In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

137 chapter ten Nonofficial Diplomacy 23333333333333 3333333333333333334 Broadly speaking, there are two types of intervening actors in international conflict: official, diplomatic, and governmental actors (Track I diplomats) and informal, nonofficial, and private actors (Track II diplomats). Nonofficial or Track II diplomacy, once virtually invisible in international conflict resolution, is now a critical aspect of peacemaking efforts in virtually every internal war around the world. A facet of the democratization of world politics—the expansion of the nongovernmental sector into all aspects of global governance—the benefits of citizen-based peacemaking were most dramatically illustrated in the Rome Agreement in 1992 between the Mozambique rebel group Renamo (Resistencia Nacional de Mocambique) and the Frelimo (Frente da Libertacao de Mocambique) government, in the Oslo Accords of 1993 between the PLO and the Israeli government, and in the Inter-Tajik Dialogue in 1994. In each of these celebrated cases, private individuals acting in an unofficial capacity played key roles in gaining the trust of the parties and mediating peace agreements in conflicts that had thus far been resistant to traditional diplomacy. These examples clearly illustrated the ability of nonofficial mediators to gain entry into intractable intrastate conflicts and the potential synergies that can be achieved when official Track I and citizen-based Track II diplomats coordinate their activities into a single peacemaking effort. Since the late 1980s, there has been a proliferation of NGOs established specifically for the task of conflict resolution in war-afflicted countries. By the mid-1990s, the Carter Center in Atlanta listed more than eighty international NGOs working specifically in conflict prevention and resolution. Many have large budgets and work simultaneously in dozens of countries. A well-known directory indicates that the twelve largest conflict resolution NGOs (those dedicated solely to conflict resolution activities, such as the Carter Center, Conflict Management Group, the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, International Alert, the International Crisis Group, the Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy, Search for Common Ground, and the United States Institute for Peace) had a combined budget of $136 million in 2000 (Aall, Miltenberger, and Weiss 2000). In addition to these single-purpose organizations , thousands of humanitarian and relief assistance, human rights, environmental, civil society–and democracy -building NGOs, as well as churches, civic associations , and concerned individuals, have also started to incorporate conflict resolution training and conflict prevention and peacebuilding activities into their everyday work. Publications by the European Centre for Conflict Prevention describe 100 nongovernmental organizations working in the fields of conflict prevention and peacebuilding in Africa, 187 in Central and South Asia, and over 300 in Europe and Eurasia (Mekenkamp, van Tongeren , and van de Veen 1999, 2002; Van Tongeren, van de Veen, and Verhoeven 2002). At the governmental level, foreign affairs departments and international organizations have begun to establish sections and units to liaise with NGOs working in areas of conflict. The United Kingdom, Canada, Switzerland, Netherlands, Finland, and Sweden, among others, have created peacebuilding units in their foreign ministries, allocated funds for conflict resolution activities, organized conferences for NGOs in conflict resolution, and in some cases, created special ambassadors with conflict resolution responsibilities (Peck 1999). The U.S. State Department encourages dialogue between official and unofficial diplomats through regular lunchtime meetings, while the Canadian government has sponsored numerous meetings between government officials and NGO representatives to discuss Asia-Pacific security (Chataway 1998: 282). Since the Oslo success in 1993, the Norwegian government has institutionalized its relationship with NGOs working in conflict resolution through the creation of the Norwegian Emergency Preparedness System and the Norwegian Resource Bank for Democracy and Human Rights (Lieberfeld 1995). These mechanisms involve a series of standby arrangements through which close cooperation takes place between NGOs, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and academic institutions in a wide variety of settings involving peacemaking and humanitarian assistance. The UN has a long-standing relationship with NGOs through Article 71 of the Charter and the work of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). NGOs can be accredited to the UN through the NGO and Institutional Relations section of the UN Department of Public Information (DPI). There are now more than 20,000 NGOs from every part of the world that have entered into some type of relationship with the UN system (Mawlawi 1993). Many of these work in the area of conflict resolution and are increasingly involved in UN peacekeeping operations. NGOs have also been heavily involved in UN Conferences , such as the four UN World Conferences on Women and Development (among others), and...

Share