What's New on the Peaceful Prevention of Deadly Conflict

The House's draft military authorization bill is full of concerning language. What most alarms me, though, isn't a section on military operations in any one country – instead, it's a report that seems to endorse increased activity on the entire African continent.

When “marking up” the text of a bill – such as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – a committee will include a report, which offers further detail on their thoughts around the legislation. Though this may not always translate into concrete language in the text of the bill itself, it can inform how appropriated funding is later used (including to support covert or classified activity). This year’s report language from the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) contained the following excerpt:

“Specifically, the committee believes that activities that utilize U.S. Special Operations Forces and an ‘indirect approach’ that leverages local and indigenous forces should be used more aggressively and surgically in Africa and the Arabian Peninsula in close coordination with and in support of geographic combatant commander and U.S. embassy country team requirements. The committee believes that current indirect activities are not fully resourced and underutilized to counter gains and preclude the expansion of Al Qaeda affiliates in these regions.”

The (semi) good, the bad, and the ugly on funds to prevent war.

Our power as individuals and as a faith community comes when we act on our convictions--this idea was affirmed through the theme of "being salt and light" at the World Gathering of Friends just as it is when we live out each day working for peace and justice. I knew that Quaker collaboration to help prevent deadly conflict in Kenya was important before I left; being in Kenya and seeing the transformative relationships between perpetrators and victims of atrocities served to reaffirm the transformative power of non-violence as a response to conflict and the value of public policies that promote peace. What can we say to our U.S. policymakers about our public policies and this kind of transformative conflict resolution? Many may feel that the work of those building peace in Kenyan communities remains disconnected from U.S. policy in Washington. While it is true that the capacity to prevent renewed electoral violence lies with those in Kenya, there are actions our own government can take to help promote peacemaking and mitigate conditions for deadly conflict.

President Obama announced a comprehensive U.S. strategy to prevent genocide and other mass atrocities.

For over a year now, the Syrian government has violently repressed its citizens. In what started out as a largely peaceful movement in March 2011, has resulted in nearly 9,000 deaths and protracted armed violence.

For over a year now, the Syrian government has violently repressed its citizens. In what started out as a largely peaceful movement in March 2011, has resulted in nearly 9,000 deaths and protracted armed violence.

While the world marks International Landmine Awareness Day today, Syria has started using these devastating weapons along the borders with Turkey and Lebanon.

Even though the United States largely complies with the Mine Ban Treaty's provisions, it is one of the 37 countries that have yet to join. Take action and write a letter to urge President Obama to join the Mine Ban Treaty.

April 4 is International Landmine Awareness Day. Help raise awareness and press the US to join the Mine Ban Treaty.

A quick look at this year’s budget requests reveals some alarming trends when it comes to U.S. policy toward Kenya. Rather than emphasizing peace and conflict prevention, this year’s funding focuses much more on counterterrorism and military assistance – an approach that could undermine stability in the long-term.

While the majority of U.S. assistance to Kenya focuses on important civilian programs that could help lay the foundation for peace – such those related to health and education – very few funds are specifically dedicated to the account titled “peace and security,” whose programs may more immediately address potential violence. And within that tiny allocation, the funds directed toward conflict prevention and reconciliation (rather than counterterrorism and military initiatives) are, as of now, next to nothing.

This week marked one year since the violent crackdown against what began as a nonviolent uprising in Syria began. Since that time, thousands of people have been killed and the country now appears to be slipping toward full civil war. The Syrian government continues a campaign of violent repression, including the recent attack on Homs that killed hundreds of civilians. Many opposition groups are now actively taking up arms against the regime, convinced that ending the Assad regime through force is the only option left. President Bashar al-Assad himself has demonstrated strong resistance to international diplomatic and even humanitarian efforts to address the escalating crisis.

Here in Washington, talk of military intervention in Syria is also escalating quickly. Despite warnings by many experts, including military officials, that foreign armed intervention in Syria could spark broader regional conflict and increase the humanitarian suffering, some members of Congress, administration officials, and human rights advocates are urging "something" be done. Once again, in the midst of violence, our toolbox seems tragically sparse.

I'm shocked, though, at the calls for military intervention. While I know far too little about Syria to propose a comprehensive way forward, what I have learned through the crisis illustrates what a disaster military intervention would be.

