Role of Peace Teams

Role of Peace Teams

WHY PEACE TEAMS RISK THEIR LIVES
Adapted from op-ed in Toronto Star, March 29, 2006 by Lyn Adamson of the Nonviolent Peaceforce

The rescue of James Loney, Harmeet Singh Sooden, and Norman Kember in Iraq, and the death of Tom Fox, has focused attention on the Christian Peacemaker Teams. Not all the attention has been flattering. There have been questions raised about the role of nonviolent peacemakers in a conflict zone. Critics have suggested that peacemakers are naive and cannot make a contribution. It is important to understand the benefits of the presence of nonviolent peace teams in order to understand why they are there.

In his lifetime, Gandhi developed the concept of the 'shanti sena' or peace army. This vision has contributed to the formation of many peace team organizations based on nonviolence. At any one time there may be hundreds of peace team members placed in a dozen or more conflict zones, each person working within this framework of making space for peace through their presence.

[more]

Each organization has its own safety protocols, its own criteria for selecting volunteers and for choosing deployments. Each provides training and support for its team members, and although there are many commonalities among these peace teams, there are also features unique to each group.

Many of us passionately believe in the power of nonviolent presence. This passion has led to the formation of the newest peace team organization, the Nonviolent Peaceforce, which has placed 25 team members in Sri Lanka. NP has plans to expand this unarmed presence to many other conflict zones where there is a need.

Like CPT in Iraq, Nonviolent Peaceforce teams live and work in Sri Lankan communities most threatened by violence stemming from Sri Lanka's decades-long civil war. Without international presence, people in conflict zones like Iraq and Sri Lanka will be left to suffer the ill effects of the occupation and the armed chaos alone.

The most important aspect of international peace teams' presence in conflict zones is its message: there are internationals, including Americans, Britons, and many others, who care about what is happening to you, who are working to get the word out about what you are suffering and to put pressure on for due process and respect for international human rights. They are doing this through nonviolent presence, and are willing to take some risks to do this.

We can never know how many Iraqis have been moved in a positive way by CPT's presence, although we do know that their work has encouraged the formation of a Muslim Peacemakers Team, which is working at bridging the Shia-Sunni divide.

This is a role that cannot be played by the military or police; that is, working with civil society organizations to develop the social infrastructure so needed to rebuild a war torn country, and showing international support for threatened individuals, organizations and communities.

In Sri Lanka, Nonviolent Peaceforce is seeing the beginnings of a re-emergence of civil society in communities where fear of violence had driven it underground. Dialogues between different groups caught up in the conflict have begun to replace communal violence.

Nonviolent Peaceforce has reviewed its work in the field many times and will continue to do so. Other peace teams go through the same process. Is the benefit worth the risk? Do we believe that the only ones who should take risks for peace are armed men and women in uniforms?

We know that active nonviolence has transformed violent conflict in many parts of the world: in India, in the U.S. civil rights movement, in the campaign against apartheid. Lives have been lost in these struggles. These must be measured against the gains that have been achieved. Ultimately society must put an end to war. To do so we must build a culture of peace and respect for human rights. We cannot attain this by staying inside a bubble of safety. Taking risks will be necessary.

Gandhi challenged us to 'be the change you wish to see in the world'. Gandhi also said: 'Nonviolence in my lifetime is at the same stage as electricity was in Edison's time: to be refined'. We all know too well the devastation of war. We would do well to support the development of nonviolent alternatives, and to see what can be accomplished by them.

www.nonviolentpeaceforce.org

Lyn Adamson is a Nonviolent Peaceforce International Governing Council Member and Secretary. She served with the International Women's' Peace Service in the West Bank (2004) and as executive of Peace Brigades International Indonesia Project (1999-2002). She is a Quaker who lives in Toronto, Canada.