Responding to COVID-19: Voices from Local Peacebuilders

Responding to COVID-19: Voices from Local Peacebuilders

The spread of the novel COVID-19 virus in more than 135 countries has drastically disrupted people’s ways of life and has paralyzed world economies—exerting formidable pressures on governments and healthcare systems struggling to curb the daily increases of new cases. Italy, Spain, Iran, and the US are still the most hit by the pandemic. The alarming death rates in these three countries have sent a warning signal to countries in Africa, Latin America, and Asia,  where a combination of prolonged armed conflicts, bad governance, and  inadequate healthcare systems predispose certain nations for much more devastating effects of the pandemic. However, despite the precariousness in these contexts, local peacebuilders are stepping up to support the already overstrained healthcare providers and are redefining responsive new ways to do peacebuilding in their communities. In order to foster sharing of experiences and learning among local peacebuilders on the frontlines of preventing further spread of COVID-19, on March 28, 2020 Conducive Space for Peace, in collaboration with Peacemaker 360 and in coordination with Peace Direct and Humanity United, launched a series of online consultations whose recommendations will feed into a joint report to share with relevant international actors and donor institutions that may support local peacebuilding in this uncertain time.

The main panelists included Michelle Belfor, a youth peacebuilder from Suriname working on a UN-supported sensitization awareness campaign against Covid-19; El Hadj Djitteye, a Malian peacebuilder working on counter extremism projects in the Sahel Region; and Gatwal Gatkuoth, a South Sudanese peacebuilder advocating for the rights of South Sudanese in refugee settlements in Uganda. The first discussion, which has since been viewed over 7000 times, saw a significant participation of peacebuilding actors tuning from different countries and who enriched the conversations with insightful perspectives and observations from their own contexts and/or professions.  The panel discussion was moderated by Christian Cito Cirhigiri, a Congolese peacebuilder and Program Adviser at Conducive Space for Peace. This blog post summarizes nine of the main takeaways from this first live call and additional off-the-call conversations with other local peacebuilders:

#1 Peacebuilding should adapt to global public health concerns: Panelists and online contributors emphasized the need to redefine and repurpose peacebuilding activities in line with sensitization campaigns and mass education efforts seeking to address disinformation. Furthermore, peacebuildiers need to be central in consultations on responses to ensure COVID-19 interventions are as conflict sensitive as possible. To prepare for future outbreaks in conflict contexts, peacebuilding as a field of study and practice should inextricably interact with Public Health. As local peacebuilders are already operating in the nexus between development, humanitarian aid, and peacebuilding concerns and are working close to communities, they are well-placed to advance cross-sectoral collaborations.

#2 Peacebuilding funding should focus increasingly on COVID-19 interventions: Additional funding to Covid-19 interventions at community level is needed to supplement peacebuilding interventions. If funding is shifted from PB interventions, the importance of this is undermined – and in the aftermath of this crisis, it will be more important than ever.   

#3 Digital and online platforms that foster experience sharing among  local peacebuilders are mostly important in times of crisis such as the Covid-19 pandemic. As people move to home-based working lifestyles to curb the virus spread, virtual interactions remain the only way to stay connected among peacebuilders. Participants also encouraged this livestreaming initiative as it helped build a sense of communtiy and solidarity with one another. However, still many local peacebuilders lack access to virtual communication and even power to charge their phones.

#4 Resource inequalities: One of the effects of the pandemic is that it has further highlighted existing resource inequalities between the Global North and the Global South. The lack of adequate medical equipment in most countries in the Global South is a huge liability in this crisis. A campaign of resource redistribution in terms of medical assistance & equipment would help poor countries withstand the pandemic. Furthermore, as people engulf in panic-buying and prices of basic commodities skyrocket, the pandemic has exacerbated in-country inequalities.

#5 Disrupted peacebuilding partnerships have intensified vulnerability of marginalized communities. With the spread of the pandemic, several international peacebuilding actors have put a hold on in-country programs and cancelled activities to prevent the spread of the virus. On the downside, some needed peacebuilding interventions with marginalized communities may be affected. It is important for ensure minimum support to these interventions to save lives.

#6 High risks for contamination faced by displaced populations in already congested refugee settlements around the world (Syria, Uganda, South Sudan).  These communities are faced with urgent needs for humanitarian assistance, and both peacebuilding funding and programs should pay particular attention to these groups.

#7 Corona-related violence: In order to enforce social distancing, Police in Uganda, Kenya, and Rwanda have resorted to violence, leading to fears of the legitimization of the wrongful use of force against potential political opponents. Furthermore, the protection of local peacebuilders who might have been targeted by oppressive regimes prior to the pandemic is critical as they [local peacebuilders] may equally be easy targets of corona- related violence. 

#8 Mental health and COVID-19: At a time like this, mental health concerns tend to be relegated to the bottom of priorities of local peacebuilders responding to COVID-19. However, it is critical for local peacebuilders to develop support systems and strike a healthy balance to care for their own needs and their families. Futhermore, while social distancing is highly recommended to stop the spread of the virus, it has also been a huge challenge for communities closely connected—leading to a deep sense of loneliness. Local peacebuilders face the important responsibility of sustaining resilience and hope in their communities. 

