You are on page 1of 23

Truth and Reconciliation Mission:

A Preliminary Emotional Relief

By: Saed Kakei, Ph.D. Student,

Nova Southeastern University Department of Conflict Analysis & Resolution Ph.D. Program

The struggle of man against power, is the struggle of memory against forgetting.

Milan Kundera

When we struggle for power, memory gets developed to prevent us from further struggles. Yet, it is our perceptions with which we manipulate memory to be perceived by others as positive or negative.

The interconnection between history and memory has been analyzed in:
The study of national identity how constructed and imagined, as in the imagined communities of Benedict Anderson, both from the elitist top-down and from the bottom-up narratives emerge from collective memories. For social movements, history and memory represent a tool kit (Ann Swidler) of images and subjects used to reframe a social movements objectives to solidify its legitimacy and dynamic strength.

History, Memory and Conflict


The role of history and memory in the study of conflict is critically important. If conflict is caused by human, then how is the we of humans constructed if not on the basis of shared history and memory? Conflict is often entails the use of force, exclusion, extermination and suppression to create the ideal homogenous society. The elevation of one groups history and memory comes at the expense of another groups history and memory they are effectively written out of history (Lazaro, 1995). Individual memory can have a significant on the buildup of a conflict, an essential foundation for ethnic/cultural conflict.

Why focus on memoirs, narratives and oral studies and not just on works of history?

1. Because conventional histories focus on unfriendly institutions, processes or paradigms which do not allow for an understanding of how individual lives are affected. 2. In order to re-capture the dignity of the individual, especially important in the context of conflicts which occur at the expense of individual lives, we must turn to other disciplines like anthropology and other resources such as memoirs.

History and memory represent distinct ways of representing the past History
Authoritative, selective interpretation of the past Structured as a formal, linear (chronological) narrative Often teleological in the sense of history as progress toward ever better outcomes Fixed prevailing attitude until formally challenged by new schools of thought.

Memory
Can be collective or individual Can co-exist with history either in tension or as reenforcing narratives that legitimate official histories Can represent alternative renditions of the past through oral literature Not fixed but alterable.

History and memory are distinct constructions of the past


Sometimes overlap and reinforce each other as in the case of national identity formation. Other times at odds with one another as in the case of colonial histories that conflict with the individual and collective memories of those subject to colonial rule.

Examples of conflicting histories and memories in contemporary politics


The efforts made to construct the history of past Iraq as a triumphal account of the success of pan-Arab nationalism conflicts with the individual and collective memories of those dispossessed by the Saddam Husseins Baathist regime. The efforts to appropriate the history of Kurdish resistance to Iraqi Baathist rule as the exclusive property of particular political elites conflicts with the individual and collective memories of those who actually participated in that resistance.

Recent Conflict Barometer


In 2010, a total of 363 conicts were observed. 6 were inter-state war and 22 intra-state wars, amounting to 28 highly-violent conicts, i.e. conicts with the use of massive violence. Sporadic violence occurred in 126 conicts, classied as crises. 209 conicts were conducted without the use of violent force, with 109 conicts being classied as latent and 100 as manifest conicts. While the number of crises rose from 110 to 126, the number of highly violent conicts sunk considerably from 25 severe crises and eight wars, i.e. 33 highly violent conicts, in 2009, to 22 severe crises and six wars, i.e. 28 highly-violent conicts, in 2010. * The competing groups must reconcile themselves with the past, as well as the future.
* Source: Heidelberg Institute for International Conict Research (2010): Conict Barometer 2010, Heidelberg.

Anatomy of a Conflict: Analytical Framework


StructuralSystemic Perspective

Insecurity Humiliation
Emotional Perspective

Interests Perspective

Indignation Confusion

Cognitive Perspective

Violation Victimization

Post Conflict Options


Amnesty Trials and Justice Negotiated Restitution Political re-education Transitional justice Truth Commissions Reconciliation Missions

Transitional justice
Transitional justice showcases two different ways of dealing with the past: 1. The rst involves an effort to address the legacy of violence as the basis for promoting reconciliation, rather than prosecuting perpetrators in order to pursue justice 2. The second model puts the onus on justice through trials.

