The “Peacebuilder” podcast, hosted by Patience Kamau MA ‘17, releases the second episode of its second season today. Kamau’s guest is Professor Catherine Barnes, who teaches strategic peacebuilding and public policy at 91����Ƶ’s Center for Justice and Peacebuilding.

The “Peacebuilder” podcast, in its second season, is a production of 91����Ƶ’s, as it celebrates its 25th anniversary. 

More than 6,500 listeners in 102 countries and 1,239 cities across the globe enjoyed Season I.The podcast is among just a handful covering the general peacebuilding field. It is available on, Apple Podcasts on iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcast, Stitcher, iHeart Radio, TuneIn and other podcast directories.

In the podcast, Barnes and Kamau chat about Barnes’ expertise in designing and facilitating deliberative dialogue processes, as well as current events including the military coup in Myanmar.

“Dr. Catherine Barnes has worked for conflict transformation and social change for more than 30 years,” Kamau says by way of introduction. “In many countries, she has worked with civil society, activists, diplomats and politicians, and armed groups to build their capacities for preventing violence and using conflict as an opportunity for addressing the systems giving rise to oppression and grievance.”

Their conversation begins with a deep dive into deliberative dialogue: what it is, when it’s useful, and what it has the power to do for a community struggling with conflict.

“The dialogue is very much about setting the conversation in this connection point – at a human level – between those who are involved and the perspectives that they have to bring. So that particularly if there’s been tension, conflict, or even indeed oppression, that you have this humanization of relationships,” Barnes explained. 

One of the early experiences that led Barnes towards this field of work was growing up in the Quaker Universalist tradition, in which congregants gather in silence “and seek the light of God moving within,” she said. They “have … this understanding that often in those spaces, there may be someone who feels moved to share something.”

Barnes went on to earn her doctorate in conflict analysis and resolution from George Mason University alongside Jayne Docherty, Barry Hart, and Lisa Schirch. She’s done conflict transformation work all over the world – including training deliberative dialogue process designers and facilitators in Myanmar. 

91����Ƶ the current violence in the country, Barnes said she feels “so heartbroken. I feel scared, scared for people who I have come to know and respect and, indeed, to love … I think it really does reveal in many ways how the zero sum nature of a power paradigm based on unilateral control and coercion is so hard to shift.”

“Are there resilience tools that you think are within the community that might help carry them through this?” Kamau asked.

“I always, always have hope,” Barnes replied. “I often will say that it’s actually, it’s within movements that you almost need these skills even more to try to think about, ‘how do we generate something that will be different in nature, different in kind than the old system that had been oppressive?'”

If two people walk up to the same bench in a park, they’re generally going to be nice to each other. They’ll allow one another the room to sit down; it’s unlikely anyone will start shouting.

But on Facebook …

It’s a different story online: it’s easier to become upset, to deny someone the benefit of the doubt, to say things we might not say to someone’s face. But what’s the psychology behind that? Who profits from our cyber-outrage? And how powerful is social media in fueling hatred, not only online, but on the ground? These were some of the questions that Instructor Lisa Schirch and about 30 remote participants delved into during a recent five-week course “Digital Peacebuilding and Peace Tech.” The course was one of 11 offered online during the 2020 Summer Peacebuilding Institute at 91����Ƶ.

Schirch’s students tuned in from all over the world, whether it was 11 a.m. in Richmond, Va., at the start of class, or 10 p.m. in Bangkok, Thailand. They came representing the Center for Community Justice in Elkhart, Indiana; the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in several countries in South Asia, and the United Way of Franklin County, Pennsylvania, to name a few. 

While the participants studied policy briefs and social media initiatives from a variety of countries on digital terrorism and peacebuilding, there was a lot to discuss about America during the class.

“Social media is playing a critical role in both the pandemic and the national protests supporting racial justice,” said Schirch. “The cell phone video of the killing of George Floyd is an example of how new technologies can empower individuals to document injustices in their lives … But on the other hand, social media has been used to spread disinformation about COVID-19 and the protests.”

Schirch works with the Toda Peace Institute, which promotes peace and justice through policy-oriented research and practice. She researches and writes on a variety of issues, including how new technologies impact global conflict and violence, how peacebuilders can use those technologies, and what policies governments and companies can use to address the challenges and harness the opportunities of these technologies.

Mennonite pastor Erica Lea-Simka joined from Albuquerque, New Mexico. She took the class to “continue to move into Jesus’ call to be a peacemaker, or peacebuilder, in these fraught digital times.”

“I have already begun compiling highlights from the course into a presentation for my congregation so they too can be more aware of online challenges and opportunities related to extremism and peace,” Lea-Simka said.

She added that being able to attend SPI online allowed her to balance the class with her regular pastoral responsibilities, as well as saving on travel expenses. 

Schirch said “teaching online was really wonderful – and challenging.” Besides using Zoom for class sessions, guest speakers, and individual video conferences, she relied on programs like Panopto and VoiceThread to share pre-recorded lectures and have participants interact via short video clips.

“It is not the same as teaching in person – there are definitely human interactions that cannot happen online. But I was amazed that we could function as well as we did in our online classroom,” said Schirch.

Hamza Hasan is a senior social inclusion officer in UNDP Pakistan’s Youth Empowerment Programme, which is now implementing digital peacebuilding and inclusion interventions in their work. Hasan joined the class from Islamabad, Pakistan for the “excellent theoretical underpinning” it provided to his work understanding hate speech issues on social media and promoting responsible public health behavior during the pandemic. 

“This helps place my ongoing work within the larger global efforts to promote digital peace building, and offers opportunities to adopt lessons learned from the implementation of similar interventions in varying contexts,” Hasan said.

After five weeks of classes, video upon video on topics such as Facebook’s profit model and Moscow-based misinformation, edifying talks with guest lecturers like award-winning journalists and depolarization innovators, and small group sessions on the power of hashtags; the digital peacebuilders waved goodbye one last time through their webcams. The Zoom doorbell rang as each one left the meeting, off to build peace in their separate spheres on the internet frontier.

This year marks the 30th installment of the Lynch series, an annual lecture sponsored by the School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution which features “ground-breaking approaches to analyzing conflict and promoting peace,” according to its . 

Zehr will speak on “Human Rights Meets Restorative Justice,” examining some of the modern-day challenges of enforcing human rights and how the legal system can contribute to injustice.

The lecture is especially appropriate considering the strong ties between CJP and S-CAR. Three long-term faculty members Lisa Schirch, Barry Hart and Gloria Rhodes, as well as CJP Executive Director Jayne Docherty (also a long-term faculty member) earned their doctorates at S-CAR and several CJP graduates are continuing their doctoral studies at George Mason.

Previous Lynch speakers include John Paul Lederach, the co-founder and first director of CJP; the president of Malta, Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca; and Paul Butler, a professor at Georgetown Law in Washington D.C. and former federal prosecutor.

Representing more than 50 years of leadership were Myron Augsburger and wife Esther, Joe Lapp and wife Hannah, Loren Swartzendruber and wife Pat, and former interim president and provost Beryl Brubaker and husband Mark.

Louise Hostetter, chair of the Centennial Committee, offered a prayer for the coming year, in part recalling the founders of the university and the many generations of educational leaders who have contributed to 91����Ƶ’s legacy: “We are thankful for all who have gone before us, and have for the past 100 years, helped build the foundations of academic excellence, made holy by years of faithful discipleship. We are grateful for those who have made it possible for us to be here today, through prayer, encouragement, and mentoring. May we also embody the values of the servants and leaders who have walked this campus before us and with us. May we never forget them.”

