| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
194067
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The demand for protection for civilians threatened by direct violence is huge, and most responses draw on ‘Protection of Civilians’ (PoC) by military peacekeepers. In Myanmar and the Philippines, civilians use nonviolence to protect people in their communities from direct violence showing that PoC is carried out by local actors and in sites outside military peacekeeping missions. Evidence from those communities, and the use of Unarmed Civilian Protection, challenges the assumption that only the military can do PoC, and provides the basis for broadening the scope of PoC to better protect civilians from direct violence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
179925
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article discusses benefits and challenges of qualitative-interpretive research conducted in teams of outside (Northern) researchers and national (Southern) associates, in which the latter have considerable autonomy over research design and data generation. Reflecting on our collaboration with Burmese associates on arts-based workshops with violence-affected communities in Myanmar, we discuss how structures and dynamics of power and trust-building shaped the research process and data interpretation. Our reflective analysis suggests that interpretivist research ‘by proxy’ is possible and can be highly enriching but depends upon sufficient time (and funding) for meaningful, long-term engagement with ‘local’ research collaborators, which our project lacked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
170279
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The assumption that peacekeeping requires soldiers carrying weapons is widespread; 35 years of successful peacekeeping by unarmed civilians is often overlooked. The original definition of peacekeeping is being confused with peace enforcement and peace operations. Limited interest has led to underfunding of unarmed civilian peacekeeping (UCP) with fewer resources for both study and praxis. Marginalization of civilian peacekeeping has restricted the options for complex interventions; this reduced vision of peacekeeping is open to challenge in the light of evidence from the field. This paper first examines what is meant by peacekeeping and UCP. The relationship of UCP to nonviolence, feminism, and peace studies is considered. The constraints and limits of peacekeeping by armed military personnel during, or after, violent conflict are outlined. The core tasks of peacekeeping are analysed, and evidence from the field is presented to show that these core tasks can be (and have been) successfully undertaken by unarmed civilians for three decades, world-wide. The argument that armed military personnel are necessary, even essential, for peacekeeping is not supported by the evidence of civilian success in undertaking the core tasks. The paper ends with conclusions and a call for a new paradigm for peacekeeping.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|