Bruken og virkningen av feilinformasjon og desinformasjon i FNs fredsbevarende operasjoner
A Forgotten People in An Unstable Region - The Effectiveness of the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei Executive Summary
Established in June 2011, UNISFA aims to foster peace, stability, and development in the disputed Abyei region. Focused on implementing the Abyei Protocol, the mission addresses border demarcation (through the Joint Border Verification Monitoring Mechanism for the Sudan-South Sudan boundary since South Sudan’s independence in 2011) and security concerns and supports local governance through engagement with administrations. However, since 2011, UNISFA’s effectiveness in fulfilling its mandate and protecting civilians has been questioned as sporadic and spontaneous violence remains very high. While the overall security situation in Abyei has shown signs of improvement, persistent conflict dynamics stemming from intra- and inter-communal tensions, hired armed elements, and humanitarian challenges continue to set the region back. The rise of communal conflicts between new ethnicities and communities entering the “Abyei box” – often referred to as the Abyei area – has led to further tensions with the mission over its ability to protect civilians. In this Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) study, the authors set out to explore the effectiveness of UNISFA in meeting its mandated tasks in several areas. These include: 1. Protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence; 2. Support the Joint Border Verification and Monitoring Mechanism; 3. Provide de-mining assistance, technical advice, and security; and 4. Provide aid to humanitarian personnel and oil infrastructure in the Abyei Administrative Area (AAA), respectively. The report examines how effective the mission has been in meeting its core mandate, what we can understand from the mission’s success and challenges, and how adaptive the mission has been regarding the ongoing crisis in Sudan and South Sudan and its impact on Abyei, which has strategic and broader implications for the mission. Co-authors Dr Andrew E. Yaw Tchie – Senior Fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs and Training for Peace Programme. Dr Fiifi Edu-Afful – Visiting Fulbright Scholar-in-Residence at the American University School of International Service and the University of Maryland Department of Government & Politics. He was formerly a Senior Research Fellow at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC). Contributing authors Christian Ulfsten – former Research Assistant with the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. Ruth Adwoa Frimpong – Project Consultant with the German Corporation for International Cooperation (GIZ) Nigeria. EPON series editor Dr Cedric de Coning, Research Professor – Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI).
A Forgotten People in an Unstable Region - The Effectiveness of the United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei
Established in June 2011, UNISFA aims to foster peace, stability, and development in the disputed Abyei region. Focused on implementing the Abyei Protocol, the mission addresses border demarcation (through the Joint Border Verification Monitoring Mechanism for the Sudan-South Sudan boundary since South Sudan’s independence in 2011) and security concerns and supports local governance through engagement with administrations. However, since 2011, UNISFA’s effectiveness in fulfilling its mandate and protecting civilians has been questioned as sporadic and spontaneous violence remains very high. While the overall security situation in Abyei has shown signs of improvement, persistent conflict dynamics stemming from intra- and inter-communal tensions, hired armed elements, and humanitarian challenges continue to set the region back. The rise of communal conflicts between new ethnicities and communities entering the “Abyei box” – often referred to as the Abyei area – has led to further tensions with the mission over its ability to protect civilians. In this Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) study, the authors set out to explore the effectiveness of UNISFA in meeting its mandated tasks in several areas. These include: 1. Protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence; 2. Support the Joint Border Verification and Monitoring Mechanism; 3. Provide de-mining assistance, technical advice, and security; and 4. Provide aid to humanitarian personnel and oil infrastructure in the Abyei Administrative Area (AAA), respectively. The report examines how effective the mission has been in meeting its core mandate, what we can understand from the mission’s success and challenges, and how adaptive the mission has been regarding the ongoing crisis in Sudan and South Sudan and its impact on Abyei, which has strategic and broader implications for the mission. Co-authors Dr Andrew E. Yaw Tchie – Senior Fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs and Training for Peace Programme. Dr Fiifi Edu-Afful – Visiting Fulbright Scholar-in-Residence at the American University School of International Service and the University of Maryland Department of Government & Politics. He was formerly a Senior Research Fellow at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC). Contributing authors Christian Ulfsten – former Research Assistant with the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. Ruth Adwoa Frimpong – Project Consultant with the German Corporation for International Cooperation (GIZ) Nigeria. EPON series editor Dr Cedric de Coning, Research Professor – Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI).
