Peace

Human Rights

Economic Justice

What is QCEA?

Structure & Staff

Contact Us

Take Action

Subscriptions and Membership

Donate

Study Tours

Internships

Around Europe

Briefing Papers

Occasional Papers and other publications

Ordering Printed Copies

History

Meeting Rooms Available

• Networking the Nonviolent

• An American in Europe

The notion of splendid isolation should be obsolete in our globalised world. The key to combating terrorism and creating a peaceful world is clearly multilateralist engagement. However, the same USA which reconstructed Europe after WW2 and which was once the driving force behind the United Nations, has increasingly traded dialogue for bullying tactics, consultation for coercion. Although a few Europeans, including the EU’s Javier Solana and Chris Patten, have sent warning signals to Washington, the European response has been disappointingly compliant.

Despite a general acquiescence to what is being done in the name of an elusively defined ‘war on terrorism’, there are many Americans as well as Europeans who have spoken out against Bush’s world view. In the States they have been lambasted by the press, dismissed as unpatriotic by the establishment and the only member of Congress, Barbara Lee, to vote against the ‘war’, must be accompanied 24/7 by a body guard. In Europe up to 400,000 people in Perugia and 100,000 in London participated in what peace activists have described as the most inclusive anti-war marches ever. People of all ages from different ethnic communities and religions have taken to the streets with a common cause: to protest the bombing of Afghanistan and to call a halt to any further escalation of war. A conference was organised in Brussels at the beginning of February, capitalising on the energy emanating from these new anti-war movements in Europe. The Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation brought together key European peace and human rights organisations and activists to form a network to organise meetings and lobby politicians. It was not however an exclusively European affair, for all continents were represented, including traditional foes: Indians and Pakistanis, Israelis and Palestinians.

Nearly every participant had their own burning issue, but a few common concerns overarched the entire group. These were: the growth and legitimisation of the military-industrial complex, US militarisation of space and the conflicts in Afghanistan, the Middle East and South Asia. It was agreed that for peace workers to be most effective, liaisons need to be improved, not only amongst Europeans, but also with often isolated US activists, as well as with those from the South. The consensus was that we stand at a critical moment in time. We can either allow one government to fulfil its ambition of ‘full spectrum dominance’, unleashing unknown consequences, or we can group together to peacefully present an alternative: namely a democratised United Nations in which all peoples are treated equally and an International Criminal Court, which binds all states to international law. A statement of the network’s goals was drafted and a liaison committee is now being established which will coordinate actions throughout Europe.

David Ferrard

To join or find out more about the network e-mail Ken Coates at elfeuro@compuserve.com

Return to contents

Two months after September 11th, an AFSC delegation to six nations of Europe met with elected and appointed officials, with staff of the European Union and NATO, with peace organisations, development agencies, foundations, and ecumenical church councils to discuss the “war on terrorism.” We brought evidence of a US appeal for a creative, non-militarized response — an appeal barely visible to the world community. We sought dialogue on perspectives little heard in the US. In each of six nations, Quakers welcomed us into their meetinghouses and homes. The staff of the Quaker Council for European Affairs made possible an exceptionally informative three days of consultations.

Members of the delegation were recipients of expressions of genuine compassion, despite the familiarity of acts of terror in the European landscape. We understood allied participation in the militarised “war on terrorism” was connected, emotionally and strategically, to a number of factors including historical gratitude to and reliance upon the US, and a shared sense of vulnerability. Yet, pervasive in almost all discussions was the cautiously worded concern for our country’s disregard of treaties, its lack of consultation, and its use of multilateral partnerships for its own, not the world’s benefit. From peoples experienced in multilateral politics, we heard deep ambivalent feelings and disappointment that the economic and military powers of the U.S. were harnessed to unilateral actions.

With representatives of peace organizations we found a common phenomenon — moral argument, historical responsibility, and the futility of dependency upon weapons of destruction, had limited influence on some policy makers. Knowing that “the minority opposition will be sidelined without an alternative,” much interchange focused on viable alternative actions. We found that the language and practice of conflict prevention and conflict resolution are assertively pursued by NGOs and multilateral organizations alike. Those knowledgeable of international covenants and treaties stipulated actions to be taken to hinder terrorist acts. Trying to prevent future wars is the focus of work for many. We explored support for the creation of a UN Security Council sponsored international tribunal, finding interest yet no locus of energy. For the establishment of the International Criminal Court we found unqualified support.

In Brussels we heard John Welton’s encouragement: “There is a huge international effort to respond to terrorism. There needs to be a huge response to act in a different way.” The trip, from our perspective, increased the ability to call for a strategically new paradigm in the midst of brutal violence. Among its recommendations, the AFSC delegation offered increased support for the use of international legal remedies and the repertoire of concerted initiatives in the field of conflict prevention, intervention and resolution.