#9 Collective call to action by local peacebuilders and international actors to respond to the pandemic: Acknowledging that no country, no organization alone can help address the overwhelming challenges  facing local peacebuilding in times like this, panelists proposed the idea of  a joint call to action to involve as many willing peacebuildng actors and donor organizations to act quickly and together in support of local peacebuilders on the frontlines of stopping the pandemic.

As we look forward to the upcoming streaming scheduled on April 4th at 3pm CET, we also invite you to join the dialogue and to share your experiences responding to COVID-19. As a result of the pandemic, there is no doubt that the field of peacebuilding is bracing for its next phase of development and the long term implications of this shift to local peacebuilding are yet to be known. The dialogue continues.

COVID-19 and its implications for local peacebuilding

COVID-19 and its implications for local peacebuilding

It is time for the peacebuilding community to join efforts in addressing the COVID-19 crisis. Let us especially support local peacebuilders in the Global South to better prepare for the spread of the pandemic and deal with it’s impacts in their communities.

By Mie Roesdahl

While the Covid-19 virus demands all our focus at this time, especially because it is predicted to have devastating consequences for countries in the Global South that already experience conflict and fragility, we in the peacebuilding field must put our minds together globally to seek innovative contributions to dealing with the crisis.
The Covid-19 virus spread has reminded me of the long-gone notions of ‘working around’, ‘working in’ and ‘working on’ conflict. In the peacebuilding field we are traditionally working ON conflict – working to address the causes of violent conflict, facilitating relationship-building and trust, resilience to violence and develop mechanisms that deals constructively with destructive conflicts. Humanitarians work ‘IN conflict’ as they are not directly focused on addressing the dynamics or causes of the conflict. However, while they are addressing the consequences of violent conflict, they have to be sensitive to the nature of the conflict, both in the sense of protecting themselves from these consequences and in the sense of making sure that their humanitarian actions have positive rather than negative effects on the conflict itself.

At this time, peacebuilders must seek out creative ways to conduct their much-needed peacebuilding work even at a time when their space for physical movement may be decreasing. And they – we – must seek out ways to contribute to preventing and dealing with the potential negative consequences of the pandemic on peacebuilding efforts. It is likely that additional measures of prevention of renewed violent conflict and escalation of simmering structural and social conflicts will be needed in the months to come. We know that additional risks to human security, such as this pandemic, feeds into existing conflict patterns, and while they can be the source of people coming together (as illustrated in Rebecca Solnit’s Paradise Built in Hell), they can also be a source of conflict escalation.

The Covid19 virus is likely to impact the work of local peacebuilders by its influence on funding patterns and collaboration structures in the future. At Conducive Space for Peace, we work (with Peace Direct, Humanity United and other partners) to shift the power to local peacebuilders, as the current way of working of the global peacebuilding system significantly influence, and sometimes even limit, the ability of local peacebuilders to pursue their peacebuilding visions, strategies and innovative ideas effectively. That is the case today. How will it be tomorrow? We must explore different scenarios for how the Covid-19 pandemic will influence the global peacebuilding system:

• Because the pandemic response demands extensive human resources within international institutions (including bilateral agencies such as Danida/Danish MFA) to focus on preventing virus spread and addressing the consequences of the spread, there will be less resources for areas that were already getting limited attention such as peacebuilding. In addition, patterns of funding streams and mechanisms may shift even more to larger entities and large-scale responses such as UN agencies, while small local organisations will have more challenges in getting support for their peacebuilding efforts.

• On the other hand, as international actors may be reassessing their own risks of in-country engagement in conflict affected countries (and getting traction for such sentiments from populist tendencies in donor countries), we may see a rethinking of international cooperation around development, humanitarian assistance and peacebuilding. In the best of cases, this would mean a re-imagining of funding and collaboration structures that shift power to local actors, and a rethinking of the role of internationals. However, if the demands of donor constituencies for ‘value for money’ and ‘peacebuilding effectiveness’ result in increasingly rigid new public management procedures imposed on local peacebuilders, the result may not be a better situation for local peacebuilders.

• With the virus spreading and fear increasing, the power of governments to make hard decisions, will become greater, also in conflict affected countries. This may imply tightened restrictions to civic space and democratic participation of people including in peace processes. And this will most likely lead to a further marginalization of already marginalized groups in countries affected by conflict. It may also imply an exertion of power by richer countries over poorer countries and inequalities will increase.

In the coming days and weeks we will follow the situation and explore, with our partners, how we can help local peacebuilders navigate in the current situation, both with a focus on protecting their lives, families and organisations, and with a focus on contributing to a global and local response to the current crisis that reduces the risk of a rise in violent conflict. We will in the coming weeks engage in consultations with local peacebuilders to understand the implications of the Covid-19 virus spread on them and their work and explore how they can best be supported. The recommendations that arise from these conversations will be channeled into action both by ourselves and our partners as well as by other international actors seeking to support the agency and power of local actors in peacebuilding.

Based on the knowledge that we have now we recommend the following:
– That funders and funding mechanisms allow for more flexibility in implementation of peacebuilding programmes, and if possible, shift the modality of funding to core operating support.
– That expressed needs of local peacebuilders in order to protect them and allow them to continue their work are met to the degree possible, even when these may be needs that do not necessarily fit into normal ‘boxes’ of support (such as an internet connection at home).
– That online platforms for local peacebuilders are mobilized to allow for dialogue on the scenarios for and implications of the Covid19 virus spread in conflict affected countries and regions, and how these implications can be addressed.