The Impact and Response to Misinformation, Disinformation, Malinformation and Hate Speech in the Digital Era Executive Summary
Over the past decades, the use of misinformation, malinformation, disinformation and hate speech (MDMH) has contributed to the escalation of violence in environments where the United Nations deployed Peacekeeping Operations (UN PKO). The widespread utilisation of modern technology in UN PKO environments raises the magnitude of the MDMH threat. In some settings, MDMH places communities and peacekeepers at risk of harm, but more broadly, MDMH places UN PKOs in ever more challenging situations which they are often incapable of responding to. The spread of information by actors as part of hearts and minds campaigns and other information strategies to bring populations on the ground on their side is nothing new. Simultaneously, the diffusion of rumours and false information can contribute to the escalation of tensions between and within groups and communities and result in widespread violence. All of these can support and contribute to the intensification and acceleration of MDMH, impacting not only the conflict dynamics but also the use of indiscriminate violence. The online uptake of MDMH may further aggravate these dynamics. It can undermine the stability of mission environments, local conflicts, indiscriminate use of violence by non-state and state actors, impact detrimentally on human rights, and jeopardise overall processes of achieving and sustaining peace and supporting its processes. The report draws on four UN PKOs as case studies and hinges further analysis on two UN PKOs to provide and understand context specific examples of the rising challenges that UN PKO face with MDMH. This report by the Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) in collaboration with Norwegian Capacity (NORCAP) and Training for Peace sets out to explore some of these key developments and challenges questioning, what is the impact of MDMH on UN PKO’s and their ability to effectively implement their mandates? What efforts have the selected UN PKO’s taken to respond to MDMH? What are the lessons identified and recommendations for UNPKOs to address MDMH?
The Impact and Response to Misinformation, Disinformation, Malinformation and Hate Speech in the Digital Era
Over the past decades, the use of misinformation, malinformation, disinformation and hate speech (MDMH) has contributed to the escalation of violence in environments where the United Nations deployed Peacekeeping Operations (UN PKO). The widespread utilisation of modern technology in UN PKO environments raises the magnitude of the MDMH threat. In some settings, MDMH places communities and peacekeepers at risk of harm, but more broadly, MDMH places UN PKOs in ever more challenging situations which they are often incapable of responding to. The spread of information by actors as part of hearts and minds campaigns and other information strategies to bring populations on the ground on their side is nothing new. Simultaneously, the diffusion of rumours and false information can contribute to the escalation of tensions between and within groups and communities and result in widespread violence. All of these can support and contribute to the intensification and acceleration of MDMH, impacting not only the conflict dynamics but also the use of indiscriminate violence. The online uptake of MDMH may further aggravate these dynamics. It can undermine the stability of mission environments, local conflicts, indiscriminate use of violence by non-state and state actors, impact detrimentally on human rights, and jeopardise overall processes of achieving and sustaining peace and supporting its processes. The report draws on four UN PKOs as case studies and hinges further analysis on two UN PKOs to provide and understand context specific examples of the rising challenges that UN PKO face with MDMH. This report by the Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) in collaboration with Norwegian Capacity (NORCAP) and Training for Peace sets out to explore some of these key developments and challenges questioning, what is the impact of MDMH on UN PKO’s and their ability to effectively implement their mandates? What efforts have the selected UN PKO’s taken to respond to MDMH? What are the lessons identified and recommendations for UNPKOs to address MDMH?