For a complete report, please contact AFSC at eenloe@afsc.org

Return to contents

There is, however, another method about which we hear little, although it gets a lot of attention here in Brussels. The European Union is a fine practitioner of this approach. As the world’s largest aid donor, its efforts to promote poverty reduction and sustainable development can be interpreted as primary conflict resolution/prevention tools. Up until recently trade initiatives, namely preferential access to EC markets and development assistance, have formed part of the EU’s most influential leverage. Without a European army, it has been unable to exert its influence militarily, although things are changing here with the recent developments in the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, namely the formation of the interventionist Rapid Reaction Force. The subject of a new QCEA project is to examine just how effective EU development aid is as a conflict prevention strategy.

One of the plethora of bi- and multi-lateral EU trade agreements with non Member States is the EU-African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Cotonou Agreement. Signed on the 23rd June 2000 it is primarily an economic cooperation agreement between the EU and 77 ACP countries, though it has far reaching political implications. By calling for a stronger and wider political dialogue and insisting on the necessity of ‘good governance’, it sets out certain conditions which need to be met if cooperation is to continue. Performance based aid allocations and the threat of ‘smart sanctions’ should make the spending of funds more transparent and democratic. The danger of this, of course, is that Western models of governance are forced upon these countries and that top-down conditions transform what should be a partnership into a clearly unequal relationship. To avoid this a large emphasis is laid on ownership, recognising the importance of cooperation programmes based on the developing countries’ own strategies, thus allowing for their particular situation, local culture and history.

What is most exciting about the Cotonou agreement is that it is the first EU-ACP agreement with a specific article on peace-building policies, conflict prevention and resolution. Article 11 sets out policy guidelines of which the overall objective is ‘preventing violent conflicts at an early stage by addressing their root-causes in a targeted manner, and with an adequate combination of all available instruments’. Proactive measures have been adopted in dealing with conflict-torn areas, including constructive engagement based on inclusive political dialogue. The Commission’s ‘Communication on Conflict Prevention’, finalised in April 2001, acknowledges that development policy provides ‘the most powerful instruments at the Community’s disposal for treating the root causes of conflict’. Lessons learned from other partnerships have proven that the implementation of peace agreements must involve cooperation activities spanning all sectors in order to re-establish structural stability. This includes sustainable economic development as well as respect for human rights and viable political structures.

The QCEA project will look at how effectively Article 11 of the Cotonou Agreement is being implemented. This will involve analysis of both policy and implementation. I will be working in collaboration with the European Peace-building Liaison Office (EPLO) and the consultation process will include Commission officials as well as the ACP Secretariat in Brussels and the embassies of six African countries which have been selected for the project. These six focus countries represent a cross-section of conflict types. The EPLO members with workers in the field will provide information to help collate an impression of what is actually happening on the ground.

The challenge facing the Commission is to ensure that its development policy and cooperation programmes have a clear focus on addressing the root causes of conflict. This requires integration at the policy level and an increased impact and efficiency of implementation. This must include working with Member States and other donors so as to pool resources and expertise.

David Ferrard

A report of this project’s findings will be available by summer 2002 for QCEA Associate Members and those interested. Feedback and suggestions are welcome at mailto:dferrard@qcea.org

Return to contents

Good news for COs

In Spain military service was abolished as of 31st December 2001. In Hungary a law is being passed to reduce the length of military service. In Serbia a new conscientious objection law is being passed with a civilian service alternative. In the Russian city Nishrij Novgorod the mayor has permitted the right to civilian service.

Return to contents

QCEA seeks applications for this appointment, which has a central part in QCEA’s double task: bringing Quaker concerns before people who work in and around the European political institutions; and informing Friends of events in Europe that call for our attention. The post is based in Brussels.

The appointment is for a man or woman member of one of the European Yearly Meetings, or a couple, one or both in membership.

They need to be:

- very familiar with the life and work of their own YM;

- experienced in the management of a small professional organisation;

- able to communicate simply and clearly about Friends’ concerns, speaking and writing in English and in at least one other European language, to a variety of audiences in many countries.

The post could suit different stages in a career, so the salary etc is open for discussion; so is the period of the contract, but it is envisaged to be between 3 and 6 years.

Further details from the clerk of the selection committee:

David Barkla

36 Majorfield Road, Topsham, EXETER, EX3 0ES, GB (tel: +44 (0)1392 876825)

Applications must reach David Barkla not later than 30 April.

[Please draw this announcement to the attention of any Friends who you think might be interested in it.]

Return to content

Return to contents

Back to the main Around Europe page