Centennial history may have been foremost in many minds, but student body co-presidents Caleb Schrock-Hurst and��Adam Harnish gave a special nod to their fellow students.

“For 100 years, students have been coming here, but you are the first ones to arrive at this time in this place,” Schrock-Hurst said. “Before we’re swamped by homework, before practices become games, before we don’t have the time to think about why we’re here, let’s take a moment to reflect. We are here to embody Jesus’ spirit in the world, and that is a task that should not be forgotten no matter how fun any weekend may be. We have a difficult task, but it is one we can take on with joy, and we are excited to do that with you all.”

In his welcome, Provost Fred Kniss acknowledged the recent events in Charlottesville and asserted the university’s imperative role as a place where even in debate and conflict, “every person is treated with dignity and respect.”

“91����Ƶ is a place where each of us brings our own personal history and perspective to bear on the most confounding questions of the day,” he said. “But as a university, we offer an alternative to the anger and violence that seem to mar so much of our society’s public conversation these days.”

As she’s been in office since January and was inaugurated in April, this was Huxman’s first opportunity to welcome a new class of first-year students to 91����Ƶ — the first group of students who will spend all four of their years on campus in 91����Ƶ’s second century.

She offered two parallel narratives, the first based on the popular children’s book The Carrot Seed by Ruth Krauss, about a little boy with great faith that his carrot seed would sprout.

A second narrative highlighted the “radical roots” of 91����Ƶ’s founders, who believed in the institution and persevered, despite great odds, in its founding and eventual flourishing. From seven students, five faculty, and three subjects of study in 1917, the university has expanded to nearly 1,800 students in undergraduate and graduate programs,148 faculty, 40 majors, and two additional instructional sites in Lancaster and Washington D.C.

After the final hymn, students traveling on cross-cultural during the semester were invited to the front for a prayer and blessing, as happens during each fall and spring convocation. This time, it was the Middle East cross-cultural group, led by Bill Goldberg and Lisa Schirch, which leaves tomorrow — the 25th semester program to the region .

Interim cross-cultural program director Ann Hershberger said that these students were about “to go on a physical journey, a spiritual journey, an intellectual journey, and an emotional journey. They go representing us.”

Yarrow was on campus for a board meeting of , a bipartisan organization which uses dialogue processes to improve approaches to conflict among Americans across the political spectrum. The organization’s name refers to President Abraham Lincoln’s call to recognize commonalities in the midst of conflict, made during his first inaugural address on the eve of the Civil War in 1861.

SPI director says Yarrow’s presence on campus during the annual peacebuilding institute was “spontaneous serendipity.”

“We share with Peter a long-term commitment to social justice and peace, and are honored to have him and the board members of Better Angels here,” Goldberg added. “It’s a special opportunity for us and for SPI participants from around the world to hear his message of unity and humanity.”

Several other experts, each of whom work specifically in the context of conflict transformation, were on campus : author and speaker , who works in the area of race relations; , a globally recognized trainer on circle processes; and , a professor at James Madison University who specializes in peace education. , director of the Strategies for Trauma Awareness and Resilience program, also offered a self-care course with Katie Ornelas.

Sharing and listening

A deep concern about civic diviseness and hostility in the United States led Goldberg and SPI faculty to this summer aimed at helping community members and organizations work in civic engagement, conflict facilitation and dialogue processes. This focus will continue in 2018 at SPI, Goldberg says.

Campt, a nationally recognized expert on race dialogue, led a course this week titled “Tough Conversations: Turning Conflict into Connectedness.” On Friday, Campt and his students facilitated a model deliberative dialogue process with SPI participants using polling technology and small group discussions.

Campt also offered a “white allies” Saturday, June 17, at Asbury Methodist Church. The event offers tools and strategies for white allies who want to help confront racism.

Listen to and watch about the June 17 workshop.

Earlier in the week, the Horizons of Change Luncheon Series hosted , a mediator, former Harrisonburg mayor and state congressional candidate. Degner spoke about the power of listening, rather than talking in dialogue, and his campaign, called the “Listening Corps,” to bring people together through facilitated dialogue.

Harmonizing with Peter Yarrow

Yarrow’s concert drew SPI participants and community members, some of whom had deep personal connections to the singer and his music.

Yarrow invited sharing, which led to a touching moment with Tom DeWolf, who works in interracial dialogue and healing as executive director of . The two men embraced, prompting DeWolf to tell Yarrow that they had hugged nearly 30 years before at a concert in Eugene, Oregon.

Yarrow deftly wove his own music, jokes, stories and shared singing into a nearly 90-minute concert that included favorites like “Leaving on a Jet Plane,” “This Land is Your Land,” and “This Little Light of Mine.”

He also dedicated “Sweet Survivor” to , a research professor at 91����Ƶ’s , as well as Better Angels founder David Blankenhorn and senior fellow Bill Doherty.

“When we sing together, the mask drops away and I can hear your heart,” Yarrow told the audience.

With Better Angels, Yarrow has been traveling and singing with people of different political persuasions. The organization is hosting a summer bus tour, kicking off on July 4, which will make stops in communities around the country to host workshops bringing together Republicans and Democrats.

Learn more about .

In a recent blog post, Payne reflected her own growth as she ‘mimicks’ her experienced guides and then steps off on her own.

As a child, I played follow the leader. I mimicked the actions of others for fun.

As a college student, I find myself in a very similar situation. This cross-cultural is an extreme game of follow the leader.

Our leaders, Kim and Seth, model how to function in contemporary Europe. They guide us through cities and on public transportation. They gladly share their wisdom and calm our nerves. We follow. We learn by example.

These times of mimicking prepare us for times of independence. Almost daily we are given opportunities to explore or assignments to find specific locations. This is when the roles reverse. My peers and I will take turns directing, learning through practice.

Although this ever-changing game of follow the leader is fun and challenging, it has a specific focus. We are tracing the paths of our Anabaptist roots.

Besides the “Radical Europe” tour of Anabaptist sites in Austria, Germany and Switzerland, 91����Ƶ cross-cultural groups are in Bolivia, the Navajo Nation and Spain.

• The Bolivia group is led by Brian Martin Burkholder, campus pastor, and Linda Martin Burkholder, cross-cultural program assistant.
• The Navajo Nation group is led by Gloria Rhodes, chair of the applied social sciences department, and Jim Yoder, biology professor.
• The Spain group is led by Professor Adriana Rojas, of the language and literature department, her husband Patrick Campbell, and Barbara Byer, the department’s administrative assistant.

The 91����Ƶ cross-cultural experience, which has been part of the curriculum for more than 30 years, is very different from the typical “study abroad” program. Approximately 68 percent of all 91����Ƶ graduates go on an international cross-cultural trip; the remaining students fulfill the cross-cultural requirement exploring the vast diversity here in the United States. Most graduates name their cross-cultural experience as a significant part of their 91����Ƶ education.

Trips are led by faculty members who have deep roots in the countries and communities where groups travel. As an example of these deep roots, nearly 20 faculty and staff are “Third Culture Kids,” who spent significant years of their youth in another country/countries. Some 20 countries on six different continents are represented tin these experiences. Most 91����Ƶ faculty and staff have also lived and worked abroad for significant periods of time.

