Welcome to the Common Ground Blog
The Common Ground Blog is an initiative of (Search for Common Ground), an international non-governmental organization (NGO), headquartered in Washington and Brussels, whose mission is to transform the way the world deals with conflict - away from adversarial confrontation towards cooperative solutions. (more here)
By Adrienne DiCerbo
Nearly everyone agrees that children should be protected and nurtured and it is this common belief which spurred the United Nations to create the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC) back in 1989.
But, to date, the United States is one of only two UN member nations (the other being Somalia) that have not ratified the CRC. This raises the question: What common ground must be reached in order for U.S. debate on the Convention to be put to rest?
The convention protects children’s (persons under 18) rights such as the right to a name, education and to express his/her own values. In addition, it calls for nations to ensure a child’s protection against abduction, slavery and sexual exploitation.
Nations that ratify the CRC must comply with its standards; they are required to report to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child and are periodically evaluated on their progress of implementing the CRC in their country.
The U.S. helped draft the CRC, signing it in 1995 and even ratified two separate protocols addressing children in armed conflict and sexually exploited children but its own ratification is still under debate. The debate is nearly two decades old—with those for and against ratification struggling to reach an agreement.
Media frenzy surrounding the debate had long eased until recently when Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the United Nations, during a visit to the Harlem Children’s Zone mentioned current White House talks over the CRC. According to Rice, Obama administration officials are discussing “when and how it may be possible to join [the Convention].”
Such attention, coupled with the upcoming 20th anniversary of the adoption of the CRC by the UN General Assembly, makes it likely that the issue of U.S. ratification will be of heightened interest in the coming months. Groups opposed to the ratification point to concerns about national sovereignty. Opponents such as the Home School Legal Defense Association argue the CRC would usurp parents’ rights, namely the right to educate their children as they see fit.
Though signatories have not reported issues regarding parents’ rights as a result of ratifying the CRC, U.S. opponents argue that America should only ratify the convention once a parental rights amendment is added.
On the other hand, supporters of ratification believe that the move would ensure the necessary protection of children and signify U.S. solidarity in a global movement of concern for the wellbeing of children.
President Obama persistently stresses the value of collaboration and it remains to be seen how his administration will help opponents and supporters of the CRC to reconcile the 20 year old debate and find common ground.
SFCG and U.S. schools use common, creative tools to address youth
By Sarah Schwarz
Zachary was excited about joining the Cub Scouts. In his school lunch bag, the 6-year-old proudly packed a new multi-purpose camping utensil which could be used as a fork, knife or spoon. Zachary’s enthusiasm was short-lived, however, as he was promptly suspended for possession of a “weapon” and recommended for reform school.
The controversy surrounding Zachary and the Delaware school’s zero-tolerance policy was detailed in a recent New York Times article. In school districts across the U.S., such policies take a strict black and white approach to school violence, often disregarding circumstance and intent in favor of swift punishment. During the 2006-2007 school year, approximately 10,000 students were suspended in Baltimore while in Milwaukee, 40 percent of ninth graders were suspended at least once.
Critics of zero-tolerance policies argue that this approach may cause students more harm than good as suspended or expelled kids are pushed out of a safe environment and onto the street, where their behavior may only worsen.
School violence has decreased in recent years, but education experts say little credit should be given to zero-tolerance policies. Instead, they point to programs such as peer mediation and student support groups as the primary cause of the decline.
Ukraine: Youth mediators have fun at training
SFCG’s Children & Youth staff can attest to the power of such programs; in Morocco and Ukraine peer mediation projects have been highly successful at curbing school violence and transforming conflict in local communities.
Search staff recognized the desperate need for a new approach to quelling violence in Ukraine, where a majority of youth committed a misdemeanor crime before entering secondary school. The Ukrainian Centre for Common Ground (UCCG), SFCG’s local arm, has trained more than 600 students as peer mediators and educated more than 150 school psychologists.
Program trainers report overwhelmingly positive results: peer mediators are restoring calm in schools where there was once a constant police force and overall violence in Ukrainian schools is declining. Even more, the program has allowed students to envision new career opportunities as they become facilitators of among their peers.
In Morocco, a nearly two-year long project trained youth mediators and taught entrepreneurial skills, covering topics from negotiation and facilitation to human rights, education and advocacy. Read a previous blog about the mediation centers here.
Case studies, group exercises and role-playing were used to build the youth trainees’ skills and self-esteem, all with the ultimate goal of creating autonomous and enthusiastic mediators able to constructively tackle conflicts in their own neighborhoods.
