Lederach & Appleby (2010) define ‘peace-building’ as “a set of complementary practices aimed at transforming society riddled by violent conflict, inequality, and other systemic forms of injustice into a society oriented toward forging a just peace” (p.35). Abu-Nimer (2003) sees the concept as “an umbrella term that includes the full spectrum of conflict resolution and transformation frameworks and approaches including negotiation, conciliation, mediation, facilitation, alternative dispute resolution, problem-solving workshops, education and training, advocacy, and nonviolent resistance, among others”
(p.22). On their part, Lynch & McGoldrick (2005) describe ‘peace-building’ as a
“complex and extensive process of helping a society recover from collective violence”
and is often seen as having four pillars: “physical security, socio-economic development, building political institutions, and reconciliation to build relationships and psychological security” (p.37). Writing about the work of Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Cilliers et al.
(2003) see ‘peace-building’ as a process of changing unjust structures through right relationships and it “transforms the way people, communities, and societies live, heal, and structure their relationships to promote justice and peace” in addition to creating a space in which “mutual trust, respect, and interdependence is fostered” (p.377).
Karbo (2008), like Kasaija (2002), points out that the term ‘peace-building’ got into wide use following the 1992 report by then UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali entitled “An Agenda for Peace” (Ghali, 1992). The report links the concept of ‘peace-building’ to three approaches namely “preventive diplomacy, peace-making, and peace keeping” (Ghali, 1992).76 In 1994, another report entitled an “Agenda for Development”
was produced by the Secretary General in which peace was identified as the foundation for development (Ghali, 1994).77 Both Kasaija (2002) and Karbo (2008) note that in 2004 the United Nations, under Secretary General Kofi Annan expounded the concept of
“Agenda for Development” in which ‘peace-building’ encompassed a wider range of issues such as economic development, social development, empowerment of women, rights of the child, international migration, environment among others (Annan, 2004).78 Karbo (2008) critiques what he calls the “short-sighted approaches to peace-building” as proposed by the UN arguing that in the context of Africa, peace-building should be geared towards “rebuilding of relationships, asserting communal responsibility and solidarity” (p.115). In the specific case of African ‘peace-building’ initiatives, Karbo (2008) as well as Francis (2008a-b) and Taylor (2010) note the imposition and wide adoption of the Western liberal peace agenda, which has led to the neglect of indigenous resources and institutions. Taylor (2010) notes how the liberal peace agenda greatly
76 “Preventive diplomacy is action to prevent disputes from arising between parties, to prevent existing disputes from escalating into conflicts and to limit the spread of the latter when they occur. Peacemaking is action to bring hostile parties to agreement, essentially through such peaceful means as those foreseen in Chapter VI of the Charter of the United Nations. Peace-keeping is the deployment of a United Nations presence in the field, hitherto with the consent of all the parties concerned, normally involving United Nations military and/or police personnel and frequently civilians as well. Peace-keeping is a technique that expands the possibilities for both the prevention of conflict and the making of peace”
(http://www.un.org/docs/SG/agpeace.html).
77 Ghali, B.B. (1994). “An Agenda for Development: Report of the Secretary-General A/48/935”. New York:
United Nations. URL in March 2012 at http://www.un.org/Docs/SG/agdev.html
78 Annan, K. (2004). “An Agenda for Development.” New York: United Nations. URL in March 2012 at http://www.un.org/Docs/SG/ag_index.htm
influences the work of the UN bodies, of intergovernmental organizations, the OECD states and donor agencies, as well as the international financial institutions (p.157).
However, Albert (2008) notes that the heavy implantation of conflict resolution approaches that follow a liberal peace agenda are less popular in Africa since traditional mechanisms seem to offer better options towards conflict management and peace building (p.32). Taking the case of the African Ubuntu worldview, for instance, Murithi (2009) notes the differences in approach whereby the liberal philosophy separates aggressor from the victims; while in the African one a dispute between members of a society is perceived as one involving the whole community (p.151). In that logic, an individual who has been wronged depends on the group to remedy the wrong since in a way the group has also been wronged (Ibid.). He notes that the key feature of African indigenous approaches is the insistence on “forgiveness, healing, reconciliation and restorative justice” (p.16). He provides several examples where African peacemaking approaches have been adopted with success such as the jir mediation in Nigeria; the Xeer, shir and guurti in Somaliland that have been used with success.
In the case of Northern Uganda, Murithi (2008) as well as Albert (2008) and Karbo (2008) review literature to explain that the Acholi community traditionally practiced mato oput as a reconciliation and conflict resolution mechanism; which has been identified as an appropriate mediation approach to end the conflict between the LRA and GoU as well as reconcile communities affected by the insurgence. In Acholi culture, the entire community feels a sense of responsibility for the wrongs done by warring parties since a law-breaking individual transforms his or her group into a law-breaking group.
Murithi (2008) notes that a key feature of the Mato Oput process is the public participation through a public assembly known as Kacoke Madit that constitutes a council
of elders who listen to views of members and encourage deliberation on the contentious issues (p.23).79 Murithi (2008) as well as Albert (2008) advocate for the incorporation and integration of such local approaches into modern ways of managing conflict on the continent.