Upcoming cross-cultural trips include:

• Israel/Palestine, fall 2018, with Bill Goldberg, director of the Summer Peacebuilding Insitute, and Lisa Schirch, research professor at the Center for Justice and Peacebuilding;
• Guatemala and Cuba, spring 2018, with Byron Peachey, academic advocacy program adviser, and Lisa King, instructor in the nursing department;
• India, spring 2018, Kim G. Brenneman, psychology professor, and her husband, Bob Brenneman;
• Kenya, summer 2018, with Roxy Allen Kioko, professor of business, and her husband, Felix Kioko;
• Paraguay, summer 2018, with Greta Anne Herin, professor of biology, and Laura Yoder, professor of nursing;
• Marginal(ized) Europe: Bulgaria and Greece, summer 2018, with Andrew White, professor of English, and his wife, Daria White;
• Lithuania, summer 2018, with Jerry Holsopple, professor in the visual and communication arts department;
• , offered each semester in Washington D.C. allows for immersion into urban culture, while acquiring valuable work experience in an internship.

Many Mennonites — and non-Mennonites as well — avoid people they disagree with, including the military, by not acknowledging or shunning, she said. “In Matthew [5:43-48], Jesus suggests we walk toward those with whom we disagree and those who are different. We greet them. We ask questions. We recognize their humanity. This is God’s security strategy. It is not just a moral strategy. It is also effective.”

Schirch shared her own journey, from the protests in Washington D.C. that marked her own growing knowledge of politics and peacemaking to her conscious choice to engage with the military — a choice which sets her apart from many Mennonites.

She is the North American research director for the Tokyo-based Toda Institute for Global Peace and Policy Research and senior policy advisor with the . In addition she sits on research advisory panels for several European governments. In 2015, Schirch finished a three-year project coordinating a global network to write a and set of 40 peacebuilding case studies on “Local Ownership in Security.” Most recently, she was named by the U.S. State Department as co-chair of the working group on engagement with religious actors by the Office on Religion and Global Affairs.

The war in Iraq in the early 1990s set the stage for the wars throughout the Middle East and Afghanistan, Schirch said, as well as increasing terrorism.

As a college student in 1991, Schirch opposed the Iraq War by participating in peace protests and marches, but she recognized the importance of real policy alternatives. She studied conflict analysis and resolution at graduate school, worked on local conflicts in Canada and the U.S., as well as traveling frequently to the Middle East, meeting people working for peace.

“I wanted to have expertise to argue for peace on strategic grounds and not only moral grounds,” she said. “We have to move from protest to proposal, clearly laying out pragmatic solutions to problems.”

In 2005, Iraqi development workers asked Schirch why the military focused on hunting down terrorists instead of civilian security. “It’s a backwards strategy,” they told her. “It only helps the insurgents in their recruitment.”

By the mid-2000s, the Pentagon realized what the Iraqis said was true; the pace of terror was escalating. Some military leaders estimated that every bomb dropped created a hundred new recruits for terrorist groups. Many agreed that their main mistake in Iraq was not listening to local people.

“The top generals in the Pentagon have had one consistent message about conflict in the Middle East,” Schirch said. “’There is no military solution.”

Looking for alternatives, the Pentagon and military schools began working with Schirch and other peacebuilders to overcome terrorism through nonmilitary means. “Many of the courses that I was asked to teach asked this question: What do we need to do so that local people will run to us rather than away from us? How do security forces gain a reputation as protecting people rather than killing people,” she said. “The military began using softer approaches, known as counterinsurgency to ‘win the hearts and minds’ of civilians.”

For the last ten years, Schirch has made regular trips to the Pentagon, Quantico Marine Corp, the U.S. Army War College, West Point Military Academy, as well as trips to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. She talks with military leaders about respecting and listening closely to local communities.

“The safety and security of the people on this planet are connected,” Schirch said. “The U.S. cannot have security while ignoring the security of people in other parts of this planet.”

Read more

• Learn more about Dr. Schirch’s to improve civilian-security sector relations.
• Read about her on peacebuilding approaches to violent extremism.
• View 2017 Summer Peacebuilding Institute offerings.

The symposium and public lecture were organized and facilitated by Professor as part of her multi-year “Silent Violence” project. Her research, which with a grant from , has focused on how abused individuals in marginalized communities employ resilient strategies to survive, endure and sometimes escape their situations.

While the first year of the project focused on surfacing individual stories and the second year on community services, the third year has emphasized the role of institutions. In March 2016, Stauffer organized a with both preventative goals and healing through arts-based approaches. One of Stauffer’s research questions, which widened the investigative scope to communities and institutions, was “How are our ideologies or institutions complicit?”

“Institutions frequently perpetuate injury to survivors by means of denial and silence,” says Stauffer.�� “My hope is that institutions such as 91����Ƶ can become models of accountability and support in instances of sexual harms. This would substantiate our commitment to non-violence in the most core parts of our life as a community.”

Other campus events in October and November included the chapel and Take Back the Night events (coverage forthcoming). The campus-wide collaborative effort, said Interim President Lee Snyder, was prepared to “help us as a community and as individuals ‘grow our capacity to respond to sexual violence in just and transformative ways’” [as articulated by the planners].

‘Learn from our mistakes’

In both presentations, Doyle urged listeners “to learn from the horrific mistakes other denominations have made, especially the ones the Catholic Church has made.” He has been involved in the issue since it first surfaced to the public in 1984. While a diplomatic officer at the Vatican Embassy in Washington D.C., he was assigned administrative duties to handle the case involving a Louisiana priest.

His experience of meeting a young victim began a 32-year journey of victim advocacy that has called his religious beliefs into question at times and caused him to reinvent his own spirituality. Because of his experiences, Doyle prefers not to use a priestly title or wear clerical clothing. He has been a frequent speaker at Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) functions, and in his lecture, referenced the Anabaptist-Mennonite chapter, .

The biggest mistake of the leadership of the Catholic Church, Doyle said, was the attempt to cover up and contain the issue, and to “refuse to treat the victims as Christ would have treated them,” Doyle said. The church is not a building or a faceless entity, but rather, “the people, the people of God,” and because of this importance, leaders must prioritize the welfare of the victims over the image and preservation of the institution. “Take the risk. We’re Christians. Do what you think Christ might do.”

Panel addresses aspects of institutional involvement

In the three-hour morning session for faculty and staff, Doyle’s keynote address was followed by a panel presentation facilitated by Stauffer and Professor and including:

• Abigail Bush, alumna and former co-president of 91����Ƶ’s student-led ;
• Jackie Hieber, prevention coordinator at in Harrisonburg, Virginia, which provides crisis, treatment and prevention services as well as annual training to 91����Ƶ students;
• , 91����Ƶ restorative justice coordinator and a member of the international Campus PRISM Project, which focuses on restorative initiatives for sexual misconduct on college campuses;
• , professor at Anabaptist Mennonite Biblical Seminary in Elkhart, Indiana, and a member of Mennonite Church USA’s Sexual Abuse Prevention Panel;
• , research professor at the Center for Justice and Peacebuilding and advocate for just and healthy responses to sexual violence in Mennonite institutions who helped facilitate Doyle’s presence on campus;
• , professor in applied social sciences at 91����Ƶ, race and diversity facilitator and founder of Destiny’s Daughters Empowerment Ministry.

Panel members addressed various issues around institutional involvement in cases of sexual abuse: victims’ needs, walking with survivors, increasing accountability and transparency, institutional responses to offenders and others affected, issues of race and identity, and best practices. Following the panel, participants were invited to reflect in table groups and write suggestions for how 91����Ƶ can continue to improve response to sexual harms.

Doyle’s evening lecture, which drew community members and also faculty and staff who had participated in the earlier event, was followed by similar opportunities to reflect, process and provide recommendations to improve processes and responses.

The “expression stations”—which included facilitated discussion, a reflection corner, candle lighting and a prayer vigil, and a word mural— were coordinated by two student-run groups, the Coalition on Sexual Violence Prevention and Take Back the Night. Participants were also encouraged to express themselves through letters, which would be delivered to leadership for review and processing.