This morning the Senate Foreign Relations Committee considered the nomination of a new Assistant-Secretary position in the State Department, that will head a new bureau in the US foreign policy architecture. Watching the confirmation hearing, I could see the policy change we'd worked for happening.

Thirteen years ago, as an intern with FCNL, I traveled with Joe Volk to Ottawa to attend the signing ceremony of the Mine Ban Treaty. Lobbying the US to join the treaty and ban landmines was a big issue on FCNL's agenda, and though President Clinton refused to sign the treaty, being present as dozens of other nations did was a remarkable, hopeful moment.

Today marks the 13th anniversary of the Mine Ban Treaty and that historic agreement to ban the production, stockpiling, and use of landmines. Over 150 countries have joined the treaty, and millions of mines have been cleared and destroyed. Unfortunately, landmines continue to maim and kill innocent civilians each year, and the US remains outside the treaty.

This week, both were talking about the importance of preventing violent conflict in Kenya.

On Monday afternoon, staff from both Senate and House offices joined FCNL for a briefing on what steps the U.S. can take to help support Kenyan efforts toward peace. During the briefing, staff learned about the peacebuilding work Friends in Kenya have undertaken since 2007-2008, as well as the concerns many have in anticipation of the next election. All who attended expressed interest in the positive role Congress can play in encouraging a U.S. policy supportive of peace, and we’re looking forward to continuing the conversation over the upcoming year.

The next day, FCNL constituents from across the country also joined a conference call on how Friends in the U.S. are working to help prevent violent conflict. After an update focused on our collaboration with other Quaker organizations and our hopes for U.S. policy in the upcoming year, the group had a discussion that ranged from mention of a trip that Earlham College alumni took to Kenya fifteen years ago to concerns around U.S. military assistance to Nairobi (which we’ve recently heard is as high as $300 million per year).

In 2007, the crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo received a lot of media attention. Prominent actors and U.S. officials traveled to the DRC and were shocked by the appalling situations in the hospitals and the testimonies of the rape victims. Their shock and concern was justified; rape and sexual violence were and are a horrific tactic of terror in the Congolese conflict.

This wave of shock was followed by a wave of financial support. Hospitals received equipment and medicine to aid rape victims. The international response to support victims of sexual and gender-based violence was astonishing. Health programs have increased the survival rates for victims, and charities provide many victims with means to supplement their income and gain access to basic services if they have experienced exclusion from their families and communities.

Reading the recent article in the New York Times Magazine, "Will Israel Attack Iran?", you might begin to think a war with Iran is inevitable and coming very soon. But no war is inevitable until it is underway, and there are real diplomatic solutions to the escalating crisis with Iran.

Yesterday, the International Criminal Court (a multilateral body dedicated to holding perpetrators of mass atrocities accountable) announced that four of the six Kenyans suspected of inciting post-election violence in 2007-2008 will head to trial. Though the road ahead is long, the decision is a step toward justice – and another demonstration of Kenya’s progress toward peace.

In the aftermath of Kenya’s electoral crisis, many both within the country and outside it called for perpetrators of violence to be held accountable. The Kenyan government initially pursued a domestic tribunal, but efforts failed to pass in Parliament. When little had been achieved almost two years later, the International Criminal Court (ICC) began an investigation of the post-election atrocities; since then, the process has been one fraught with controversy.

On January 5th, President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta released the Pentagon's new military strategy document, designed to guide military budgets and operations for years to come. Despite the heavy rhetoric from President Obama and Secretary Panetta claiming the new strategy represents big changes, I find little more than cosmetic touch ups to the same old war policies that have gotten the US into its current economic and security problems and reaped horrendous global damage along the way.

Yes, the size of the forces will be reduced somewhat. Yes, there's a shift away from the idea of the US being able to fight two major wars simultaneously (that one has been buried in Iraq and Afghanistan already). Yes, military planners will be focusing more on Asia and the Middle East, less on Europe and Latin America. And yes, there will be changes in the budget line items (think more drones and cyberwarfare) presented to Congress.

In returning to Washington after a month-long trip to Kenya, one conclusion from my time there has become all the more clear: as Kenyan Friends continue to empower their communities toward peace in the upcoming year, those of us in the U.S. should ensure that our country’s policy supports, not undermines, the success of their programs and others like them. With 2012 already here, the countdown to Kenya’s elections has begun – and now is the time to make peaceful prevention a U.S. priority, sooner rather than later.