Morocco: Youth rally outside of training center
The program has been successful and the proof is in the participants. A Moroccan youth mediator said it best, “Before, it seemed that power and authority were the best mechanism for resolving disputes. […] With mediation, youths have the capacity and tools to resolve conflict without the ‘old people.’ It’s not owned by anyone – anyone can practice it.”
Learn more about SFCG Children and Youth programs: http://www.sfcg.org/programmes/children/whatwedo.html
Download the latest Children and Youth newsletter featuring Morocco and Ukraine intiatives
Read the NY Times article “It’s a Fork, It’s a Spoon, It’s a…Weapon?”
By Juontel White
The Washington Network on Children in Armed Conflict (WNCAC) is a community of NGOs, scholars, practitioners and government agencies dedicated to improving the protection of children affected by armed conflict. Initiated in 2004 by SFCG and USAID’s Displaced Children and Orphans Fund, the network convenes at bi-monthly meetings, each highlighting a relevant issue through a panel discussion.
The most recent meeting, hosted at John Hopkins School of International Studies in late October, was a discussion on the Machel Study 10-Year Strategic Review.
In 1996 Graça Machel, an international women’s and children’s rights advocate, was appointed by the U.N. to chair a study on how armed conflict impacts children. The results were devastating, Machel discovered the myriad of harmful effects armed conflict has on children. Her report included several recommendations which served as the basis for creating UN resolutions to protect children affected by armed conflict.
More than a decade has elapsed since the Machel Study was introduced and the 10 year Strategic Review is an analysis of the progress of and challenges faced by practitioners in the protection of children in armed conflict since that time.
The WNCAC meeting on the Review included panelists Bo Vikor Nylund, UNICEF Senior Advisor for Child Protection in Emergencies, Stephane Pichette UNICEF program manager and Tonderai Chikuhwa, special assistant to the UN Office for Children and Armed Conflict.
Chikuhwa began the discussion by explaining that that armed conflict in general has experienced notable changes during the last decade. In particular, the primary victims of armed conflict are now the most vulnerable citizens of society (women, elderly and children). And, children are now both victims and weapons of war.
He continued saying the Strategic Review addresses four key areas: ending impunity, care and protection of children, knowledge of state building capacities, and preventing conflict and building peace.
A key point in the Review is the paradigm shift in addressing children’s rights. Children’s rights is no longer addressed as only a human rights issue, but is now of concern to the international security council—in accordance with Machel’s recommendation.
This has been a crucial change, says Chikuhwa, because for children in armed conflict humanitarian responses must be paired with military/security force in order for protection efforts to be effective.
This change is groundbreaking because children’s rights is the first human rights issue to be placed on the Security Council’s agenda.
“This is because there exists a resounding moral consensus surrounding children’s issues,” says Chikuhwa. This consensus makes it easier for the international community to find common ground and join forces in support of the protection of children.
In addition, the shift has forced the Security Council to alter its mode of operation. Traditionally it was a reactive institution, responding to security breaches in specific countries as they happen, but now “the council is having to deal preemptively with situations if it is to evenly deal with children,” said Chikuhwa.
Humanitarian groups have also implemented preemptive measures. UNICEF’s Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism (MRM) is an example of this. As of October 2009, 15 countries have local MRM task forces dedicated to monitoring for behaviors that could lead to grave violations. These countries are the most notorious for violations against children and include; Columbia, Sudan, Myanmar and Uganda.
As manager of MRM task force in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Pichette is responsible for helping ensure the release of children from child soldiering.
“It is our job to work ourselves out of a job,” he jokes. The audience laughs but the irony is that it could happen; as it did for many of his colleagues involved with the Treaty to Ban the use of Landmines. The team had met their goals of banning landmines throughout the world and their positions were no longer relevant.
As of now, grave violations—which includes the killing and maiming, sexual exploitation, and recruitment and use of children in armed conflict—are still occurring against children and Pichette still has job security. He owes his job, in part, to the 1996 Machel Study which confirmed the relevance of and even helped create several of the panelists’ positions.
Prior to the Machel Study, there weren’t any international standards addressing children in armed conflict. According to the Strategic Review, the more than 10 UN resolutions formed in response to the report have been powerful in protecting the rights of children in armed conflict during the past decade.
In particular, Chikuhwa notes that since the adoption of UN resolution 1612 back in 2005, approximately 13,000 children have been released from recruitment and use in armed conflict. This is an early estimation and more details will be announced by the UN in coming months.
Overall, the Strategic Review is a positive assessment of the years since the Machel study, but there is still much work to be done. For instance, in regards to child soldiering, Nylund and Pichette remarked that though thousands of children have been released, there are some states in which practitioners are left asking themselves: what do we do next.