Sonya Shaver contributed to this article.

The 2016-17 magazine features articles on the theme of “Learning Through Theory and Practice,” focusing on the program.

• Academic programs director Jayne Docherty begins the thematic treatment with an and the unique collaborative process by which the curricula is re-visioned in response to changing global needs.
• Alumni , MA ’03, and , MA ’14, talk about impacts of CJP education on their work in the Middle East and Burundi, respectively.
• The second-year , when students merge theory and practice, is shared through four students.
• Learn about two new programs: the new , the first of its kind in North America, and the .

A sampling of articles about CJP programs

In addition to its academic programs, CJP also includes four programs that each receive individual treatment in the magazine: , , , and the .

• STAR Director and Professor help in Bosnia and Herzegovina about trauma and memory.
• Summer Peacebuilding Institute hosts a popular new class, “” with Professor .
• comprise the fourth cohort of the Women’s Peacebuilding Leadership Cohort.
• Zehr Institute hosts and experts provide in a variety of contexts.

Peacebuilder magazine is housed at �� The site also includes , who are encouraged to update their profiles regularly.

“It’s a really, really beautiful story,” said , a research professor at 91����Ƶ’s (CJP), who was in the audience. “Today the Philippines is really the ideal case study where civil society, the military and the police are working together the most.”

For years, Schirch has spent an enormous amount of time thinking about the essential role such collaboration between civil society and the security sector plays in peacebuilding. At the conference in The Hague, attended by dozens of military, police and civil society leaders from around the world, she released her new 300-page training manual on the topic, Handbook on Human Security: A Civil-Military-Police Curriculum.

The handbook, accompanied by a separate collection of 40 case studies of civil society work with the military and police, a policy brief and two videos – all available – is the culmination of three years of work. With support from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Schirch worked with partners from more than 100 peacebuilding organizations around the world to develop the first-of-its-kind curriculum, designed to improve human security by facilitating cooperation between civil society, police and the military.

Cooperation necessary and important

Although the just-published manual was three years in the making, Schirch traces the true beginnings of the project to the morning of the September 11 attacks, when she and her colleague – now the program director of CJP – began writing a document envisioning a “.”

Schirch said the curriculum is already being used in the Philippines and Tajikistan, and that she hopes for a wider audience.

“We tried to make it relevant to very different security challenges, from drug trafficking to insurgent groups to a repressive government and civil society response,” she said.

Whatever the context, the fundamental idea behind the handbook is, as Schirch wrote in the introduction: “Human security depends on fruitful civil-military-police understanding and coordination.”

“New generations of security sector leaders recognize that civil society is an important stakeholder for sustainable security,” she continued. “At the same time, many in civil society recognize the need to engage with the security sector as key stakeholders necessary for sustainable peace.”

After the conference in The Hague, Schirch made a few final edits to the curriculum and has been preparing for a final visit to the U.S. Army War College, where she has worked with military officers for 10 years to learn about their perspectives on security and advance their understanding of civil society peacebuilding.

For Schirch, the publication of the curriculum also marked – temporarily, at least – an end to a hectic schedule of regular commuting to Washington D.C. and frequent international travel as she taught and studied civil-security sector relations.

New projects related to religion, violent extremism

In early 2016, she will begin co-chairing a new task force convened by the U.S. State Department Office on Religion and Global Affairs. The group has been asked to write a handbook for training Foreign Service officers on engagement with religious actors.

Schirch will also work part-time for the Japan-based . Among her responsibilities there will be helping plan a seminar on peacebuilding response to violent extremism that the organization will host next fall at 91����Ƶ. Schirch will also teach one course each year at the Summer Peacebuilding Institute.

Schirch also shared that she plans to spend time with her family and in her garden, as well as on an art project using traditional Mennonite art forms like fraktur and etchings from the Martyrs Mirror to explore the positive and negative implications of Mennonite peace theology.

On a related note, she is also writing a book, A Tribe Called Mennonite, about her own career and the philosophy and psychology of Mennonite peacebuilding. She’ll speak about this work in a keynote address at a conference in June 2016 at Conrad Grebel University College in Waterloo, Ontario.

“Peace activists tend to be sensitive to interacting with the military and police,” said 91����Ƶ professor , as she introduced the speakers. “We often define security in a different way, focused on ‘human security.’” But she believes the two sides can – and must − work together even in countries where the security forces are part of a repressive government.

“We’ve come a long way in civil society to move from protesting security policies to making policy proposals for how to better pursue human security,” said Schirch, who has been invited to speak at the Pentagon, the Army War College and West Point Military Academy. She noted that several Harrisonburg Police Department officers were guests at the luncheon.

A research professor at 91����Ƶ’s (CJP), Schirch is also director of human security at the , an international network of peacebuilding practitioners and scholars that promotes “sustainable peace and security.”

Schirch and many of the luncheon attendees are currently involved in the final phase of a three-year project: the creation of a master curriculum, including a handbook and training modules, to help security forces and civil society groups learn how to collaborate on human security, community engagement and security sector development. The project, supported by the , partners the Alliance for Peacebuilding with the and the at the University of Notre Dame.

Approximately 30 contributors travelled from 26 countries for the one-week “training of trainers” on the 91����Ƶ campus. The luncheon speakers, who were part of the training session, spoke about their experiences engaging with military and police.

Reforming police practices

Kamal Uddin Tipu started his career as a police officer in Pakistan, eventually rising to deputy inspector general in the city of Islamabad. He came to CJP as a Fulbright scholar in 2004 to earn a master’s degree.

At 91����Ƶ, Tipu focused on restorative justice as a better way to deal with crime, law-breakers and victims. He spoke fondly of his time on campus, his family’s experiences while living in Harrisonburg, and his internship with the police department in Rochester, New York. He returned to Pakistan to implement what he had learned, introducing reforms in local police practices.

In recent years, Tipu went to Africa as a police adviser to the African Union and United Nations. “I saw how we need to focus more on the root causes of conflict,” he said. “I also saw the enormous amounts of money that countries spend on the military.”

A ‘peace general’

Deng Giguiento, a longtime peacebuilding trainer and practitioner, counts two generals as her friends on the Philippine island of Mindanao. As training coordinator for the Peace and Reconciliation Program of , she often interacted with security officials on local situations of conflict.

When a German couple was abducted by anti-government insurgents, for example, she helped negotiate their release alongside an army general. The general had rejected military action, despite opposition from his officers. Afterwards, the general started a class for his officers. His textbook was “The Little Book of Conflict Transformation,” written by��John Paul Lederach, founding director of CJP.

“When the general got stuck, he would call me and put me on speakerphone,” said Giguiento, who helped to establish the after attending SPI in 1997.

Moving from protest to proposals

Bernardo Arevalo de Leon, a former Guatemalan diplomat, talked about how his country is still trying to recover from a 33-year civil war between armed rebels and a repressive right-wing government. After 10 years of peace talks, the two sides signed a peace accord in 1996, but the country is struggling to implement reforms that were promised.

“The big task is to transform the way the government uses its security forces,” said de Leon, who was involved in the peace process. “We needed to think differently about the role of the police and the army.”

He also pointed out that civil society needed to move from protest to proposal to engage in the reform of the security sector.

De Leon is now based in Guatemala, where he is director of the Regional Office for Latin America for , a global peacebuilding nongovernmental organization based in Geneva.

The context she’d been immersed in as a graduate student in the with the (CJP) at 91����Ƶ (91����Ƶ) was very different than the context of the institute at Carlisle Barracks in Pennsylvania.

