In 1998, Peru and Ecuador settled a long-running border dispute in the Cordillera del Cóndor mountain range that had killed and wounded dozens on both sides in 1995. In addition to pledging renewed cooperation on deciding the final placement of the border, the agreement, the Acta Presidencial de Brasilia, committed both sides to establishing extensive ecological protection reserves on both sides of the border: A peace park of sorts was born.

Can demobilized ex-combatants help improve water resources in post-conflict countries? Last fall, the Global Water Institute (GWI) held a symposium in Brussels to find out.

Seventy representatives from the African Union, the United Nations, civil society, research institutes, and EU water policy advisors discussed ways in which former soldiers could be employed in the water sector to create peace dividends, bridge divided societies, and improve water security in countries recovering from conflict.

GWI, which is headquartered in Brussels and led by Valerie Ndaruzaniye, formerly of the Institute of Multi-Track Diplomacy’s Global Water Program, hopes to use the water sector development to meet multiple objectives in post-conflict reconstruction, such as:

• increasing environmental security,
• reducing the likelihood of future conflict over water,
• enhancing security and stability, and
• employing demobilized ex-combatants to create peace dividends.

“The GWI’s suggested strategy is to exploit the enormous potential of demobilized forces who had made war,” said Ndaruzaniye at the symposium. “GWI proposes to re-channel this potential force for development of water programs and protection of the environment.” While this is a tall order for even the most established of organizations, GWI is already ahead of the game by recognizing the synergies between these issues.

While disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR), is a fairly new process in post-conflict settings (the first program took place only 15 years ago), it has progressed rapidly in recent years, moving from a primarily military exercise to one focused on reintegration. Reintegration has also shifted from its exclusive focus on the ex-combatants, which often caused resentment in conflict-affected communities, to include women, children, youth, and the elderly and disabled, as well as the affected communities.

Reintegration is still the most difficult stage of any DDR program, not only for budgetary and political reasons, but also due to the processes of transitional justice and reconciliation. Through experience in the field, practitioners have realized that such programs are not simply technical exercises and must be better linked to wider recovery efforts and development programs for more sustainable results.

By supporting sustainable development in the water sector, and simultaneously contributing to reconciliation and peace dividends by involving ex-combatants in community development work, GWI can offer a substantial contribution to the reintegration process.

“Making the link between water management and DDR is a novel idea. GWI is a good example of integration of policy areas in order to build peace in some countries,” said Catherine Woolard, the director of the European Peacebuilding Liaison office.

Adrienne Stork is currently working on natural resource management and disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration programs jointly with the UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery and the UNEP Disasters and Conflicts Unit in Geneva, Switzerland.

Photo Credits: Flickr User ISAFMEDIA, 080816-N-8726C-019

“Political Marginalization, Climate Change, and Conflict in African Sahel States,” authored by Clionadh Raleigh and appearing in the March 2010 issue of International Studies Review, examines the relationship between political status, economic status, and conflict among African communities threatened by climate change. “[T]he risk of conflict depends largely on the size and political importance of ethnic groups,” Raleigh finds. “Small, politically insignificant ethnic groups experience most conflicts related to environmental pressures.” The work is geared toward helping practitioners predict where high levels of vulnerability and conflict may occur in the face of climate change. (SUBSCRIPTION ONLY)

International peace parks have captured the imagination of visionaries like Nelson Mandela, who called them a “concept that can be embraced by all.” Such parks—also known as transboundary protected areas—span national boundaries, testifying to the peaceful collaborative relationship between neighboring countries and to the co-existence of humans and nature.

An emerging coalition in Israel dramatically illustrates how common environmental concerns can create unexpected partnerships across difficult political barriers. Through programs initiated by Friends of the Earth Middle East, the Israeli and Palestinian residents of Wadi Fukin and Tzur Hassadah (see inset map) have joined together to oppose the construction of a planned security barrier between their two communities.


View Good Water Neighbors in a larger map

The barrier, an element of the Israeli Green Line, threatens to disrupt karstic springs that support traditional agriculture in the Fukin valley. One third of the Israeli residents of Tzur Hadassah petitioned to halt construction, reports Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

“The Israeli community understood that instead of providing them with security, the fence would harm the springs and lands of the village, and will rob the Palestinian farmers of their livelihood and arouse hatred toward their Israeli neighbors,” Friends of the Earth Middle East (FoEME) Director Gidon Bromberg told Haaretz.

On February 24th, Israelis and Palestinians from both communities met to organize their response to the construction of the separation barrier, including preparing to petition to the Israeli High Court of Justice.

“The case of Wadi Fukin is special, because it is the first time that the resistance of the residents is not based on human rights allegations. Objections here are from an environmental organization,” FoEME attorney Michael Sfard told NRG news.

Since 2001, FoEME’s Good Water Neighbors project has helped divided communities come together over shared natural resources. By collaborating with community members to improve their water situation, the organization encourages sustainable water management through information sharing, dialogue, and cooperative ventures. While the majority of the communities share common surface water sources, including the Jordan and Zomar rivers, some, as with Wadi Fukin and Tzur Hassadah, rely on common underground aquifers.

This “natural interdependence,” says Bromberg, helps to create trust and solve problems facing both communities.

Photo: Courtesy Friends of the Earth Middle East

Conservation practitioners realize they must deal with conflict but often lack the training to do so, says Dr. Andrew Plumptre, director of the Wildlife Conservation Society’s (WCS) Albertine Rift Program. Moreover, they don’t realize their conservation efforts—by restricting access to resources or creating new burdens, costs, and risks for communities—are at times directly responsible for spawning new conflicts where none existed before.

In a recent presentation—Healing the Rift: Mitigating Conflict Over Natural Resources in the Albertine Rift, sponsored by WCS and the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group—Plumptre used his work with WCS in the Albertine Rift as a launch pad to discuss how conservation practitioners can work to mitigate conflict.

Achieving “Conflict-Sensitive Conservation”

“Conflict-sensitive conservation,” as outlined in an International Institute for Sustainable Development‘s practitioners’ manual developed in conjunction with WCS, is a multi-step process:

1. Identify—What are the area’s current or potential conflicts?
2. Prioritize—Which conflicts are the most serious?
3. Target—Which high-risk conflict does my organization possess the capacity to address?
4. Analyze—What are the causes and effects of conflict? Who are the stakeholders, what are the relationships between them, and which should we seek to engage?
5. Design & implement solutions—With what strategy should the conflict be approached? At which point in the conflict cycle should we seek to intervene?
6. Monitor—Continue to watch the area for new developments.

Conflict in the Albertine Rift

Plumptre’s fieldwork on the DRC’s Virunga National Park is one of the case studies in Renewable Natural Resources: Practical Lessons for Conflict-Sensitive Development, recently published by the World Bank. Conflict in the park began in 1996, when an influx of internally displaced persons from the war in the DRC poured into the area, placing severe strains on the park’s fish, wildlife, timber, and agricultural resources.

In 2006, Plumptre and his WCS colleagues entered Virunga and identified four challenges they could best address:

• Overfishing on Lake Edward
• Military poaching
• Park encroachment
• Conflict with displaced Ugandan pastoralists

WCS tackled the conflicts with an array of strategies:

• To combat overfishing, WCS helped villages establish sustainable targets and implement internal policing mechanisms
• To curtail encroachment and poaching by the military and those living in the greater Virunga National Park area, WCS trained Congolese Park Authority (ICCN) staff in enforcement and monitoring techniques, established channels of communication with military commanders, and engaged in general and targeted environmental educational campaigns.
• To relieve resource pressures from the presence of Ugandan pastoralists, WCS worked with the Congolese and Ugandan governments to ensure pastoralists could safely and freely return to Uganda to settle elsewhere.

All of WCS’ work was carried out in conjunction with local ICCN members. WCS also regularly convened meetings of elected stakeholder representatives, where disputes, accusations, and interests could be openly aired and mediated. The meetings also fostered collaboration between the stakeholders and created an enabling environment for conflict resolution.

Beyond Virunga National Park

Since completing their project in 2007, Plumptre and his team have established similar projects in Kahuzi-Biega National Park, the Itombwe Massif, and Misotshi-Kabogo. Now, however, they are working to prevent conflicts before they take root. WCS has guided communities in the Misotshi-Kabogo area to work together to petition the Congolese government to turn their territory into the DRC’s 8th national park.

Climate change is predicted to spur local, often intra-state or regional, migrations in response to droughts and flooding. Could these migrations lead to similar resource conflicts in the future? The rate of migration, governance and carrying capacities of the absorbing communities, and economic status of the migrants will all come in to play. In cases where conflict might result, Plumptre’s work successfully demonstrates that “conflict-sensitive conservation” should have a place in the peacebuilders’ toolkit.

“Most of the actual violence around water today is not occurring with armies marching out on the field of battle…[it] is more diffuse, more at the community level, more small scale, but quite real and quite important for us to try to address,” says Ken Conca, professor of government and politics at the University of Maryland during this conversation with ESCP Director Geoff Dabelko. Though the world remains fixated on future “water wars,” we “should not forget the actually existing violence in the world today,” he says.

“Climate change seems to be eclipsing all other environment and security issues, but those issues haven’t gone away,” says Oli Brown, program manager at the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). “There are still problems with illegal timber, still problems with mining, there are still problems with diamonds, there are still problems over land, water, and so on. Climate change encompasses a lot of those issues and makes some of them more difficult and more pressing.”

IISD is working with the United Nations Environment Programme on ensuring that these issues are addressed in UN peacekeeping missions. “What we do with UNEP is to coordinate a group of experts that help to advise the UN family on ways that it should do conflict prevention, post conflict reconstruction, peacekeeping, peace negotiations and peacebuilding more effectively,” says Brown.