rekonstruksi pascakonflik

1. rekonstruksipascakonflik kelas kat 9

2. diskusikan • rekonstruksi pascakonflik: apa, kapan, siapa, dll • kondisi paskakonflik: karakteristik masyarakat, tantangan keamanan, pemerintahan, ekonomi, budaya, dll • prioritas aksi • masalah & kritik

3. rekonstruksi pascakonflik • Membangun kembali • Fisik dan mental • Yang rusak • Empowerment • Kapan? Pascakonflik: gencatan senjata, perjanjian, resolusi, problem solving, tdk ada pertikaian terbuka • Siapa? Pihak terlibat, intervenor • Kapan berhenti? • Damai di permukaan saja

4. rekonstruksi pascakonflik rekonstruksi • membangun kembali atau membangun yang baru? • apa yang dibangun: sektor, sistem, kultur? • siapa yang membangun? pascakonflik • kapan ‘pasca’?

5. Trauma Distrust Segregation High crime Instability Produksi terhambat Sb daya rusak Krg legitimasi Intervensi tinggi Kepentingan Eksklusivisme Penyelesaian dg kekerasan Harapan? kondisi pascakonflik

6. kondisi pascakonflik (ball) institutional characteristics • weak political & administrative institutions • nonparticipatory political system • vigorous competition for power at the expense of governing • limited legitimacy of political leaders • lack of consensus on direction country should follow

7. kondisi pascakonflik (ball) economic & social characteristics • extensive damage to or decay of economic and social infrastructure • high levels of indebtedness • unsustainably high defense budgets • significant contraction of legal economy and expansion of illegal economy • reversion to subsistence activities • destruction or exile of human resources • conflicts over ownership of and access to land • gender imbalance • environmental degradation • weakened social fabric • poor social indicators

8. kondisi pascakonflik (ball) security characteristics • bloated security forces • armed opposition, paramilitary forces • overabundance of small arms • need to reassess security forces accordingly • lack of transparency in security affairs and accountability to civil authorities and to population • political role of security forces • history of human rights abuses perpetrated by security forces

9. Assessment: local wisdom Disarmament Repatriation/ resettlement Reintegration Trauma healing Basic needs: food&security Reconciliation prioritas aksi

10. kritik • Neutrality & impartiality • Sovereignty • Limited resource and capacity • Exit strategy • New (contested) values • Whose standard? • community’s participation • Dependency - accountability

11. Postwar Peacebuilding Reviewed: A Critical Exploration of Generic Approaches (llamazares) • Maynard (1999 in Croker et al, 2001 p.705) points to the need to address insecurity as key to successful post-war peace-building, as it is vital that freedom of movement, absence of personal or group threats, and safe access to resources is achieved for all in the post-war setting to even hint at a movement towards healing and reconciliation.

12. Schnabel (2002) believes that the core principles of conflict prevention must inform post-settlement peacebuilding to effectively avoid a re-lapse into war and make it sustainable thus emphasizing the military/security deficit.

13. Stedman (2001, pp. 750-1) highlights the importance of keeping ‘peace spoilers’ in check through better intelligence and increased capabilities of deterrence in the military component of peace-building missions. He prioritises the demobilisation of armies, reintegration of soldiers to civilian life, and the successful transformation of armies into political actors.

14. Nicole Ball (2001, p.726) also believes that the reform of the security sector in support of good governance and equitable socio-economic development is key to the sustainability of peace-building efforts.

15. Pugh (1995, 2000) leads the school of ‘developmentalist’ approaches to post-war peacebuilding, which point to poverty as the main source of conflict. He views socio-economic vulnerability as the main hindrance to local capacities to withstand political complex emergencies. He commends the UN for leading the way in expanding the conceptualisation of peacebuilding as a developmental approach to conflict management.

16. Peirce and Stubbs (2000, p.158) also value the contribution of integrated social development approaches to post-war peacebuilding, and view the combination of ‘good governance, physical reconstruction, and economic and social development’ as a winning formula against the recurrence of violence in post-war settings.

17. Duffield (1998, 2002) acknowledges that international post-settlement reconstruction is embracing conflict resolution and that there is a move towards more comprehensive approaches to building peace, but faults this approach for overlooking issues of ‘inequality, economic growth and resource distribution’. Duffield (2000, pp.69-75) believes that postwar peacebuilding normalises unjust situations by merely helping people to cope with the consequences of globalisation and ‘war economies’.

18. Berdal and Malone (2000, p.2) share Duffield’s concerns and believe that the political economy of civil wars, which they consider to be a key source of ‘protractedness’ in many of today’s conflicts, remains unchallenged by current peace-building approaches.

19. Collier (2000, p.91, 105) supports the economic agendas of war as key sources of conflict in his “greed over grievance” debate, and suggests that good peacebuilding must reduce incentives for those benefiting from war in order to reduce their influence over the process.

20. Paris (1997, p.57) warns of the need to acknowledge the underlying economic conditions that create the risk of violent conflict, and highlights the sometimes-worsening impact of peace-building interventions. He criticises the practice of conditioning economic assistance to governance, and the undue pressure that restructuring measures place on post-war societies. Paris proposes a softer approach to market reform and structural adjustment, but atougher stance on democratisation and institution building (2001, p.770).

21. Cousens and Kumar (2001, p.4) believe the ‘fragility or collapse of political processes and institutions’ to be the main catalyst for war, while Kumar (1998, p.7) argues that post-conflict elections would restore the loss of legitimacy of political institutions and processes, thus institutionalising a conflict resolution mechanism into the body politic.

22. Rothstein (1999, p.239) points out: “[…] since there is obviously an important psychological or emotional component of protracted conflicts, there is […] likely to be an equally important psychological or emotional component to their resolution”.

23. Pugh (1995, p.18) believes that an emphasis on structural causes of conflict underplays the “[…] psychological, spiritual and cultural determinants of violence”, and that “[…] reconciliation between social groups previously at war, requires more than money”.

24. Ryan (1990) criticises neglect of the inter-personal and psycho-social dimensions of peacebuilding, linked to current approaches overlooking the grassroots as an important intervention entry point.

25. A gender analysis of peacebuilding policy implementation can help avoid what Pankhurst and Pearce (1997) refer to as a ‘gendered peace’, where gender-blind interventions fail to adequately address women’s needs.

26. beberapa masalah • konsep: (1) membangun kembali vs membangun yang baru; (2) fisik, sistem, attitude; (3) holding office vs fostering change; (4) bersyarat; (5) berbeda; (6) sama/mengalami konvergensi • koordinasi: (1) antar intervenor; (2) antara intervenor dan masyarakat; (3) antar masyarakat; (4) antara penyumbang, lembaga donor, pelaksana program, dan masyarakat; dll • exit strategy: (1) kapan; (2) bagaimana; (3) harus!