“The term ‘peacebuilding,’” she said, “is used frequently at PKSOI, but primarily to refer to activities done ‘post-conflict’ during ‘reconstruction,’ not to refer to activities all through the scale of different stages of conflict. This can make it challenging for stakeholders from dissimilar backgrounds to have productive conversations.”

Monitoring semantics was just one of many skills Gehman practiced during what she calls a “cultural immersion” in the military environment. With her specific interest being the military-peacebuilding nexus in the Middle East and North Africa, Gehman was matched with a project covering the African Union Mission in Somalia. She worked under the supervision of retired Colonel Dwight Raymond, an expert on the protection of civilians in mass atrocities.

The experience gave her a better knowledge of the multi-dimensional, powerful stakeholders who engage in operations of war and peace: the U.S. military, U.S. government agencies, and multinational coalitions.

“I now have a basic familiarity with the principles and processes of United Nations peacekeeping, including issues like mandate implementation, force generation, and logistics for troop-contributing countries,” Gehman said.

The CJP Capstone Project

When it came time to choose her practicum experience, Gehman said applying to PKSOI was a good option to pursue her academic and professional interests. She had previously conducted interviews with veterans, participated in a workshop called “,” and joined veteran and fellow CJP graduate student Michael McAndrew .

Gehman also benefited from CJP’s connections to the institute. Her advisor, professor, had taken students to visit the institute. Additionally, CJP research professor has been a guest lecturer at the U.S. Army War College.

“Our faculty have strong connections with peacebuilding organizations around the world,” said program director and professor. “This helps our students find placements that fit their particular interests, and build skills and networking contacts.”

Students in CJP’s practice-oriented graduate program in conflict transformation culminate their coursework in one of three options for a capstone project. The organizational practicum, of which Gehman’s experience is an example, requires a 2-4 month commitment. A second option is the research-based practicum, which results in production of an article, book, exhibit or other project. A third option allows full-time CJP students to write a thesis. Students must make a presentation to the CJP community about their project.

2015 CJP Capstone Projects

In addition to Gehman (from Morton, Illinois, and a graduate of Wheaton College), the following graduate students presented capstone projects during the 2015 spring semester. All were awarded their degrees during the April 26 commencement ceremony.

Matt Bucher (Harrisonburg, Virginia; Messiah College, 91����Ƶ MDiv ’15) researched Anabaptist responses to Christian Zionism and sought to find Christian theology that is good news for Israelis, Palestinians, and Americans. Additionally, he worked at the in Harrisonburg, connecting with local church leaders and working to understand where and how ministers have developed their ability and skills for addressing congregational conflict. Project title: Pursuing Good Theology and Best Practices: Christian Zionism, Empowering Church Leaders and Self-Reflection.

��Ray Garman (Ocean City, New Jersey; Haverford College) conducted independent research on the role that meaningful productivity plays in post-traumatic growth. Project title:A Predicament of Being

Fabrice Guerrier (Port-au-Prince, Haiti; Florida State University) worked in the Advocacy Unit of the United Nations Office of the High Representative for Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States (). He focused on research and supporting numerous outreach and advocacy strategies essential to OHRLLS’ implementation of its programs of action, as well as mobilizing international support for the most vulnerable countries. Project title: Advocating for Vulnerable Countries in the 21st Century

Tony Harris (Annapolis, Maryland; Goucher College) worked as the global education graduate associate at the . His primary responsibilities included curriculum development and program design/implementation. He was also involved in planning special events and worked on various projects related to organizational development. Through his practicum, Harris also explored explicit and implicit theories of change specific to the organization. Project title: The Global Education-Peacebuilding Nexus: Pedagogies, Programs, and Possibilities

Jacob Kanagy (Elizabethtown, Pennsylvania; Eastern University​) served as a congregational consultant and member of a church governance reference team at a community mediation center. His experience led to exploration of the overlap and complexities of serving in both a secular and religious peacebuilding context as a mediator or facilitator. Project title: The Intersection of a Community Mediation Center,��Congregational Conflict, and a��Church Governance Project

Diane Kellogg (Staunton, Virginia; Geneseo State University) ​contributed to the development and implementation of the Center for Justice and Peacebuilding’s (WPLP). Confident that WPLP was making a greater impact in the participants’ home communities than most people were aware of, Kellogg explored how that impact could be measured and evaluated. Her video production introduced the program and its participants, and reported on the community-level impact of the women’s participation. Project title: Evaluation and Promotion of the Women’s Peacebuilding Leadership Program

��Bridget Mullins (Hudson, Ohio; University of Notre Dame) explored the role of theater in visualizing the roots of conflict and��re-discovering voice, body, self and the other.��In the process, she witnessed communities, both in Harrisonburg and in occupied Palestine, rehearsing the change they want to see in themselves and the world. ��Project title: Beautiful Resistance:��When Words Fail, Art Speaks��

Nate Schlabach (Millersburg, OH., Ohio State University) worked in the , an organization based in Washington, DC, that promotes better relations and understanding among the people and nations of the United States and the Asia-Pacific region. He was involved in writing, researching, and editing several of the center’s newly released publications on Japan and Australia, and he provided news and analysis for the “Asia Matters For America” website. Project title: The U.S.-Asia Relationship:��Why It Matters to America

Wrong.

In fact, the United States military combats terrorism and climate change. Both are huge threats to national security.

In this week’s Suter Science Seminar on the 91����Ƶ campus, professor connected two related issues that are central to the university’s educational mission and values: peacebuilding and sustainability. A research professor at 91����Ƶ’s , Schirch also serves as director of human security at the Washington, DC-based , which works to advance sustainable peace around the world.

Schirch’s perspective on climate change and global stability is bolstered by her wide travels; she has conducted conflict assessments and participated in peacebuilding planning alongside local colleagues in over 20 countries including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Kenya, Ghana, and Fiji. She earned a PhD in conflict analysis and resolution from George Mason University and is the author of a number of books and other publications.

After briefly explaining the science of global warming, Schirch focused on its political and social effects, rather than arguing for its existence. While much of the American public has varying responses and opinions to the concept of climate change, the view that global climate change is happening is uncontested in the Pentagon, as well as among the majority of the scientific community, she said.

The human response to climate change can be dramatic, Schirch said. When drought caused by global warming mixes with corrupt governments and religious extremism, terrorism can result.

In fact, retired naval commander Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, has argued that the conditions caused by global climate change will “extend the war on terror.” Lopez was among 11 retired military leaders contributing to a 2007 report, “.” Their findings and recommendations to the Department of Defense acknowledge the serious implications of political and social instability caused by the effects of climate change, Schirch said. (Schirch also referenced a 2014 report, “,” in which an expanded advisory board of 16 military leaders echoed the earlier findings.)

North Americans may be less aware of the implications of climate change, Schirch said, because “we actually are living in one of the most climate stable regions of the world.” Nations in the northern part of the globe are less affected by climate change. Ironically, these are the nations that tend to be the worst polluters of the atmosphere.

“As the sea levels rise in the decades and centuries ahead, there will be inundation of coastal areas with loss of settled areas and agriculture land, threats to water, and spread of infectious disease will stress the region,” Schirch said. The result will be forced migrations out of the most affected regions as land becomes unlivable.

Some activists claim that “climate migrants should have the right to move to the countries from which all these bad greenhouse gasses are coming from,” she added.

Though climate change poses serious threats, Schirch concluded with some hopeful ideas. “Climate change is a source of conflict, but it also has potential to be a motivator for collaboration and peacebuilding,” she said. Climate change has potential to bring humanity together with one common goal. She added that the Mennonite tradition has always supported the goals of peace and creation care, even before climate change was a problem.

