|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 14 September 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Trends in the Asian peace processes The context of the challenges of today by Eliseo "Jun" Mercado, OMI In the 80's Social Scientists in Southeast Asia gathered together both in Kuala Lumpur and Singapore to discuss and exchange notes on the issue of separatist movements and ethnic conflicts in Southeast and South Asia. Those were very revealing and interesting conferences in terms of highlighting the "uneasiness" as well as "misunderstanding" of the social cleavages brought about by ethnic and religious differences and diversities. Already in the early 80's, it was opined that the "wonder" or the real "miracle" in Asia was the fact that there were few separatist movements and ethnic conflicts given the region's ethnic and religious diversities (Ruth McVey. 1984). Moreover, at that time, there was the feeling that the inroad of modernization and the emerging globalisation would, in time, bring about greater "harmonization" of ethnic and cultural differences. It was also in the same period that the world began to see the "terror" and the "cruelties" of ethnic and religious wars. But in the midst of the rising terror, there was a nascent consciousness of the need to settle conflicts peacefully, including separatist conflicts, through negotiations. Peace Process was then the new emerging phenomenon beginning the early 90's. While policy makers and government people point mainly to the positive aspects of globalisation, the present analysis of Asian-Pacific realities points to the numerous negative effects of the impact of globalisation and its subsequent economic and political, social and religious and ethnic upheaval. With the emergence of various forms of Neo-Liberalism, characterising the process of Globalisation, the role of the Nation State is being undermined and diverted from its basic responsibility of promoting the common good and protecting the basic human rights of individuals. A new social scenario is emerging before our very eyes. We see the gradual erosion of the agricultural base of our economies, the displacement of millions of people internally and externally, the situation of millions of migrant workers who have to leave their homes and families to work as contract labour with little security and under deplorable conditions. There is the gradual and blatant increase in the trafficking of women, girls and boys and the feminisation of poverty accompanied by violence on women. The rapid deterioration of ecology and environment is largely due to the pace of unethical and unsustainable development resulting in the indiscriminate destruction of natural resources and the environment. The prevalence of Greed in an organised manner within the systems that promote various forms of neo-liberalism based trade and capital liberalisation has created inequalities and institutionalised injustices in the economic, political, ethnic and religious spheres. This leads to feelings of oppression or hopelessness, hatred, prejudice, and desire for vengeance, resulting in violence. The lack of good governance and social structures that deal effectively with political, economic and social inequalities in our society has resulted in a culture of intolerance where people lack respect and understanding of each other and there is domination of one race, caste over the other. Historical grievances have also caused individual violence, violence of the people, and violence of the State. Declining religious values and increasing religious fundamentalism have also brought about clashes and conflicts. Conflicts Today's violent conflicts challenge our conventional wisdom of the nature of war and its aftermath. Traditionally, states have waged war against one another with professional armies. The majority of the casualties have been combatants. And a military victory has signalled the end of hostilities. The subsequent peace, often accompanied by a formal agreement, has allowed each side to rebuild (roads, bridges, houses, schools, etc.) and, over time, to come to terms with the wounds of war, resulting in a form of peaceful coexistence with their former enemy. By contrast, the violent conflicts plaguing the world today are mostly civil wars with spill over impacts on neighbouring countries. They are waged by youthful combatants with little formal military training who are often nationals of the same country. Civilians are increasingly targeted - killed and displaced. And a cease-fire usually results from war fatigue and military stalemate rather than outright victory. Formal peace agreements are rarely fully implemented and the "post-conflict" period is beleaguered by small-scale, sustained violence, resulting in many war-affected countries being in a prolonged state of half war and half peace. In many cases, the war continues by other means with little reconciliation, as former enemies are reluctant to trust one another, refusing to live together as neighbours. This can even happen when billions of dollars and thousands of peacekeepers are present (e.g. Bosnia and Kosovo). One clear lesson of civil war is that social reintegration cannot be bought nor legislated in the short run. To begin to formulate a more appropriate response to these conflicts, we need to consider the changing nature of war and requisites for sustainable peace in the post-Cold War world. Often conflicts are explained in terms of ethnic groups or religious identities/difference. However, the identity of a social group, whether it be ethnic, religious or otherwise, is not fixed. The roots of conflict are multifaceted and complex, involving not only ethnic and religious opposition, cultural differences, colonial history and ideology, but also economic factors such as poverty and issues of governance due to inexperienced or distorted administrative and judicial institutions. Social scientists have identified three major sources of conflict: Poverty, Political exclusion and inequality. These three causes are also the underlying issues in the lack of social cohesion in society. The countries in the region that have experienced the sharpest drops in growth are those with divided societies and weak institutions for managing conflicts. De-establishing conflicts have in recent years, been a major obstacle to development in Asia and the Pacific. Conflicts have high economic and social costs. Everybody recognizes the tremendous negative impact of conflict on development. Conflicts have drained the country's funds and energy that should have been devoted to the improvement of public welfare and economic development. Poverty reduction strategy implicitly recognized that conflict is both a cause and consequence of inequality. The poor are often unable to obtain basic services because of institutions that are not accountable, domination by local elites, widespread corruption, culturally determine inequality, and lack of participation by the poor. In many respects, conflict is the result of politics of exclusion and iniquity. If all sections of society can participate in decision-making and development, and if institutions for such participation are in place, emergence of violent conflicts can be significantly reduced. At the same time, the roots of conflict can be traced back to history of discrimination (iniquity) from the time of colonialism to the arbitrary drawing of maps and formation of states, the way various social and ethnic cleavages developed and were managed, and the way natural resources have been managed and distributed. Favourable Conditions in Peace Making ... There are three major factors that contribute to the appropriateness of the on-going peace process within the region albeit at different degrees and levels between the governments and the rebel fronts. 1. The first is the continued pauperization of the peoples of the Region. The Asian Financial crisis beginning 1997 dispelled all the magic of the economic miracle. It was a bubble, a mirage! the WB's poverty reduction strategies have very limited success. And the region continues to reel in poverty in spite of the much claimed development investments. People do claim that the continuing conflicts and the many unresolved issues that define identity and social cohesion remain one of the dominant key factors in the lack of any forward movement in the poverty reduction strategy in the region. More than ever, the parties (governments and rebel fronts) to the conflict realize that fighting does not offer solution to the many unresolved social issues. In fact, it exacerbates the continued "victimization" and marginalization of the very peoples whom they believe to represent in the arena of conflict. Political settlement is now seen as preferable to an ongoing conflict worldwide. The continuing poverty of peoples and their continued marginalization exert pressure on both parties to accommodate each other to the benefit not only of the region but their particular country as well. 2. The second factor is the realization by both parties that a lasting political settlement in any civil war or internal conflicts cannot be won by war. Military solutions, even the unlikely military "victory" do not result to peace. It is quite obvious that military force cannot solve political, economic and cultural issues that are at the roots of the conflicts in the region. Military solutions have been tried and the best they have produced are but fleeting truces among the combatants. This realization is the major factor for the governments and rebel fronts (though grudgingly) to engage in the many on-going peace processes in the region. 3. The third factor is the economic and political changes in the Regional and global scenes. Asia and the Pacific Rim are in the threshold of unparalleled economic growth despite the present temporary crisis of market. APEC, ASEAN, and other regional economic groupings and economic corridors including the proposed revival of the old "silk roads" bring new opportunities for economic growth in the said Rim known for its rich natural resources and entrepreneurial sectors. The growing consciousness and acceptance that there are no real winners in conflict and war, especially internal war, is one of the key elements in peacemaking. More and more, people begin to realize that it is time not only to talk peace but also to agree on a formula among stakeholders that would pave the way for an enduring peace settlement. People, civilians and combatants alike, are getting tired of war. There is a growing "war fatigue" not only among the protagonists in the conflict but also among the stakeholders, the very people in whose name the war is being waged. This is further exacerbated by the increasing poverty and underdevelopment in conflict areas. Moreover, the political leadership in the region appears to have accepted the fact that the lack of any forward movement in the long pestering political internal conflicts has been the major factor in the continuing underdevelopment of the country. The negotiated political settlement will definitely enhance faster growth and development of both of the country and the region as well. No doubt, there are great obstacles to peace. Foremost is the historical bias as well as the history of conflicts in the regions. Wounds on all sides are, indeed, deep. They continue to exercise tyranny over the spirit of the peoples of the region. Relations between and among peoples are, largely, shrouded in mutual suspicion and mistrust. There remains the challenge on either side to rise above the general ignorance and bias that have, for years, characterized relationships. Rev.Fr. Eliseo "Jun" Mercado OMI, is the Head of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate initiated Justice Peace and Integrity Creation Service in Rome and is also the Consultant on Peace Affairs to the Philippines President. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