Negotiating the release of the children is a tedious process but the next step is developing a plan to reintegrate them into society—in a timely and efficient manner so the children are not tempted to return to soldiering.
Because of the success thus far in the protection of children in armed conflict, particularly in regards to its incorporation into the security council, children’s rights has now become a key UN actor, setting an example for other groups such as women’s rights and disabled rights. This was a highlight of the Review and is a motivator for members of the WNCAC to keep working hard.
By Karen Meberg and Juontel White
Every year since 1998, Search for Common Ground has presented Common Ground Awards to people and organizations that have made outstanding achievements in conflict resolution, community building and peacebuilding. Recipients came from all parts of the world and combined, their work positively impacts a variety of peoples and groups—from inner city youth to former child soldiers, small communities and international agencies.
This year Search for Common Ground honored the following awardees: CeaseFire, Luma Mufleh and the Fugees Family, Karen Armstrong, Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish, Congressmen John Lewis and Elwin Wilson, Playing for Change, Melissa Etheridge and Salman Ahmad.
The Ceremony
Reception guests enjoy food and a live jazz band
Hosted at the Canadian Embassy on October 29, the 2009 Common Ground Awards was a grand affair. The embassy was a prime location for the occasion as it is the only embassy to stand directly between Capitol Hill and the White House- and thus is a true symbol of common ground, Guy Saint-Jacques, Deputy Head of Mission for the Canadian Embassy jokingly remarked.
Ambassadors, musicians, congressmen and even her majesty, Queen Noor of Jordan, joined SFCG staff in celebrating the honorees. The evening began with a reception, where guests and recipients mingled while tasting savory appetizers and listening to the smooth sounds of gypsy jazz. Then, everyone filled an auditorium eager for the program to begin.
Mistress of Ceremonies, Susan Collin Marks, co-founder of Search for Common Ground, gave a warm greeting and awardees were each introduced through a 5-minute video montage. After the video, they were invited to the stage to accept their award and give a speech.
(l-r) Susan Collin Marks, Queen Noor congratulate Luma Mufleh on her award
The acceptance speeches were far from the provincial and curt thank-you remarks followed by traditional polite applause. Rather, recipients shared their personal stories, revealing the life changing experience(s) that motivated them to perform their work.
For some it was overcoming a tragedy, for others a serendipitous encounter; but all shared a common desire to make peace and uplift humanity. The sincerity of their stories caused tears to swell in the eyes of some audience members and all recipients received boisterous applause.
In addition to the speeches, several musical sections were interspersed throughout the program—namely a screening of “Ring the Bells”
Salman Ahmad performing live
SFCG’s promotional video by Melissa Etheridge and Salman Ahmad as well as a live performance by Ahmad, who strummed his guitar while singing a medley that included traditional Pakistani music and John Lennon’s “Imagine.”
SFCG Co-founder, John Marks gave closing remarks, and the celebrations were brought to an unwanted, but inevitable, end.
About the Awardees
CeaseFire is an antiviolence initiative in Chicago, IL and received the Common Ground Award for Community Peacebuilding.
Founded by Gary Slutkin, M.D. and based at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, CeaseFire treats gun violence as a public health problem, and works to cure it by changing both individual and community behavior.
Tio Hardiman accepts CeaseFire's award
Much of CeaseFire’s success has resulted from the work of “violence interrupters”—streetwise individuals (some former gang members) who use their connections to dispel conflicts before they become violent.
The Chicago community where CeaseFire was launched experienced a 67 percent decrease in crime within the program’s inaugural year. Tio Hardiman, director of CeaseFire Illinois, accepted CeaseFire’s Common Ground Award for Community Peacebuilding
In 2004, Luma Mufleh began coaching a team of refugee boys outside of Atlanta, GA. Two years later, she founded Fugees Family, Inc. an organization that uses soccer as a tool to give hope to child survivors of war and help them realize their potential.
The organization consists of a year-round soccer team and has expanded to include after-school tutoring, a private academy and an academic enrichment camp for about 90 boys, each of different backgrounds. On Fugees Family teams, Northern and Southern Sudanese, Sunni and Shia Muslims and boys of many other ethnicities all play together. Mufleh believes the collaborative nature of team sports allows the boys to put aside their differences and focus on their commonalities. She hopes to one day have girls join the team.
British author Karen Armstrong is widely known as one of the most provocative and original thinkers on religion and its role in the modern world. She has published more than 20 books on comparative religion, preaching the similarities of Islam, Judaism and Christianity.