In a formal response after the seminar, biology professor Jim Yoder described global climate change as a “wicked” problem, a thorny and complex issue that cannot easily be pinned down or solved. Ray Gingerich, emeritus professor of theology and ethics, reminded the audience that both a top-down and bottom-up response are required.

Schirch’s lecture was part of 91����Ƶ’s annual , made possible by the Daniel B. Suter Endowment in Biology. Six seminars by experts in their field will take place this semester. Lectures are free and open to the public.

Almost 20 million people died between 1914 and 1918 in the worst war the world had ever known. U.S. President Woodrow Wilson and others reacted to the carnage by embracing the idea of a “league of nations” which would settle conflicts before they escalated into wars. Wilson told a joint session of the U.S. Congress in 1919 that such a league would be a “guaranty against the things which have just come near bringing the whole structure of civilization into ruin.” This league would not merely “secure the peace of the world,” it would be “used for cooperation in any international matter,” said Wilson.

Narrow, national politics intervened – as they would henceforth – and the U.S. Senate refused to ratify the Versailles peace treaty that founded the League of Nations.

In the absence of U.S. cooperation and that of other key players in the following years, the League’s impact was limited. It nevertheless took some actions from its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, that showed the possibilities for its post WWII successor, the United Nations. It settled territorial disputes between Finland and Sweden, Germany and Poland, and Iraq and Turkey. It dealt with a refugee crisis in Russia. It gave rise to the Permanent Court of International Justice.

But the League had an imbalanced structure that continues to plague today’s UN – decision-making was dominated by certain nations, namely the victors from WWI (with the exception of the United States). And the League had no power of its own to stop aggressor-nations, whether by agreed-upon economic sanctions or by military means. The outbreak of World War II marked the utter failure of the League.

In the aftermath of the Second World War

If WWI was terrible, WWII was horrifically worse, claiming the lives of more than three times the number of military and civilian people as WWI.

Again, it was a U.S. president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, who pushed for the creation of an international organization to be, in fact and not just in words, a guarantor of peace.

[A]s earlier, the basic dilemmas and conundrums had not changed: How to balance national sovereignty and international idealism? How to reconcile the imbalances between countries over power and influence, over resources and commitments? How, in other words, could one draft a charter that would recognize and effectively deal with the sheer fact that some countries were, in effect more equal than others?��(Hanhimäki, 15)*

The answer was to entice the then-most-powerful nations into being players in the proposed organization – and into staying in the game –��by giving them permanent seats at the top of the organization, with each having veto power over decisions.

To this day, 68 years since the founding of the United Nations in 1945, the five victorious powers from WWII – China, France, Great Britain, the United States and Russia – occupy permanent seats on the UN’s��, with each being able to block a decision by exercising a veto that cannot be overridden. For example, the inability of key players on the Security Council to agree on ways to support peace in Syria has blocked any effective UN role in Syria, except for chemical weapons dismantling. Similarly the UN was helpless when the United States ignored France’s, Russia’s and China’s dismay and unilaterally led an invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The Security Council is now enlarged by 10 members, elected by the general UN membership to two-year terms, but these 10 do not have the veto power or staying power of the “Permanent Five,” dubbed the P-5.

Which part does what in the UN system?

There’s no simple way of explaining the complexity of the United Nations and its “system” or “family of organizations,” but in the next couple of dozen paragraphs we’ll make a try. The UN began in 1945 with these six components (all beginning with “The”):

1.��, consisting of representatives from the UN’s member nations who deliberate policies, then make recommendations and decisions. Basically, it’s the UN version of the U.S. Congress or British-style parliaments, but with less legislative impact since the UN is a voluntary association.

2.��, as described above.

3.����(or��), responsible today for some 70 percent of the human and financial resources of the UN system, including 14 specialized agencies, nine “functional” commissions, and five regional commissions.

4.��, today made up of 43,000 civil servants who staff duty stations around the world and perform the day-to-day work of the United Nations, including administering peacekeeping operations, surveying economic and social trends, and preparing studies on human rights. Basically, the Secretariat services the four other organs on this list (not counting the Trusteeship Council) and administers the programs and policies invoked by them.

5.��.

6.��Trusteeship Council, whose historical reason for existence has disappeared, leaving it without a purpose.

The UN system has grown exponentially beyond the 1940s-era United Nations to encompass more than 50 affiliated organizations – known as programs, funds, and specialized agencies – with their own memberships, leaderships, and budget processes. For example, the����– almost always simply called UNESCO – is a legally independent organization that is affiliated with the United Nations through a negotiated agreement. Its chief executive meets twice a year with the executives of 28 other UN-affiliated organizations, including the��,����and��. This group is called the Chief Executives Board for Coordination and is chaired by the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

In contrast to the “specialized agencies” like UNESCO with its structural independence, the “funds,” “programs,” “departments,” and “commissions” (among other descriptors) of the United Nations are usually an integral part of the mother organization headquartered in New York City. They carry out the policies established by the General Assembly and Security Council.

For a visual overview, locate the eight-color, 14-box chart titled “. Another handy resource is��. It outlines the better-known components of the UN system. A word to those who might wish to work within this system: there isn’t a centralized application process; you’ll need to search for each unit’s specific hiring requirements and procedures and be prepared to compete against many – perhaps hundreds – who are multilingual with graduate degrees.

The UN system performs work that almost everyone would agree is laudable – from supporting basic research aimed at improving food production to raising literacy levels around the world – but the United Nations’ foundational purpose of maintaining international peace resides largely with the Security Council. No use of international sanctions, no peacekeeping operation, no��significant��steps for peaceful resolution of a��major��conflict, can be undertaken without Security Council approval.

Stemming the flood of suffering��and dying people

When massive loss of life looms, whether from natural disasters or war, the UN system is positioned to intervene, if welcomed (or at least permitted) by the host state. For natural disasters, the aid typically comes quickly. For massive deaths due to human conflict, United Nations intervention gets stymied by political considerations, resulting in ineffectiveness and delay, as occurred in the Rwandan genocide of 1994.

��typically get funded by developed nations, using personnel drawn from less-developed nations. This is why the UN’s “blue helmets” or “blue berets” are disproportionately from Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Jordan and countries making up the African Union.

The Security Council also largely shapes the work of the General Assembly, which is supposed to be where democracy comes to the fore on the international level. Yes, all 193 members of the UN have one vote in the General Assembly. But, no, they can’t override any Security Council decisions. Only the Security Council can pass binding resolutions, though the General Assembly can, and does regularly, pass non-binding resolutions that at least have a moral impact.

The entire UN system is coordinated by its��, currently Ban Ki-Moon of South Korea, who gets into that position only if recommended by the Security Council.

Money flows into the UN system in two ways, via: (1) an assessment, like a tax, based on a country’s gross national income relative to other countries and (2) voluntary contributions. The UN’s peacekeeping operations are funded through the assessment, with a surcharge paid by members of the P-5 group.

Voluntary contributions from nations and other sources (e.g., the European Union and development banks) make up at least part of the budgets of many important organs, such as the��,��,����and��, as well as��,��, and��.

Nine countries account for roughly three-quarters of the operating budget of the United Nations: the United States, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, Spain and China. The United States is the single largest contributor at 22 percent, but collectively, the European Union countries contribute the lion’s share of the UN’s budget, roughly 35 percent.

In 2011, the����(UNHCR) said it needed $3.5 billion – its largest request ever – to meet the needs of the world’s growing numbers of refugees and displaced persons. It received $2.18 billion.

The biggest forced movements of humans today are in Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Sudan (and South Sudan), Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar, Colombia, and Mali. The world has 15.4 million recognized refugees – equivalent to everyone living in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and San Francisco becoming refugees simultaneously – plus twice that many displaced within their own countries.

