The Network is global because we all have experiences to share and lessons to learn from each other. As the EastWest Institute has demonstrated for almost 30 years, bringing people from different cultures and societies together – people who have very different opinions and beliefs, and who don’t normally meet – gets things done.
Questions and Answers
Submitted by lglasby on 14 May, 2009 - 15:58
Q&A’s on the Parliamentarians Network
Why a global network?
What is the Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention and Human Security?
We are a global network of parliamentarians dedicated to preventing conflict turning violent through the mobilization of our collective means and resources.
What does the Parliamentarians Network do?
The Network applies its collective early warning capacity to raise government, media and public attention to prospective violent conflicts. It advocates for a greater allocation of resources for preventive action and for increased capacity building.
How many members does the Parliamentarians Network have, and where do they come from?
The Parliamentarians Network is truly a global initiative; it currently includes over 95 parliamentarians from 40 countries across the globe.
Who is the network open to? Only sitting parliamentarians? What about countries with no democratically elected parliaments?
Any current or former member of parliament who wishes to be a part of building an effective structure for conflict prevention may join the Network. We believe that an open and inclusive dialogue is the best way to avoid violent conflict, and that exclusion can only lead to escalation.
Where did the Parliamentarians Network come from?
The EastWest Institute’s International Task Force on Preventive Diplomacy whose members include Martti Ahtisaari, Sadig Al-Mahdi, Lakhdar Brahimi, Kim Campbell, Jan Eliasson, Gareth Evans, His Royal Highness Prince El Hassan bin Talal, and Thorvald Stoltenberg, issued a Declaration “Making Conflict Prevention Real” in December 2007. The members of the Task Force called for the establishment of the Parliamentarians Network as one mechanism to ensure effective change in the existing conflict prevention architecture.
Why was the Parliamentarians Network started?
It is viewed as an initial answer to the existing deficiencies in the global conflict prevention architecture and a way to generate the necessary political will within parliament for the effective prevention of conflicts turning violent. As people’s representatives, parliamentarians are particularly well-placed within their respective states to understand and provide solutions to the many intricate issues that often contribute to conflict.
What has the Parliamentarians Network achieved to date? What are some successes?
The network is still very much in its infancy – launched in October 2008. To date we count a membership of 95 parliamentarians in some 40 countries across the globe. Already we have secured the political and moral support of the governments of Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Norway, and South Africa. And of such notable institutions as the European Parliament, whose President Hans-Gert Pöttering, pledged his and the European Parliament’s full support to the Network at the Network’s inaugural meeting.
What is the Parliamentarians Network’s added value? Aren’t there many other parliamentary networks out there already? Do you collaborate at all?
We are unique as an international group of parliamentarians with an exclusive focus on conflict prevention and human security, dedicated to mobilizing national and international resources towards the prevention of conflict turning violent.
There are established regional networks devoted to the same cause, and existing international networks working on comparable but not identical issues (like peacebuilding, ongoing conflicts, etc). These networks offer opportunities for cooperation and collective action, similar to what we have done on this occasion with the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group on Conflict Issues.
What are the Parliamentarians Network’s plans for the next months/years? What is the big goal?
Our principal goals are to generate political will and increase resource allocation toward conflict prevention. Political will has yet to be fully realized among the members of the international community so that they respond consistently and effectively to prevent large-scale violence. Securing the necessary resources to strengthen and support a solid institutional architecture for conflict prevention is another important and critical step toward making conflict prevention real.
Why did the Parliamentarians Network change its name?
The Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention was just recently called "The Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention and Human Security". The Executive Committee, however, took a decision during its meeting on June 17, 2010 to shorten the name based on consultation with some members and the notion that human security aspects are imbedded in the principles of conflict prevention as outlined in the Networks Guiding Principles. There are additional public relations benefits with the shorter and more catchy name and we look forward to furthering our advocacy work and making new connections between the members with our new name. You can still, however, see the former title in some of the Network's meeting reports and documents created before June 2010.
Q&A’s on the Declaration
Why address the G-20 with the Declaration?
Our global interdependence demands no less than a collective, concerted, and cohesive mobilization of our efforts and resources. We support the open and inclusive spirit of the G20, and its dedication to bringing together industrialized and developing economies. It is this spirit of dialogue that we believe will facilitate conflict prevention efforts. Also, the G20 Finance Ministers are in unique positions of influence upon their governments’ allocation of resources, and it is important that they see the global support the Network represents for investment in conflict prevention.
What does the Declaration call for?
Our Declaration is a call for G20 members to build their national capacities for conflict prevention, increase transparency in the use of their resources, and help facilitate coordinated international responses to potential conflict.
What’s happening with the Declaration?
The Declaration is being distributed worldwide amongst the member countries of the G20 calling on them to properly resource conflict prevention efforts, to increase transparency in the use of these resources, and to help facilitate coordinated international responses to potential conflicts.
