What has UNMISS achieved?......Nothing

Roving Bandit poses the question of the efficacy of UNMISS and goes further to question the viability of aid expenditure on peacebuilding and governance in general when compared to the "safer bet" of investing in health and education.

Lets first address the simpler issue regarding UNMISS......
What have they achieved?......so little that their ineptitude has caused a vacuum that threatens to engulf our planet ....

I was tempted to just leave it at that........but I guess there are many more laughable points to be gained from a deeper investigation.

The best place to start would be their website. While there are all sorts of updates, articles and reports on all sorts of activities that you would think UNMISS is involved in, a closer inspection leads to the realisation that UNMISS is nothing more than an event planning and taxi service. For example, following the violent conflicts in Jonglei earlier this year, the South Sudanese Presidential Committee for Peace organised a peace planning workshop (no surprises there), where they came up with a bunch of points and ideas that had already been thought of a million times over during the million other peace planning workshop that has taken place since the concept of peacebuilding came to South Sudan.

In reply to a question regarding how UNMISS hopes to contribute to these wonderfully 'novel' ideas, some important UN guy replied;

"We will provide logistical support, from transporting the committee that has been formed to conduct the peace process at the grass-roots level to organizing workshops and meetings within communities. 

We will participate in substantive discussions and offer ideas for working group meetings. We have also been providing logistical support for sensitization of the parallel civilian disarmament process. And we are prepared to assist with destruction of collected weapons, if that is the government’s wish, or help transport them and store them in a safe and secure place"

Translation: We will let you guys play with our fancy helicopters (which are in a ludicrous abundance and serve very little purpose aside from making the few who get to use it feel like a badass). We will also throw you some wicked-fun conferences with delicious snacks and crappy t-shirts. And finally, we will take out your trash (guns) or burn them......you know.....whatever you need to make us feel like we're doing something.

I got a bit carried away there..... anyways, the site is filled with what their targets and objectives are, but contain absolutely no information regarding what they have achieved (this usually suggests nothing).

And now, regarding Roving Bandit's point on peacebuilding and governance projects in general.....

Someone in his comments section had already addressed the problem of assuming a returns in education so allow me to try and respond to the point on health with an anecdotal point.

I once worked on a project in South Sudan where we were setting up water points as well as latrines (for the school) in a particular village. However, about 2 weeks after the project was complete there were some conflict between different ethnic groups which subsequently led to the entire village being abandoned. Ok, fair enough that this was WASH and not necessarily health, but I think the point is clear. While conflict continues to constantly displace people, it is rather difficult to make a good targeted investment in any sector. Also, lets not forget the number of hospitals that get burned down as a result of conflicts (an example of a couple here).

But the main argument is really that peacebuilding does not necessarily have to be a big gamble. As long as a shred of thought is put into the projects and that ideas are based on actual evidence as opposed to simply being the musings of a bunch of arbitrarily selected individuals at a 'party' organised by UNMISS (more on this rant here)

Finally.....to you Roving Bandit; you calculator-wielding, STATA-code-eyed, rational-model-worshipping, oversimplifying, desk jockey!!.........Stop trying to quantify and measure peace. Has the Wire not taught you anything about the downfall of playing a numbers game when it comes to peace?

No more peace conferences!!!! (the conflict in Jonglei)

Im sure (hoping) that many of you have heard about the recent violence that has been occurring in Jonglei State of South Sudan between the Murle community of Pibor county and the Lou-Nuer of the surrounding area*. I was pleasantly surprised to find that Al-Jazeera had made it the headline of their front page. Also, here is a link to an interesting recording from the BBC Worldservice, on the current conflict
It is difficult to really state when this conflict actually began but it is certain that the the level of violence has been continuously escalating as vengeance is met revenge. This recent attack is in retaliation to this attack that left 600 (Lou-Nuer) dead, which was a retaliation to this attack 250 (Murle)  dead, and so on and so forth. The number of casualties of this recent attack has been estimated at 2,182 people from the Murle community, mostly women and children......That is about 1.5% of the entire Murle population**. This is the type of numbers you see from a full military conflict or civil war. But this is not civil war. This is a conflict between two communities fighting over identity, resources (cattle) and a lot of strong emotions. For me, one of the strangest thing about this conflict is that you can't really sympathise with either sides.

Anyways, the following is a video from Al-Jazeera, I want to draw your attention to the interview with the vice president Riek Machar, and his strategy on dealing with the issue. 

******WARNING: OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE IMMINENT.....you have been warned*********

Aside from the standard procedures to deal with the immediate threat, deployment of additional security forces and the creation of a buffer zone, the solution is one that I am absolutely sick and tired of hearing......Motherfucking PEACE CONFERENCE!!

For those that might not know, a peace conference is basically just an event where the politicians and community leaders from both warring parties come together, have a nice meal, hand out some t-shirts, and tell some wanker consultant about what THEY think the cause of conflict is and how THEY think the issues can be resolved. A whole bunch of pretty resolution and recommendations are written down....and then ends up in some file to never see the light of day again. This obsession of peace conferences basically stems from its successes in resolving some of the inter-community conflict, back in the day. Since those successes, whenever there is a conflict, peace conferences have become the de facto solution.....but it has been so long since they have been successful. The organisers typically exclude the people who are involved in the conflict, and when the belligerents are involved, they will say whatever sounds good at the time just for the sake of saying them.....people behave differently in the presence of different people?!.....that is just shocking! (anyone who has ever done a community focus group discussion will know what Im talking about).