“These truly are alarming numbers,” said UNHCR head António Guterres, upon releasing a report in June 2013. “They reflect individual suffering on a huge scale and they reflect��the difficulties of the international community in preventing conflicts��[author’s emphasis] and promoting timely solutions for them.”

In mid-2013, nearly 97,000 uniformed UN personnel were conducting peacekeeping, truce supervision, or stabilization work in 16 areas, including Afghanistan, Mali, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Darfur, Sudan, Liberia, Haiti, Lebanon, and the border of India and Pakistan, Their budget was $7.57 billion, the largest single outflow of UN dollars for anything. (Yet this is miniscule, relative to the military budgets of developed nations like France and the United States.)

Dramatic jump in peacekeeping

A��dramatic increase in UN peacekeeping operations followed a 1992 “,” nurtured by then-Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. The policy document was endorsed at a meeting of heads of state convened by the Security Council. It defined four consecutive stages to prevent or control conflicts: preventive diplomacy, peacemaking, peacekeeping, and peacebuilding (i.e., identifying and supporting ways to help strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid future conflict).

For the first time ever, the Agenda for Peace implied that the UN did not necessarily require the consent of all parties in the conflict to intervene.

One of the early success cases of the Agenda for Peace was in Mozambique, where between 1992 and 1994, about 6,000 UN peacekeepers helped oversee its transition from a state of civil war to democratic elections.

The balance sheet for UN peacekeeping in the 1990s, however, was mostly negative, with its disastrous failure to stabilize Somalia – festering to this day – and to prevent ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda.

Obviously, the foundational reason for the United Nations – being a guarantor of peace – is far from being achieved.

“The basic problems for the UN as the overseer of international security was and remains simple: how to deal with conflicts – be they between or within states –��without offending the national sovereignty of its member states[editor’s emphasis],” writes Jussi M. Hanhimäki, a native of Finland who is professor of international history and politics at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva.

From the beginning the UN recognized the economic roots of much violent conflict, putting these words in its charter: “to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples.”

This statement reflected awareness that the global Great Depression after WWI, coupled with the punitive reparations imposed on WWI’s losers, incubated the aggressive ultra-nationalism that resulted in the next world war.

Efforts to alleviate poverty around the world, however, have been confounded (in part) by different nations’ political and economic ideologies. The United States, for instance, has always promoted global capitalism as the best way for all countries in the world to develop. But is it? If other modes of development were better in certain situations, would the UN system have room to explore them under its current funding and leadership system?

Doug Hostetter, a 1966 graduate of 91����Ƶ who directs��, has observed over the last five years growing involvement by global corporations in UN discussions.

Viewed in the most positive light, this corporate involvement – often in the form of underwriting the costs of conferences and participating in them – shows private-public cooperation to address some of the world’s most intractable problems. Viewed in terms of vested interests, however (as Hostetter says he views matters), the corporations are mainly interested in maximizing their profits, regardless of the impact on the most vulnerable in the world.

Impact of unwieldy structure on functioning

As mentioned earlier, the UN system consists of more than 50 organizations and entities, labeled by dozens of acronyms, with the majority beginning with “UN” or “W” for “World,” plus ones like ECOSOC, FAO, GATT, IAEA, ICJ, ILO, IMF, ITU, MSC, OHCHR and ONUC.

Excluding the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, the UN system has about 83,000 on its payroll, most of them working out of offices or “duty stations” around the globe. The single largest chunk of employees is within the��, headquartered in New York City. Secretariat employees also work from office centers in Addis Ababa, Bangkok, Beirut, Geneva, Nairobi, Santiago and Vienna.

Annual expenditures in the entire UN system, excluding the banking entities, topped $41.5 billion in 2011, according to the UN Chief Executives Board for Coordination.

Compensation varies within the system, but at the United Nations itself, salary scales (found at the����) for two sample locations in the fall of 2013 – New York City and Addis Abba, Ethiopia – ranged from a minimum of $77,338 for entry-level professionals to a maximum of $203,620 for senior-level professionals, including cost of living adjustments for these locations. Rent subsidies, allowances for dependents, grants for children’s schooling, extra pay for hardship and hazardous work are routinely granted in addition to salaries.

In 2005, then Secretary-General Kofi Annan sought to strengthen the Secretariat’s office of internal oversight in order “to review all mandates older than five years to see whether the activities concerned are still genuinely needed or whether the resources assigned to them can be reallocated in response to new and emerging challenges.” This is just one example of many initiatives in recent decades aimed at streamlining the United Nations, some of them successful.

“There is no point in mincing words,” writes Jussi M. Hanhimäki. “The UN is a structural monstrosity, a conglomeration of organizations, divisions, bodies and secretariats, all with their distinctive acronyms that few can ever imagine being able to master.” He notes that “the UN has a tendency not to reform but to build new structures on top of already existing ones,” causing limited resources to be “squandered due to lack of operational coherence.”

Development aid in particular is subject to “duplication and overlap [that] have reduced efficiency and increased administrative costs within the UN and its sister organizations,” such as the World Bank, says Hanhimäki.

Everett Ressler, a 1970 graduate of 91����Ƶ, draws a different conclusion from his 40 years in international development and humanitarian work. “The UN functions as a crucible in which people from all countries strive to work together for the common good, including the resolution of differences,” he says. “What has surprised me is not that there are challenges and disappointments but that so much continues to be achieved despite them. The limited but unique role of the UN is often wrongly portrayed, and its contributions are undervalued.” (Ressler retired from UNICEF in 2008 after 14 years of what he describes as “ building capacities to prepare and respond more effectively in crisis situations.”)

Peace is central, ongoing focus

Turning to the peace field: building a peaceful world has been at the UN’s heart since it was founded, garnering its agencies or people Nobel Peace Prizes in 1945, 1954, 1957, 1961, 1965, 1969, 1981, 1988, 2001, 2005, 2007 and 2013. The 1992 Agenda for Peace was endorsed at the Security Council level.

In the summer of 2005, the first “people building peace” conference was held at the UN headquarters in New York City. This conference attracted about 1,000 delegates from 119 countries, including 15 CJP students and several who are currently CJP professors, Catherine Barnes, Barry Hart, and Lisa Schirch. Sitting together in the majestic Grand Assembly room, Hart and Schirch reported being thrilled to see many CJP graduates, partners and colleagues from around the world.

In 2006 the UN formed a��, charged with coordinating the efforts of multiple actors, including UN agencies and international donors, in stabilizing post-conflict countries. Currently on the stabilization list are Burundi, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, and the Central African Republic. The Commission has a budget titled the����from which it disperses about $100 million annually for activities and projects aimed at preventing these countries from relapsing into conflict.

Burundi, for example, was one of the first countries receiving support from the Peacebuilding Fund, with an initial allocation of $35 million in 2007 aimed at “making the hard-won peace in Burundi irreversible,” said Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, referring to the end of a decade of civil war in the mid-2000s. The UN has remained in Burundi ever since, supporting security sector and justice system reforms, radical improvement in governance and human rights, and improved living conditions.

Yet the path to peace remains perilous in Burundi, as��Peacebuilder��magazine recently learned from Jean-Claude Nkundwa, a CJP graduate student who did research in his home country in the summer of 2013. As a teenager in Burundi in the early 1990s, Nkundwa witnessed genocidal killings and lost family members to ethnic cleansing.

In an article posted atdescribed what he saw during his recent visit: muzzled dissent, the fostering of militant youth groups by the ruling regime, and discrimination against out-of-power ethnic and regional groups. He said President Nkurunziza, serving a second five-year term after being elected in 2005 and re-elected in 2010, has disregarded human rights and rule of law (including, it appears, the law barring him from running for election again).