Public–Private Development Cooperation: Interface and Conflicting Logics in the Formation of a Strategic Partnership
I denne artikkelen tar Jon Harald Sande Lie for seg offentlig-privat samarbeid (PPP) i bistandssektoren og hvordan dette kan føre til at offentlige bistandsmidler, egentlig ment for fattigdomsbekjempelse, ender opp med å fremme norske private aktørers interesser i Etiopia. Mer overordnet handler den om hvordan PPP-agendaen i bistandssektoren etablerer relasjoner mellom aktører med konkurrerende logikker som vanskelig lar seg forene i praktisk partnerskap og som dermed bidrar PPP i praksis til å undergrave PPP-agendaens hensikt. Empirisk handler artikkelen om Norads innovative strategisk partnerskapsprogram for å koble norsk næringsliv sammen med bistandsaktører i såkalte ‘public-private partnerships’ (PPP); og den handler om hvordan det offentlige Norge med kronprinsparet i spissen ledet an en større næringslivsdelegasjon til Etiopia på søken etter investeringsmuligheter og kontrakter. Og den handler om Yaras visjon om å utvinne pottaske for kunstgjødselproduksjon i Dallol, i Etiopias Afar-ørken – et prosjekt de var villige til å investere en milliard dollar i, men som de etter sigende endte med å selge for en dollar. Og den handler om det strategiske partnerskapet mellom Utviklingsfondet og Yara, og om hvordan ambisjonen og presset om å få til et strategisk partnerskap gjorde at Utviklingsfondet engasjerte seg i et bistandsprosjekt utenfor sitt etablerte kompetanseområde: om å renovere en yrkesskole, fra pensum til infrastruktur, for å kunne gi lokale ungdom utdannelse og dermed Yara bedre tilgang på kvalifisert arbeidskraft. Samtidig er det ikke det artikkelen egentlig handler om. Egentlig handler artikkelen om PPP-agendaen i praksis. PPP er ikke nytt, men det representerer et nytt mantra i bistandssektoren, hvor viktigheten etableres i og av bærekraftsmålene (nr. 17) hvor offentlig-privat samarbeid ansees som avgjørende for å frigjøre det årlige behovet for 2,5 billioner dollar for å realisere de 16 andre SDGene. PPP ser bra ut på tegnebrettet, men kart og terreng er ikke det samme. Artikkelen går forbi det offisielle nivået, hva som står i kontrakter, og som ytres i festtaler, til å se på PPP i praksis og hva som skjer i møtepunktet mellom offentlig og private aktører. Artikkelen viser hvordan private og bistandsaktører følger to forskjellige logikker og ansvarlighetsregimer, som vanskelig lar seg forene i praksis og i reelt partnerskap. Bistanden følger en ‘not for profit’-logikk, hvor organisasjonen forholder seg til et dobbelt ansvarlighetsregime: ‘oppover’ til bevilgende myndigheter og deres krav, og ‘nedover’ til mottagerne og deres rettigheter, behov og ønsker. Private aktører derimot, har en ‘for profit’-logikk der de i all hovedsak står til ansvar overfor investorer og eiere. Disse forskjellene gjør reelt partnerskap vanskelig. Således viser artikkelen til en mer fundamental utfordring med offentlig-privat samarbeid i bistandssektoren: at koblingene mellom aktørene, praksisene og kunnskapsfeltene som PPP-agendaen iscenesetter bidrar til å undergrave PPP i praksis. Artikkelen viser således hvordan et offentlig finansiert bistandsprosjekt blir en proxy for private interesser, men ikke nødvendigvis pga. dårlige intensjoner eller motstridende interesser blant de involverte aktørene, men heller som et resultat av de praksisene og kunnskapskampene som PPP agendaen produserer i praksis.