Now of course I am being excessively harsh. Its not like I have any bright ideas to solve this conflict.....(not one that is ready to be implemented anyways) and these politicians are merely just implementing what they know......and what they know is basically whatever horseshit that NGOs and the UN have been feeding them.....and what do these people know? well....horseshit. Many of the peacebuilding strategies are created with guesswork based on the dubious information about the causes of the conflict that they extract from the community (through rubbish focus group discussions).
So basically, Im calling for an end to this ridiculous method of resolving conflict. Im calling for a beginning of peacebuilding strategies that are rigorously tested before implementation. Im calling for new approaches to resolving conflict that does not involve what is essentially a really expensive circle jerk***

Oh and lets also not forget those damn donors with their short term funding that forces organisations to adopt simple shallow projects that are expected to perform miracles......fuck you, you ignorant cretins.

Finally, I just have to add.....the UN would've probably been able to anticipate this attack much much earlier if they actually had people on the ground. The UN has a compound in Akobo town (the capital of the county where the Lou-Nuer come from) that I know is always empty. They just fly-in on their fancy helicopters once in a while to talk to the county commissioner, but never actually stay there.....probably due to security issues.....pussies.

*For a map of the boundaries of the various ethnic groups in SS, go here

** For the SS 2010 census, go here 

*** Not to say that there aren't organisations out there that are trying different approaches......but usually when there are, they are still not very well thought through and a widely based on gut instinct. 

Conflicts in Everything: Man vs Elephants

Man vs Elephant

From Osborn and Parker 2003, Towards an integrated approach for reducing the conflict between elephants and people: a review of current research(pdf):



Problem:

Conflict between elephants and people persists even where considerable resources have been devoted to solving the problem. This can be attributed to a range of factors, including technical faults, lack of commitment of the farmers and limited resources

An expensive ‘arms race’ can develop between managers and elephants that are able to adapt quickly to new fence features designed to electrify the parts of the fence that elephants destroy.

Most interventions aimed at reducing crop-loss come from organizations outside of the aCected community, which include government wildlife departments and external development organizations. Farmers expect the conflict to be resolved, and when it is not, often turn against the responsible agencies. Donor-funded technical solutions are often unsustainable because external agencies are reluctant to provide the high maintenance costs.

Solution:

Tests with various chemical repellents have been undertaken in a number of field situations. In Malawi, Bell (1984) conducted trials with HATE 4C, a commercially available deer repellent, on fields and found no significant reduction in crop loss.

or

The current methods to reduce conflict between elephants and farmers are either expensive or ineffective. If it is essential to bring farmers into the process of resolving conflict by taking responsibility for the problems of crop pests, then any large-scale solution that involves continuous funding from outside the community will eventually fail. We suggest that the more responsibility farmers have for crop protection, the more successful deterrence will be. The role of external agencies and wildlife managers is, therefore, to work with farmers to develop a range of management solutions for repelling elephants.

They should try adopting a peacebuilding strategy that is so widely used here in Sudan.....the peace conference. Although it would be cool to say that you resolved conflict with HATE 4C

Dem youts, dat cheddar and mad violence

"Poor and underemployed young men don't seem to a source of social instability", Blattman says as he takes a piss over the numerous peacebuilding NGOs around the world. Whilst my bitter nature would encourage me to argue his point, I do fully support the idea that 'just because your young and poor doesn't mean your going to go out and kill people'. That notion is essentially no different to Britain's fear of the 'hoodies'.

But I also have to defend those poor naive little NGOs as the reasoning behind the massive number of youth engagement projects are not necessarily to help improve their economic status, rather, it is to engage the youths and keep them busy......I tried to find some evidence for this but it seems that NGOs and the UN don't like to explicitly provide justifications for their projects.

So I can only really speak based on my own experiences working in South Sudan, but it seems that here, the belief is that the main drive of conflict between communities is not economics, but rather, idleness. Many people from the community, government and even the youths themselves always seem to give the same solution to conflict: "We have to keep the youths busy, when they are idle, they will more likely go out and fight or conduct criminal activities".

Anyways, I think my point is that outside of the economics world, peacebuilders and other NGO types don't think that the point of vocational training projects is to reduce poverty, thus reducing conflict, but rather as a method to change behaviour. I think its in line with all those silly sports for peace projects. Its a means of making these youths a contributing member of society and all the mentality that comes with it (if need be, I can try and draw out the sociopsychological mechanisms of this). Nonetheless, I am very much looking forward the findings of Blattman's study on the issue (though I'm very intrigued to see his design for this).
Kids will be kids, and youths will still stab you in the alley behind MacDonalds for not giving him a cigarette.

P.S. Don't get raped by the burden of proof, don't forget the lessons of epistemology and evidence is like crack.....it's great, but sometimes you can live without it (sometimes).