But the last thing Nkundwa wants is for the UN to give up, as if Burundi were hopeless. On the contrary, he says:

The international community needs to play a more proactive role right now. It must assert itself and pressure the Burundian government to create political space to allow the opposition to operate without intimidation and harassment. The international indifference to the war in Rwanda in 1994 led to the genocide of one million people. Surely, there are some lessons learned, and the international community should not repeat the same mistakes in Burundi.

Realize, though, that the UN is operating in Burundi with the permission of its ruling regime. This long-standing dilemma of the UN’s – i.e., that it is supposed to be a servant of its member-nations, almost regardless of what the leadership of a particular nation is doing – began to be addressed in the early 2000s with a series of formal discussions on whether each state has a “responsibility to protect” its people.

In 2005, the UN members agreed that each of them has a����their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. (It’s dubbed the “” principle.) And, when states fail to do this, the international community has the right and responsibility to act in a “timely and decisive manner” – through the UN Security Council and in accordance with the����– to protect the people facing these crimes.

This principle has since been invoked in the cases of Libya (controversially), Côte d’Ivoire, South Sudan, and Yemen.

The goals are worthy,��but how to implement them?

Activities that the UN system undertakes without fail, year in and year out, are convene conferences, issue reports, and make heartfelt declarations on what the world needs to do to move closer to most people’s desire for justice, peace, and prosperity (or at least a chance at decent survival) for all.

Terminology has changed over the years at the United Nations. “Human security” is the latest term referring to the right of people to live in safety and dignity and earn their livelihood – which, of course, is what long-standing UN units concerned with poverty reduction, education, health, agriculture, peace, and so forth have been trying to do for decades.

The��, declared under former Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2000 to guide the UN through 2015, called for eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, universal primary education, gender equality, better health, environmental sustainability, and “a global partnership for development.”

“We have to connect the dots [between] climate change, [the] food crisis, water scarcity, energy shortages and women’s empowerment as well as global health issues,” says Annan’s successor, Ban Ki-Moon. “These are all interconnected issues.”

Except for the emphasis on environmental sustainability, Annan’s and Ban’s stated aspirations for a better world can be found in the 1945��, its 1948��, and its supplemental 1966��.

It’s the implementation of these grand goals that continues to bedevil the UN system.

Look at the work of the Office of the��, for example. In a given week, it may hold meetings on: who is using torture for what purposes; the rights of indigenous people in the face of gold prospecting, lumbering, ranching, and drilling for oil; abuses endured by women in the Middle East and Africa; and legal protections that developed countries should extend to their migrant workers. Yet, to the dismay of its staff no doubt, the human rights commission is basically toothless. It can make recommendations; it can try to shame entities into making changes. But it lacks implementation tools.

As for peace work, when is the Security Council going to respond to early signs of an impending conflict and authorize preventive measures before it’s a full-fledged crisis, with tens- or hundreds-of-thousands or millions dead?

Why we need the UN system

Despite the weaknesses of the UN system, it is the place in which the world places its hopes when the going gets really tough. Every day the UN system directly helps millions of people, at the comparatively modest cost of about $6 annually for each of the world’s inhabitants.

A����found that a strong majority of Americans support the UN system and its efforts to end global poverty, provide humanitarian relief after disasters, and lay the groundwork for peace around the world. Specifically, the UN system:

1.��Articulates important objectives for the world. It thus raises consciousness everywhere on issues like the abuse of girls and women and the rights of indigenous peoples.

2.��Feeds the hungry and houses the homeless when they are recognized as groups of displaced people or refugees from conflict, abuse, or natural disaster. Tries to get them back to their homeplaces whenever it can.

3.��Dispatches well-qualified advisors – in almost any humanitarian, educational, cultural, security, governance, or developmental field you can name –��in response to invitations by governments. Designates UNESCO World Heritage sites.

4.��Issues educational materials and underwrites trainings that are especially valued by governments that have few resources.

5.��Acts as a moral counterweight to reprehensible acts around the world, calling individuals and governments to be accountable.

6.��Sponsors cross-national biomedical, environmental, and scientific initiatives aimed at reducing preventable diseases and improving living standards.

7.��Remains the only globally recognized organization that aspires to recognize and uphold the rights and needs of one and all, mediating between those who come into conflict. As such, it is an essential instrument for global peace.

In a June 2013 interview, UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson said:**

My answer to those who criticize the UN is that the UN is as strong as the member states want it to be. The UN is a reflection of the world as it is, whether you like it or not. Democracy is not everywhere, human rights violations take place, wars and huge inequalities exist. But if we forget the UN Charter, if we forget the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, if we forget what our work and the world should be, then we have failed. My job as well as yours at the Alliance for Peacebuilding is to reduce the gap between the world as it is and the world as it should be. It is relevant for the UN and for the Alliance for Peacebuilding. This is what we are fighting for, every day.

# # # #

The chose 91����Ƶ because of its dedication to, said Kate Addleson, program manager for the , one of the partners in the campaign.

“We really appreciated the holistic approach that 91����Ƶ has to sustainability,” said Addleson, who hopes to see other universities in Virginia emulate what she described as 91����Ƶ’s pioneering and precedent-setting leadership on the issue.

The event, held on Earth Day in late April, featured a panel of 91����Ƶ faculty, staff and , speaking to a crowded room in the Campus Center.

“For us, it is a faith issue to take care of God’s creation,” said Swartzendruber.

Motivated by a theological commitment to care for the needy, he said, 91����Ƶ has been prioritizing sustainability for decades to try to limit resource consumption to its fair global share. As a result, 91����Ƶ’s buildings now consume significantly less energy per square-foot and per student than the average among its peer institutions.

Since 2000, efficiency upgrades on campus have allowed the university to save 46 million kilowatt-hours of electricity and $2.5 million on its utility bills, according to sustainability coordinator . (The figures are based on a comparison to energy consumption levels in 2000.)

One of the most significant recent sustainability projects was the on the roof of the . It was the state’s largest commercial solar power project at the time. Its innovative financing agreement has been the basis for statewide legislation designed to promote growth of Virginia’s solar energy sector. The solar project was developed in partnership with , a solar energy company led by 91����Ƶ business professor and MBA program co-director , who also spoke on the panel.

The university worked with the to pass an ordinance exempting the solar panel equipment from the local machinery and tools tax – another move that set precedent for recent state legislation.

Just three and a half years into their decades-long lifespan, the solar panels on the library roof have generated more than 450,000 kWh of electricity, offsetting the consumption of more than 266 barrels of oil. The average annual output of the library array is roughly equivalent to the annual energy use of 10 homes in Virginia. See live data on the solar array at

Earlier this year, the university was awarded a silver ranking by the , based on its sustainability initiatives in operations, curriculum, planning and other areas. 91����Ƶ is one of seven universities in Virginia with a silver ranking. Four others universities have earned bronze rankings, while none have a gold certification.

Also speaking on the panel was , a research professor at 91����Ƶ’s . She discussed her approach to sustainability as a issue by describing the growing link between climate change and violent conflict around the world.

Biology professor provided an overview of 91����Ƶ’s , an interdisciplinary program that combines environmental and social sciences. Launched just five years ago, enrollment has grown rapidly to more than 40 students, making it one of 91����Ƶ’s 10 most popular majors.

Kai Degner, a city councilman and former Harrisonburg mayor, also spoke. He complimented 91����Ƶ for demonstrating the environmental and economic benefits of large-scale sustainability initiatives, and said that the university “really provides us a terrific local example” for government, institutions, businesses and citizens to pursue similar projects.

More on sustainability at 91����Ƶ: