Having just finished a two-week intensive residency at Royal Roads University in Human Security and Peacebuilding, my mind is filled with images, stories and theories that attempt to paint a picture of the root causes of human conflict in our world today. Here are a few highlights (in no particular order). Many thanks to my profs, Rob Hanlon and Lauryn Oates, and my cohort members who shared their stories openly and courageously and expanded my way of understanding the world.
| Canadian mining company, Barrick Gold, is investigated for human rights violations and environmental degradation at their Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea. Investigations brought to light assault perpetrated by security guards, (employees of the mine), conflict with local gold panners and environmental degradation from open pit mining and tailing ponds. To their credit, Barrick Gold has since joined (2010) the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights. But this is not the only case. | |
1. Canadian mining company Barrick Gold: investigating human rights abuses in Papua New Guinea
I believe we have a national responsibility to hold Canadian companies to a high ethical and environmental standard, both at home and abroad. Resource extraction companies are taking advantage of operating in areas with poor governance structures. This allows exploitation of minority groups who have limited power over land use contracts, corruption and ensuring equal government economic distributions that support basic essential services. In certain cases, locals are displaced, experience rape and abuse, lose water and air quality, are forced to give up fertile land. They often experience market competition which leads to negative economic impacts. And we wonder why conflict arises?
2. Women: the centre of success
| Women are the key to advancing their own health and that of their family, but their reach also often extends to in-laws and into the community. Keeping girls in school beyond the pivotal age of puberty (which will vary with region and cultural considerations, but tends to be around 11 or 12), improves their chances of delaying child marriage and childbirth and decreases their likelihood of experiencing sexual assault and contracting HIV. Their future income potential is directly related to their literacy level. | |
The solution can be as simple as providing bathrooms for girls at local schools in developing countries, many of which have no such thing. And it can also be as complicated as trying to remove armed insurgency groups from a girl's path to the classroom. Each situation is unique, but the core message is clear: "The very best predictor of a state's peacefulness is not its level of wealth, its level of democracy, or its ethno-religious identity; the best predictor of a state's peacefulness is how well its women are treated." (Hudson, 2012)
3. The Responsibility to Protect: International reactions to crimes against humanity
| International reactions (or inaction) to crimes against humanity during conflict - Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Rwanda or Srebrenica for example - often invoke the question, "why didn't we do more?" The disastrous results of inaction of the UN during the horrors of the Rwandan genocide of 1994 led the international community to begin discussing the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), acknowledging that we must protect people whose basic human rights are being violated. | |
In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), which was funded by the Canadian government, released its report on called the Responsibility to Protect. It had a major impact on the discussions leading to the UN R2P document, which was formally proposed by Kofi Annan at the 2005 World Summit.
R2P is based on three principles, addressing the tools the international community has to address human rights violations. First, a state has a responsibility to protect its citizens from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. This reflects a change in thinking around borders and was seen by some to challenge the idea of state sovereignty, which viewed the state more as owner of the citizen, rather than being accountable to them. Second, the international community has the responsibility to assist states do be successful in protecting its citizens. In times of deeply entrenched conflict, the UN peacekeeping missions and other multilateral initiatives such as economic support from the Bretton Woods institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, can be employed. Lastly, if the state is not capable of maintaining human security or is the perpetrator of atrocity, the international community has an ethical and moral responsibility to intervene. There are many criticisms of R2P, not the least of which is its imperfect success record and political biases due to the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Countil (China, US, UK, Russia, France). But, it is a shift in the international approach: we have recognized the necessity to consider human security, not simply state security.
R2P is based on three principles, addressing the tools the international community has to address human rights violations. First, a state has a responsibility to protect its citizens from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. This reflects a change in thinking around borders and was seen by some to challenge the idea of state sovereignty, which viewed the state more as owner of the citizen, rather than being accountable to them. Second, the international community has the responsibility to assist states do be successful in protecting its citizens. In times of deeply entrenched conflict, the UN peacekeeping missions and other multilateral initiatives such as economic support from the Bretton Woods institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, can be employed. Lastly, if the state is not capable of maintaining human security or is the perpetrator of atrocity, the international community has an ethical and moral responsibility to intervene. There are many criticisms of R2P, not the least of which is its imperfect success record and political biases due to the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Countil (China, US, UK, Russia, France). But, it is a shift in the international approach: we have recognized the necessity to consider human security, not simply state security.
4. Somalia: the Mayor of Mogadishu
| Bringing to the forefront the question of how to govern a failed state, this documentary talks to Mohammed Nur, who served as the Mayor of Mogadishu until February 2014. Nur addresses changes he made to the infrastructure leading to increased security, including lighting and electricity, and focuses on the importance of celebration and music as a way to restore community. He encourages women to take part as leaders in their community. But he is also attacked for having large areas of slums with inadequate health, food and sanitation resources for inhabitants. | |
The conflict in Somalia is rather unique in that it doesn't follow the predominant path of civil war: that of ethnic or religious conflict. Somalians largely speak one language and have one religion, forcing us to consider how to address differing angles of inequality. To find a solution, we must identify root causes and common ground. How does we do that? Each of us constructs our identity and our values and our vision of another's based on our cultural, religious, political, social, and economic experiences. To heal these deep conflicts, we must hear the other's stories, and we must tell our stories so that understanding can arise and we can begin to break down the barriers between 'us' and 'them'.
5. The Dragon Rises
| When discussing the future of humanitarian development, it's necessary to consider China's expanding role. With growth comes both dependency on the external market (and therefore, a desire to appease the international community), and a self-serving need to provide for its growing population. To meet these needs, increased partnerships are formed, and Chinese humanitarian aid and investment is heavily felt around the world, particularly in some African nations. Two issues keep surfacing for China: the need for resources and the ability to govern effectively while respecting human rights. The New York Times article, A Game of Shark and Minnow, provides a visual story of the carefully planned Chinese geopolitical response to resource extraction in the sea. The entire international community has an interest in the rules drawn out around sea ownership, with particular focus on the rich resources found on the seabed. | |
The Chinese record of human rights violations is brought to light in The King and the Cobra: this story illustrates the increased Chinese partnership with the Zambian economy and questions if China can effectively monitor labour conditions imposed by its private sector on the African continent when it has trouble monitoring human rights at home.
These examples raise the underlying question: who is responsible for holding foreign investors accountable for their actions, the host government or the home government? The answer might obviously lead us to the host government...but what happens when a state does not have effective governance? If the host nation is not currently providing basic necessities for all of its citizens or there is evidence of deep-rooted corruption and ethnic inequalities, can we expect foreign investors to be held to account?
These examples raise the underlying question: who is responsible for holding foreign investors accountable for their actions, the host government or the home government? The answer might obviously lead us to the host government...but what happens when a state does not have effective governance? If the host nation is not currently providing basic necessities for all of its citizens or there is evidence of deep-rooted corruption and ethnic inequalities, can we expect foreign investors to be held to account?
RSS Feed