Theory
Johan Galtung: Positive Peace
Positive peace is more than the absence of violence; it is the presence of social justice through equal opportunity, a fair distribution of power and resources, equal protection and impartial enforcement of law. Michel Foucault: Discourse as Power
Interpretation of reality is an assertion of power

Truth Commissions vs. Reconciliation Missions


Developed over the past 30 years Presently, there are 30 or so TRCs A new developing concept Personal Initiative awaiting support There are no physical TRM presence anywhere in the world Definition: It is an initial delicate reconciliation process during which a perpetrator agrees to meet with his/her victims in the presence of a mitigation practitioner to not only provide an accurate account of the occurred human rights abuse(s), but also formally apologize to the victims and seek their forgiveness.

There have been TRCs on 4 continents Definitions vary Ron Kraybill:


Reconciliation as an interpersonal or intergroup encounter is a difficult and delicate process that is not simply a matter of the head, but more so of the heart.

Characteristics TRC TRM


Defined time limit of operation Created at a point of transition Officially sanctioned Non-Judicial bodies Authority for unusual access to investigate sensitive issues Focus on the past Investigate Patterns of abuse over time Focus on human rights violations Conclude with a report No time limit of operation Initiated at a point of transition Not sanctioned, but seek official protection Non-Judicial bodies Seek permission for unusual access to investigate Focus on the past to improve future relations Mitigate patterns of past abuse Focus on human rights violations Conclude with a documented oral & written apology with the promise to advocate human rights.

TRC
Record the past Identify perpetrators Overcome denial Restore dignity & Promote peace Educate about the past Prevent future violence Form basis for Democratic order Promote legitimate reconciliation and stabilize new regime Create a collective memory

Goals
Identify perpetrators Overcome denial

TRM

Let go of the past with apologies & forgiveness Restore dignity & Promote peace Educate about the past Prevent future violence Form basis for Democratic peace Promote legitimate reconciliation and social harmony Create a collective memory

A TRM Model in Transition


The model is malleable
Consent Local Social Condition Local Political Situation Local Reconciliation Methods Local Religion Funding

This is its greatest strength

Role of TRM
Although it starts with a small group (victims, perpetrators, and mitigate practitioners), TRM goals are national Media, Academic, and Politics play a huge role Custom plays a huge role Perpetrator's recorded apology is used as a healing The ultimate goal is to reconcile groups (identity groups)

Strengths
Provides dignity to victims Converts perpetrators to human rights advocates Provides recognition of past crimes Defeats Impunity Humanizes the Other Provides peace & security De-legitimizes denial of violent past

Weaknesses
Truth is not always an original form of reconciliation TRM model may be viewed as illegitimate tribal practice Suitable only for the willing participants (victims & perpetrators) Lack of government/donor funding Lack of minority/privileged participation Hard to represent all views Too open to the charge of purposeful manipulation of victims truths Truth may never be recorded and told.

Summary of RTM
One among many options Model in transition Malleability Acknowledges and addresses emotional sufferings Individual to Communal impact Legitimizes new options by refuting the old

References:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Kundera, M. (1999). The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. New York: HarperPerennial Modern Classics. Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities. London: Verso. Swidler, A. (2001). Talk of love: How culture matters. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Lazaro J. F. (1995). The Distorted Past: A Reinterpretation of Europe. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Davis, J. (2005). Papa Bear, The Life and Legacy of George Halas. New York: McGraw-Hill. Jehn, K. (1994), "Enhancing effectiveness: an investigation of advantages and disadvantages of value-based intragroup conflict", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 5 pp.223-38. Lanegran, K. 2005). Kimberly. "Truth Commissions, Human Rights Trials, and the Politics of Memory." Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 25, no.1 Galtung, Reader in Peace Studies. Grenz, S. (1996). A primer on postmodernism. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

7. 8. 9.

10. Kraybill, R. (1988). From Head to Heart: The Cycle of Reconciliation. Conciliation Quarterly, Vol. 7 No. 4. 11. Chapman AR, Ball P. 2001. The Truth of Truth Commissions: Comparative Lessons from Haiti, South Africa, and Guatemala. Human Rights Quarterly Vol. 23: pgs. 1-43

Questions?

You might also like