UN Peace Operations & Human Rights: A Thematic Study Executive Summary
Denne studien av Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) undersøker bidragene fra FNs menneskerettighetsarbeid innenfor et bredt spekter av FNs fredsoperasjoner, inkludert fredsbevarende oppdrag, politiske oppdrag og regionale kontor for konfliktforebygging. Kjernespørsmålene i denne studien er: (1) Hvordan bidrar FNs menneskerettighetsengasjement til den samlede effekten av FNs fredsoperasjoner, inkludert beskyttelse av sivile? (2) Samlet sett, hvordan bidrar FNs fredsoperasjoner i seg selv til menneskerettighetsutfall? og (3) Hvilken lærdom kan trekkes ved å sammenligne ulike FNs fredsoperasjoner når det gjelder å bygge bedre synergier mellom menneskerettighetsfokuserte aktiviteter og det øvrige oppdragsarbeidet? Målet med rapporten er å tilby en komparativ, empirisk støttet vurdering av måtene FNs fredsoperasjoners innsats for å fremme menneskerettigheter bidrar til oppdragets effektivitet og bredere oppdragsmål. Hovedforfatter Prof. Charles T. Hunt – Senior Fellow, United Nations University Centre for Policy Research/ Senior Research Associate, Institute for Security Studies/Professor of Global Security, RMIT University Medforfattere Ms Emma Bapt – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research Dr Adam Day – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research Dr Fiifi Edu-Afful – Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC) Ms Abigail Gérard-Baldé – Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC) Ms Hafsa Maalim – Independent researcher Ms Wendy MacClinchy – Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC) Ms Nadia Nata – Independent researcher Dr Claudia Pfeifer Cruz – Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
UN Peace Operations & Human Rights: A Thematic Study
Denne studien av Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) undersøker bidragene fra FNs menneskerettighetsarbeid innenfor et bredt spekter av FNs fredsoperasjoner, inkludert fredsbevarende oppdrag, politiske oppdrag og regionale kontor for konfliktforebygging. Kjernespørsmålene i denne studien er: (1) Hvordan bidrar FNs menneskerettighetsengasjement til den samlede effekten av FNs fredsoperasjoner, inkludert beskyttelse av sivile? (2) Samlet sett, hvordan bidrar FNs fredsoperasjoner i seg selv til menneskerettighetsutfall? og (3) Hvilken lærdom kan trekkes ved å sammenligne ulike FNs fredsoperasjoner når det gjelder å bygge bedre synergier mellom menneskerettighetsfokuserte aktiviteter og det øvrige oppdragsarbeidet? Målet med rapporten er å tilby en komparativ, empirisk støttet vurdering av måtene FNs fredsoperasjoners innsats for å fremme menneskerettigheter bidrar til oppdragets effektivitet og bredere oppdragsmål. Hovedforfatter Prof. Charles T. Hunt – Senior Fellow, United Nations University Centre for Policy Research/ Senior Research Associate, Institute for Security Studies/Professor of Global Security, RMIT University Medforfattere Ms Emma Bapt – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research Dr Adam Day – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research Dr Fiifi Edu-Afful – Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC) Ms Abigail Gérard-Baldé – Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC) Ms Hafsa Maalim – Independent researcher Ms Wendy MacClinchy – Center for Civilians in Conflict (CIVIC) Ms Nadia Nata – Independent researcher Dr Claudia Pfeifer Cruz – Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
BRICS - en allianse mot verden
BRICS utvidast. Russland overtar samstundes leiarskapen i organisasjonen som utfordrar Vesten. Kva kan skje? NUPI-forskar Julie Wilhelmsen er ein av deltakarane i denne samtala i NRK-programmet Debatt i P2.
UNMISS 2022 Mandate Renewal: Risks and Opportunities in an Uncertain Peace Process
I forkant av fornyelsen i mars 2022 av mandatet for FNs misjon i Sør-Sudan (UNMISS), gjennomførte Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON) en vurdering fokusert på to kjernemandatområder: beskyttelse av sivile (PoC) og støtte til freden prosess. Basert på vurderingen som følger, legger rapporten opp flere strategiske hensyn for det nye UNMISS-mandatet.