In 2008, Armstrong received the TED Prize, which grants each recipient “One Wish to Change the World.” Armstrong’s wish was for the creation, propagation and launch of a Charter for Compassion, based on the principles of universal justice and respect. The Charter focuses on what Armstrong believes is the one thing all major religious, spiritual and ethical traditions have in common: the mandate for compassion!
Submissions to the Charter were open to the public and more than 150,000 people from over 180 countries contributed their words. The final document will be unveiled on November 14 and on that day, will be posted in churches, mosques, temples and other religious centers throughout the world. Though she was unable to attend the ceremony, Armstrong sent a video acceptance speech to SFCG.
Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish is a Palestinian doctor who has practiced in Israel and the Palestinian Territories. He has conducted joint research projects with Israeli physicians and worked to bring injured Palestinians to Israel for treatment.
As one of the few Palestinians with a work permit in Israel, Dr. Abuelaish serves as a bridge between the two worlds. During the Gaza crisis earlier this year, three of his daughters and a niece were killed in their home. Despite his grief, Dr. Abuelaish remains committed to spreading his message of forgiveness, hope and non-violence between Israelis and Palestinians.
In honor of his daughters’ legacy, Dr. Abuelaish is developing a foundation that will provide leadership training and access to education for Middle Eastern women.
Rep. John Lewis' speech expresses his deep gratitude
Almost 50 years ago, Representative John Lewis was a member of the Freedom Riders, a move that would propel him to become anational leader of the Civil Rights Movement. When he and other Freedom Riders attempted to enter a waiting “Whites Only” area in Rock Hill, SC he was brutally attacked by a mob.
Elwin Wilson was part of that mob. This January, the two men met on Capitol Hill, where Wilson expressed remorse for his racist attitudes and for taking part in Lewis’ beating.
Rep. Lewis and John Wilson embrace after accepting their award
Rep. Lewis forgave Mr. Wilson without hesitation and the two hope that their reconciliation will inspire others who were involved in Civil Rights-era violence to come forward and work towards healing the wounds of racism thatpersist in the United States.
Two music videos, both expressing messages of peace and unity, were shown at this year’s awards. “Stand By Me,” produced by Playing For Change (PFC), is an international collaboration of 37 musicians. PFC traveled the world collecting footage of musicians playing Ben King’s classic. The video has become one this year’s most unexpected cultural phenomena and has gone viral, with over 20 million views online.
Ring The Bells was created as a result of conversations and jam sessions between Melissa Etheridge and Salman Ahmad. The song blends Melissa’s raspy vocals and pop-folk style with Salman’s Sufi singing in a call for worldwide unity and change. The video was produced by Participant Media, whose mission is to tell compelling stories that raise awareness on global issues and encourage the audience to make a difference. Youtchi von Lintel accepted the award on behalf of Participant Media.
By Alisa Albee
Search for Common Ground is one of the largest peacebuilding organizations worldwide. We are often asked how do we do what we do? Integral to our operations and success is our Design, Monitoring, and Evaluation team.
Fondly known as DM&E, our specialists provide essential information to our many programs. Below are answers to some frequently asked questions regarding DM&E. It’s a compilation of responses from Search’s Washington-based DM&E specialist Jerome Helfft, Regional DM&E Advisor in Guinea Patrick Masuba, and my own research as intern for SFCG’s Children & Youth Department.
What is the role of DM&E in Search for Common Ground programs?
DM&E is the backbone of SFCG programs. It develops a framework for SFCG to create programs and projects but is also a way to examine the their impact. DM&E provides an opportunity for programs to reflect, learn and improve the effectiveness of their work and pave the way for future projects.
What are Design, Monitoring and Evaluation?
Design is the process of transforming an idea into a tangible program. The key to design is creating a framework of prioritized objectives that will achieve the overall goal of the project. Each objective is, thus, a step towards the goal. Design also involves the creation of indicators that allow a program to gage the success of its project. For example, if a project goal were to facilitate the participation of marginalized groups into a country’s democratic process, then an indicator of the project’s success would be the percentage of people from the marginalized group who report participating in democratic decision-making. These clear statistics can help a program assess whether or not it’s on target for reaching its goal.
Monitoring is an ongoing process that tracks project implementation by evaluating the immediate results of accomplished activities. For instance, monitoring can involve surveying participants immediately after training to determine what they learned.
Evaluations are conducted at the onset and conclusion of a project in order to assess the project’s impact on the targeted population. Occasionally, a program may conduct an evaluation long after a project has ended to appraise its long-term effects. The evaluation results are used to improve the effectiveness of current programs and fuel concepts for newer ones.
