there were initiatives from NGO and UN in resolving conflict in

Afghanistan due to the lack of political framework in Afghanistan. This initiative includes the

promoting of dialogue between the NGO, UN, and the local government to see the

possibilities of reconciliation in Afghanistan. UN Habitat in the mid-1990s together with

Hazara-Tajik made a joint project in Kabul in an attempt to reduce the ethnic tension.

The local NGO, Afghan Development Association (ADA) sees the conflict resolution

as at the core of what it does, and individual development projects as conflict prevention

tools. In 1992 there was a chaotic situation in Uruzgan because at that time there was conflict

between Hazara and Pashtun, Hazara and Hazara, Pashtun and Pashtun. So, it decided the

9

Boutros-Ghali, Boutros. Op. Cit,. 10 See Ali Wardak, “Jirga and Traditional Conflict resolution in Afghanistan”, in John Strawson (ed.), Law after

Ground Zero (London, 2002).



9

way to face this problem was to get people to work together on practical project in order to

strengthen their relations.

In the late 1990s, there were Oxfam and World Food Programme (WFP) which were

doing emergency food distribution which wanted to spread an equal distribution of food and

poor people can get the equal rights.

Another Afghan NGO namely Shuhada focused on the reconciliation in Afghanistan

in the education program. Dr. Dima Samar as the founder and now the Chair of the Afghan

Independent Human Rights Commission said that:

In Jaghori the schools really changed the whole attitude of the area. In 1989/1990 when we

started, everyone was holding a gun, was part of the political parties. And the educated ones, they left

the party and joined the school to teach. And the young people started coming to school not joining the

parties. In school we speak about equality. Only through education can we really bring about work on

reconciliation. We need opportunities, alternatives to the gun. And we need to talk to the people,

through schools, through mosques, through clinics and health projects. You can see, in areas where

there is no education people are much more violent.11

From the paragraph above, we can see that one of the phases of peacebuilding is by

doing the education program. Education program in peacebuilding is really needed in order to

give knowledge to the civil society about the equality, live in peace, rights and norms, and

others. By maintaining education program in Afghanistan, it can be a way to smoother the

reconciliation and to decrease the violent situation in there.

Other peacebuilding mission in Afghanistan was the Afghan NGO Cooperation for

Peace and Unity (CPAU). CPAU was set up specifically to work on issues of reconciliation.

Its approach has been to think of doable things, to focus on what can be achieved rather than

talking about the impossibilities.12

The work of CPAU was in building capacity of

community which aiming to the empowerment, to transfer skills and knowledge, and to help

the traditional shura and jirga to be practical.

Then, since 11 September 2001 NGO work on reconciliation and peacebuilding has

not fundamentally altered and some new players have come on to the scene and existing

actors have taken the opportunity to extend some of their activities. NGOs continue to see a

role for themselves but they also recognize their limitation and the need for an overall

strategy that seeks to involve people at all levels. NGOs also find the difficulties to get

11ICG interview with Dr. Sima Samar, Kabul, August 2003.

12 ICG Asia Report. Peace Building in Afghanistan, September 2003, pp. 16



10

funding not just for specific peacebuilding work but also for the long-term development that

can support democratic and inclusive community structures.13

Funding is the important thing to do peacebuilding, reconciliation, and the

development in the former conflicting areas. Peacebuilding needs a big amount of money to

reconstruct, reconcile, and develop country because after the conflict ends, conflicting areas

lack of funding, destroy, and need long time period to maintain a stable country.

In 2002, there were also two inter-agency initiatives in the North Afghanistan; the

Security Commission for the North, and the Return Commission and its associated Working

Group. The establishment of Security Commission for the North was the idea of UN Mission

(UNAMA) in May 2002. The aim was to get factional leaders to be responsible for solving

disputes and to police the behavior of their own commanders.14

The Commission also

observing some places which consider will create trouble and tried to negotiate local

disarmament (one of the concept of DDR) in high tension areas. But, there was not a

complete disarmament conducted in Afghanistan.

The Return Commission for the North was set up as a response to the fact that

although some 700.000 refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) had returned to the

north, less than half returned to their province, and the majority of one particular group, the

Pashtuns from Faryab and Jawzjan, remained away in the belief that conditions were not safe

for return.15

Then, the Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation, the northern authorities,

UNAMA, the office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the AIHRC

was established the return Commission with the aim of facilitating the voluntary, safe,

dignified and sustainable returns of Afghans to the northern provinces. This initiative is

valuable, but it has limitations on what it can achieve unless backed by strong central

government action.16

5. CONCLUSION

Peacebuilding is the continuation of peacemaking and peacekeeping process.

Peacebuilding took place after the end of violence conflict and usually marked by ceasefire

and agreement. Peacebuilding is a long-term process that occurs after violent conflict has

13Ibid., et. seq.

14

ICG interview with UNAMA staff, Mazar-I Sharif. August 2003.15 Op.Cit. pp. 19. 16

Ibid.,



11

slowed down or come to a halt Peacebuilding activities includes reconciliation, workshop,

DDR, the return of refugees and IDPs.

In Afghanistan, peacebuilding started without any ceasefire, but there was a Bonn

Agreement. The effort of maintaining peacebuilding in Afghanistan includes the

establishment of education program which aiming civil society quit from parties and can

learn about the equality and left behind their guns. There was also shura and jirga which can

be consider as the tools to decrease tension because civil society can sit together in there,

debate, and talks about their problems. There was also the effort from the NGOs and UN

initiatives to establish good governance in Afghanistan. Then, there was also the Return

Commission which focused on the return of refugees and IDPs to their place. Also, there was

an effort to involved military people active in peacebuilding.

Peacebuilding will not effective if there is no good relations between the actors (peace

builders) with the government. Peacebuilding should be conducted together between the

government or elite party, middle class, and the poor society or means that all aspects should

be involved.

Peacebuilding in Afghanistan categorized as a post-conflict peacebuilding.

Peacebuilding is hard to take place if there are no enough funds to make reconstruction. So,

funding is also important for the implementation of peacebuilding. Pecaebuilding hopefully

can be a way to reduce the dilemma of the civil society from war, reconstruct, reconcile,

reintegrate, and make stability in a country.



12

REFERENCES

International Crisis Group. 2003. “Peace Building In Afghanistan”. 29 September 2003.

Kabul/Brussels

Keating, Tom and W. Andy Knight. 2004. Building Sustainable Peace. Canada: The

University of Alberta Press

Kriesberg, Louis. 2007. Constructive Conflicts From Escalation To Resolution. The United

States Of America: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc

Lederach, John Paul. 1997. Building Peace sustainable Reconciliation In Divided Societies.

Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace

Ramsbotham, Oliver. et.al. 2006. Contemporary Conflict Resolution. UK: Polity Press

peacebuilding syndicate2

Documents