The Declaration is also being shared with a broad audience of key stakeholders including government, regional organizations, other parliamentary networks, the United Nations, and representatives of civil society.
What are Governments Doing?
United Kingdom: Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, submitted a Written Ministerial Statement on plans for conflict funding for the next financial year. Ministerial Statement on conflict resources 2009-10 (25/03/2009)
United States: Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, released the President’s International Affairs Budget FY 2010 for the Department of State outlining the Administration’s priorities in the coming period.
Q&A’s on Conflict Prevention and Human Security
What is conflict prevention?
One of the main difficulties with the notion of conflict prevention is that it can cover the whole range of activities associated with the mitigation and management of violent discord. What makes it even more difficult is that different organizations employ the term in different ways. So we have chosen not to define conflict prevention in the traditional sense of the term but to use a broader, more inclusive explanation that encompasses the whole gamut of activities associated with the prevention and mitigation of violent conflict: conflict prevention proper, crisis management, post-conflict peacebuilding, conflict resolution and reconciliation. We consider all these various activities, employed at a certain stage of the conflict cycle, conflict prevention.
What is human security?
Kofi Annan said that human security is “ensuring that each individual has opportunities and choices to fulfill his or her potential.” Violent conflict destroys those opportunities. By building capacities for conflict prevention, we aim at taking the first step toward achieving human security for all.
Why does conflict prevention really matter?
Conflict comes with very high costs, both humanitarian and financial. Simply put conflict prevention is cost prevention.
- civilian life: 100 years ago, 4 out of 5 people killed in war were military personnel. Today, 4 out of 5 killed in war are civilians – women, children, entire families.
- financial:
- The UN Peacekeeping budget this year calls for some US$20 million per day. Two days of UN peacekeeping would fund a diplomatic mission for an entire year.
- Today there are 70 current or potential conflicts worldwide. The direct average cost of each conflict is estimated at US$64 billion – that is a cumulative total of US$4.48 trillion.
What are the biggest challenges in addressing conflict prevention and human security issues?
Making progress toward preventing conflict turning violent begins with leadership and political will. If a sufficient number of key actors and their constituencies decide to change and choose more judicious options, the situation will change. The challenge is rooting new thinking on conflict prevention and security in government agencies and societies as a whole, and translating it into practice. There is a moral, economic, and political case that today conflicts must be prevented, not fought.
What big looming conflict issues do you see on the horizon?
Part of a successful conflict prevention architecture is to address systemic issues that feed into violent conflict. Water resources, food security, climate change, migration, and poverty are all issues that will need to be dealt with. Conflict may arise from many issues, which is why we advocate for a ‘whole-of-government’ approach to prevention, coordinating foreign, defence, and development policies.
Will the financial crisis lead to violent conflict?
Mounting frustration and desperation with the current situation has already provoked social upheaval in many countries across the globe, as witnessed in Haiti during the food riots in April 2008. Last year the situation was so dire, it forced the World Bank to issue a statement warning that 33 countries risked serious upheaval and violence due to rising food insecurity.
These events can be viewed as a precursor to the financial crisis. If not managed properly the consequences, like food insecurity and rising unemployment, may well aggravate fragile situations across the globe and become one of the major driving factors for violent conflict.
It is important during these difficult economic times that governments around the world try to get the most out of their limited resources. Conflict prevention is much cheaper than peacekeeping and post-conflict reconstruction and by making efforts now to provide resources for conflict prevention governments can significantly reduce and alleviate human suffering.
Q&A’s on Specific Conflicts
What about state interests? Where do you draw the line between what is a conflict and what isn’t? Who decides that?
Part of what we do is to build the political will to recognize that conflict prevention and human security issues transcend state boundaries. Given our global interdependence, it is obvious that no one state is isolated from the effects of conflict in another country, be it in terms of refugees, organized crime, or environmental degradation and climate change.
We are not advocating however that all conflict, in and between societies and countries, can or even should be prevented. Some conflict is good, it brings the exchange of new ideas and new solutions to old problems. What we call for is the peaceful management of conflict.
Why don’t you look at current conflicts?
To involve ourselves in specific conflicts runs the risk of people confusing conflict management with conflict prevention. It is not our ambition to resolve ongoing violent conflicts, but to generate political will and raise awareness for conflict prevention with our national constituencies and governments along with other key international decision-makers.
The international community already has in place structures for dealing with ongoing conflict. We are not part of or integrated into that chain of command, so rather we act as an advisor, promoter, initiator, and watch dog for conflict prevention and human security efforts.
Where do your figures/statistics come from? Are they reliable?
The figures we use come from sources such as the UN, the OECD, private think-tanks, non-governmental organizations, and trusted academic research institutions, and are offered on good faith.
