The Big Gun
When you think of peacemaker who
or what do you think of? What first
comes to mind? For me, I thought of the
belt-fed machine gun capable of firing more than 500 rounds per minute; used by
United States
troops in World War II and the Korean War.
It was called the peacemaker because there was no other weapon that
compared to it at the time. When used it
could wipe out the enemy as they were encountered. Peacemaker can also be defined as “one who
makes peace especially by reconciling parties at variance; a person or organization that
attempts to reconcile parties involved in a dispute” which reminds me of my
wife and mom – both have mastered the art of peacemaking.
Weakness or Strength
There
are those who view peacemaking as a weakness but, in fact, peacemaking requires
great strength. Peacemaking does not
mean avoiding conflict but rather meeting conflict head on without making the
conflict worse. In order to achieve lasting
peace, the peacemaker requires a special inner strength to look beyond the
common solutions of intimidation and retribution in order to find creative ways
of solving the conflict. Peacemakers require a strength that allows them to put
aside typical emotions as they pursue paths which satisfies the question of who
the parties ought to be there in clarifying the questions of who the parties
ought to be and who the parties want to be.
Moments
of conflict provide opportunities for peacemaking which helps to enrich our
knowledge and understanding of conflict resolution in many important ways. There have been many notable peacemakers that
have taught the world valuable lessons.
Many peacemakers use the same approach towards conflict resolution.
1. Contact
2.
Cooperation
3.
Communication
4.
Conciliation.
Jimmy Carter Approach
Jimmy Carter is considered a
peacemaker however; I have differing opinions of President Carter. Several of the Iranian hostages who were held
for over 400 days were my peers.
President Carter was unable to secure their release while he was in
office. However, after leaving office
President Carter did make strides in peacemaking in various parts of the
world. Carter had several
characteristics that made him an effective peacemaker after leaving
office. He had an uncanny ability of
defusing or calming down both sides of a conflict. As an effective communicator he was able to
address issues and not feelings. Jimmy
Carter was a master at bringing parties together in agreement or compromise. Once successful conflict resolution was
achieved Carter gave credit to the parties involved, if he failed he called it
like it was.
In 1994, Carter traveled to
Pyongyang North Korea
in attempts to dissuade the North Koreans from nuclear proliferation. Carter's credentials gave him credibility
with Kim Il Sung. What was important
about the meeting is what Carter did during a CNN interview after the first day
of meetings. “By announcing on CNN Kim Il
Sung’s promises, Carter locked both sides into conducting the third round of
negotiations that eventually produced the Agreed Framework” (Caprio). Carter was uniquely qualified as a former
President and Nuclear Engineer which enabled him to communicate
effectively. Even though Carter was
successful in achieving agreement on a framework he was highly criticized –
accused of having weakened President Clinton's
and “for his being 'gullible, naive, or an appeaser'” (Caprio).
Peacemaker or Troublemaker
Many have questioned did Jimmy
Carter overstep his bounds as a former president in his attempts to be a
peacemaker? Was he doing freelance
diplomacy, in conflict with current U.S.
policy and against U.S.
interests, and possibly in violation of the law? Or was he simply acting as a
private citizen, using his celebrity to make headway with a group that would
otherwise be hostile to the United
States?
I believe any world states-person such as Carter would consider trying to break the stalemate
through contact. Carter is a Christian man who is also a world leader who has
always stood for justice and human rights.
He has always taken the issue of the sanctity of life seriously which
could easily be used to make the argument he considered he had no choice but to
try stop the potential bloodshed of conflict.
Another
example to consider with Carter is how he dealt with Hamas. In the protracted
conflict between Israel
and Hamas, Carter added new ideas from a high-profile position which shook up
the status quo. As peacemaker, Carter
showed the world that the issues between Israel
and Hamas were much grayer than the Israeli and U.S. government portrayed them to
be. While it was unlikely an
ex-president would be able to extract major concessions, what Carter did in his
meetings with Hamas was still notable.
Carter's success with Hamas came from his ability to enter the dialog
with a cool head, with the intent to achieve compromise and conciliation from
both parties. Carter was good at
peacemaking because he was a good listener and approached each situation with
an open mind and clean slate. He called
it like it was bad or good and ensured credit was given when credit was due.
Unity and Respect
Peacemakers
strive for unity. Their guiding
principles steer their efforts in conflict resolution to unification and
understanding. They strive to establish sustained
relationships of respect. They have an uncanny ability to defuse conflict and
put people at ease which invites trust.
Peacemakers have an ability to synthesize what is divided antagonistic
conflict into a unified acceptable compromised conflict resolution. In other words it is perfectly acceptable to
agree to disagree as long as concerns of both sides are treated with respect
and understanding. Who are the
peacemakers in your world? Are you a
peacemaker? What conflicts are you
currently in that could not be resolved by just respectfully agreeing to
disagree? We can all be peacemakers by
being good listeners, approaching conflict with an open mind and establishing
or renewing relationships through understanding and respect.
Reference:
Review of A
Moment of Crisis: Jimmy Carter, the Power of a Peacemaker, and North Korea’s
Nuclear Ambitions, by Marion Creekmore, Jr. (2006) Korean Studies
Review 2007, no. 2 http://koreaweb.ws/ks/ksr/ksr07-02.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment