Search results

Bert Ingelaere

The modernised gacaca court system as it functioned in Rwanda is often referred to in terminology and descriptions as if it were identical, or at least similar, to the traditional conflict resolution mechanism known as the gacaca that has existed in Rwandan society since pre-colonial times. It, therefore, often carries the connotation of a customary and quasi non-judicial mechanism with primarily a restorative objective. The image of palavers under the oldest tree in the village is never far away. However, the relation between the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ gacaca

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Timothy Longman

Zaïre. Le vécu d’une réfugiée rwandaise ( Paris : L’Harmattan ). Verwimp , P. ( 2003 ), ‘ Testing the Double Genocide Thesis for Central and Southern Rwanda ’, Journal of Conflict Resolution , 47 : 4 , 423 – 42 . Verwimp , P. ( 2013 ), Peasants in Power: The Political Economy of Development and Genocide in Rwanda ( Dordrect : Springer ).

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Brendan T. Lawson

( Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press ). Arendt , H. ( 1990 ), On Revolution ( London : Penguin ). Autesserre , S. ( 2014 ), Peaceland: Conflict Resolution and the Everyday Politics of International

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Megan Daigle
,
Sarah Martin
, and
Henri Myrttinen

, C. ( 2004 ), ‘ Security and the Democratic Scene: Desecuritization and Emancipation ’, Journal of International Relations and Development , 7 : 4 , 388 – 413 . Autesserre , S. ( 2014 ), Peaceland: Conflict Resolution and the Everyday Politics of International Intervention ( Cambridge

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
How Can Humanitarian Analysis, Early Warning and Response Be Improved?
Aditya Sarkar
,
Benjamin J. Spatz
,
Alex de Waal
,
Christopher Newton
, and
Daniel Maxwell

and alleviating suffering in a conflict or crisis in relation to a much wider set of goals – around livelihood protection, governance, resilience, conflict resolution and others that align with the ‘triple nexus’ of humanitarian action, development and peacebuilding. Third, we recognise that the ‘humanitarian community’ is not a monolithic entity. It consists of different types of groups and movements, often with contradictory ideas about how the broad goal of saving lives

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs

For over five decades, the Cold War security agenda was distinguished by the principal strategic balance, that of a structure of bipolarity, between the United States (US) and the Soviet Union (USSR). This book seeks to draw from current developments in critical security studies in order to establish a new framework of inquiry for security in the Middle East. It addresses the need to redefine security in the Middle East. The focus is squarely on the Arab-Israeli context in general, and the Palestinian-Israeli context in particular. The character of Arab-Israeli relations are measured by the Israeli foreign policy debate from the 1950s to the 1990s. A dialogue between Islam and Islamism as a means to broaden the terrain on which conflict resolution and post-bipolar security in the Middle East is to be understood is presented. The Middle East peace process (MEPP) was an additional factor in problematizing the military-strategic concept of security in the Middle East. The shift in analysis from national security to human security reflects the transformations of the post-Cold War era by combining military with non-military concerns such as environmental damage, social unrest, economic mismanagement, cultural conflict, gender inequity and radical fundamentalism. By way of contrast to realist international relations (IR) theory, developing-world theorists have proposed a different set of variables to explain the unique challenges facing developing states. Finally, the book examines the significance of ecopolitics in security agendas in the Middle East.

A framework for understanding EU crisis response
Oliver P. Richmond
,
Sandra Pogodda
, and
Roger Mac Ginty

and Conflict, the work was particularly interested in the extent to which a commonly accepted framework for understanding responses to conflict could be applied to how the EU responds to crises. The conflict response framework stretches from conflict management to conflict resolution and to conflict transformation, with conflict management the most conservative and conflict transformation the most

in The EU and crisis response
The organisation of war-escalation in the Krajina region of Croatia 1990–91
Hannes Grandits
and
Carolin Leutloff

reform and institutional formation in the process of societal transformation. The leader–followeroriented perspective was chosen to avoid the hypothesis that conflict escalation was inevitable. The analysis of the year before the outbreak of open war in June 1991 is sub24 War-escalation in the Krajina region 1990–91 divided into three sections focusing on distinct phases in the development: first the popularisation and institutionalisation of national front-lines, secondly, the mobilisation for violent conflict resolution and, finally, the importance of the potential of

in Potentials of disorder
Mørten Bøås
,
Bård Drange
,
Dlawer Ala'Aldeen
,
Abdoul Wahab Cissé
, and
Qayoom Suroush

management driven to a large extent by external security concerns that make the EU states’ ambitions of contributing to conflict resolution and transformation hard, if not impossible to achieve. The main reason for this is that the five paradoxes that permeate these operations create a lack of local ownership and conflict sensitivity that leads programming of EU crisis response to become supply-driven and

in The EU and crisis response
Stuart Kaufman

conflict management and conflict resolution can work. Where security interests are constructed in mutually exclusive ways, neo-realist objections to neo-liberal arguments apply. In the hot spots of Eurasia, security dilemmas continue to exist within and between states because states and groups define their security in mutually exclusive ways. In ethnic conflicts such as those in the Balkans, institutional arrangements to manage conflict will remain fragile as long as and to the degree that ethnic attitudes and goals remain mutually hostile. Furthermore, even the fragile

in Limiting institutions?