How are evaluations conducted?
There are multiple tools that can be used to evaluate a project including; surveys, questionnaires, interviews and discussion groups. Each tool has a unique purpose and its use depends on the type of information a program is trying to gather.
According to Patrick Masuba, focus group discussions and key informant interviews are useful for capturing qualitative data—which helps to “describe situations or issues, before, during and after the life span of the project.” Surveys and questionnaires, on the other hand, are ideal for quantitative data—concise, hard statistics such as the number of people who experienced positive attitude changes as a result of the project.
Is DM&E a universal process for all Search programs?
The same general process and techniques of DM&E are used for each SFCG programs but for some, there are differences. For the Children and Youth Program, DM&E must be altered to effectively reach that target group.
Children have shorter attention spans then adults, so it is important to ensure that questionnaires and surveys are short and concise and that interviews are not lengthy. In addition, questions are simplified so that surveys are easily understood by youth.
When conducting focus group discussions, the size should be limited between 7 (ideal) to 10 youth. And, it is advisable to obtain parent permission and/or go through the structure (office, community, facilitators) established within the community.
What challenges does DM&E experience when working with Children and Youth?
Most children and youth are willing to participate in evaluations, but there are several challenges to collecting data. First, surveys and other tools of evaluation take time to administer, and does not easily fit into the schedule of the project. Working with project facilitators to choose an evaluation tool that fits their schedule is key to achieving both the goal of DM&E and the SFCG program.
A second challenge is though children are typically enthusiastic about partaking in the evaluation, they often do not fully understand the importance or duties of their role as an evaluee. Lastly, it can be difficult to obtain authentic, reliable answers about topics that are considered taboo, such as sexual violence.
Although, children and youth typically give more genuine answers then adults, most feel they need to give a politically correct answer. For example, in a patriarchal society, when asked, “do you think women participating in government is an asset to your country?” a majority of participants may answer “Yes” simply because they think that’s the answer project facilitators would like to hear. For this reason, it’s important to use multiple tools of evaluation, in hopes of uncovering the superficial answers and revealing participants’ actual beliefs.
Alisa Albee is an intern for SFCG’s Children and Youth
Orrin Hatch: Senator Reaches Out to Democrats
He is one of America’s Best Leaders for finding common ground while passing legislation
Read original article here
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Through word and deed, Sen. Orrin Hatch has demonstrated that a member of Congress can work to pass meaningful, bipartisan legislation without compromising his core principles and strongly held ideological convictions.
Indeed, no one would ever accuse Senator Hatch of being a liberal. He is, by all accounts, a true and proud conservative. What sets him apart and makes him an effective legislator is his willingness to find common ground with Democratic counterparts when he believes it is the right thing to do—even when it isn’t the politically convenient thing to do.
It is common knowledge that Senator Hatch had a good working relationship and friendship with the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. The two made an unlikely tandem, but they teamed up to pass a number of landmark pieces of legislation, particularly in the area of healthcare. I served alongside Senator Hatch for 33 years. We hailed from different parties, different parts of the country, and different ideological traditions. But in those 33 years, he and I also shared more than a few legislative victories.
Over the years, we worked on a number of laws designed to make Americans safer. For example, in 1994, he cosponsored my proudest legislative achievement, the Violence Against Women Act. VAWA created some of our most successful federal programs aimed at reducing domestic violence and providing assistance to community shelters that aid victims of such violence.
Party and principle. That bill and others we worked on together passed through Congress with broad, bipartisan support. This was due, in good measure, to Senator Hatch’s ability to recognize common goals among his colleagues and his unwillingness to put party ahead of principle. He knew then, as he knows now, that when it comes to protecting the Ameri-can people, particularly the weakest among us, no lines should be drawn between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. When other Republicans saw that Senator Hatch was on board, they were more inclined to give their support. In many cases, he was able to persuade even some his most conservative colleagues to join him.
This is not to say that Senator Hatch and I were frequently in agreement. In fact, far more often than not, the opposite was true. But even in those circumstances when partisan divides were the widest, he didn’t make his disagreements personal. And while he didn’t always have many Democratic allies, he had even fewer Democratic enemies.
Continuing in this tradition, Senator Hatch worked with the Obama administration and Senator Kennedy to enact the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, legislation that will greatly expand opportunities for public service. The bill passed overwhelmingly in the true Kennedy-Hatch fashion, with both Democrats and Republicans on board.
It was another lesson in bipartisanship that politicians of all stripes, from staunch conservatives to committed liberals, can learn from Orrin Hatch.
