A Visit To Carnegie Council

I was pleased to be invited recently to a dialogue entitled, "What It Means To Prevent Genocide" at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs in New York.  The guest speaker was Tibi Galis of the Auschwitz Institute.  I enjoyed hearing Mr. Galis speak about the important work the international community is doing to prevent genocide and other mass atrocity crimes.

As I've mentioned in this blog, I feel it's important to not only acknowledge the great work being done, but also to challenge ourselves for continuous improvement.  Toward the end of the segment, I asked Mr. Galis some rather tough questions about why genocide still exists in the world today.  I applaud Mr. Galis' candor in answering my questions and agree that we need to start digging deeper into why governments choose to support human rights abuses.  I am meeting with Sudanese Ambassador Daffa-Alla Elhag Ali Osman this week and plan to ask him some tough questions as well.  Here's a video of the Carnegie Council event where I ask Mr. Galis my questions, followed by a transcript.

QUESTION: My name is Kate Coy, and I am here from the University of Oregon.

The University of Oregon's School of Law has recently launched a genocide initiative to raise awareness about preventing genocide. We had Gregory Stanton come and speak this past April. I'm here at the UN, and unfortunately I missed that talk.

But this looks very familiar. A lot of what's being said is something also that I heard at a talk earlier today at the UN, where Kai Brand-Jacobsen talked about basically these things. His talk was about preventing more violence and genocide, critical approaches to making prevention work. So I think there's a lot of buzz around the topic from a lot of places.

If I can really just kind of call out the elephant in the room, this morning on my way to work I heard about children in Syria being strapped to tanks to prevent them from being blown up. So there's something missing. We're doing a lot of great things, and I appreciate that, but what's the missing link?

TIBI GALIS: I think that the missing link is that we talk a lot about the things we are supposed to do and very often don't really do them. We end up in situations where governments are behaving just like they used to before we had started talking about genocide and mass atrocity prevention. I believe that shows a failure of us to reach out everywhere.

At the same time, looking from the other perspective, we have had the chance to influence the way governments operate and governments relate to their citizens so much more than we have had the capacity to do in the past, thanks to a genocide-prevention responsibility to protect agenda, that many mass atrocities, it can be argued, have been avoided.

I am the first one to call out how bad we are still at preventing mass atrocities and how many crimes happen around us. This is not to say, though, that the work that we need to take forward is not already being done. It takes time. It took time for the convention to become anything else than a piece of paper. It took so much time for it because of the Cold War. It took time for anything that approaches an international criminal justice system to come together. But we are there. We are making serious advances in this field.

But we need to continue pushing and, at the same time, realize that these atrocities that happen today are great indicators of how badly our governments are still doing their job and how much help they need in doing it better.

QUESTION: I think you're right. I think that it's wonderful to acknowledge what—I think it's hard to measure success when success is something that is prevented.

But something was brought up by Mark Simmons, whom you may know, who has done a lot of work in Sudan. He made the comment this afternoon that stuck with me. He said, "The Sudanese governmentdoesn't want peace." That's a real barrier, that state sovereignty issue, where if you have a government that has no interest in preventing genocide, how do you overcome that?

TIBI GALIS: Again, my response would be not a very radical one. Governments don't operate in vacuums. Governments operate in this world that is getting rather small. In order to operate, they have to interact with other governments, with other parts of society. It's time to actually engage with what makes a government change its mind about mass atrocity and genocide.

Mapping efforts beyond the actual mapping and gathering physical data are also expanding into mapping social relationships within each society to see which of the sectors of society can be mobilized to stop that society's government from committing mass atrocities.

At the same time, whenever a government fails to protect its citizens at home, that is a grand failure also of the other governments who were supposed to create an environment in which that failure to protect shouldn't have materialized.

So what I am telling you is it's about engagement, it's about engagement with each and every situation. It's not a small process, it's not an easy process, and it's a resource-intensive process.

But, you know, we have engaged with interstate conflict for centuries, dedicating huge resources for that problem—war. Our wars today don't look the same. It's time that we rededicate resources to the wars that affect us—internal wars, mass atrocities—and we dislocate resources from our defense budgets potentially. This is just an example, but there are so many ways to engage with a government that is criminal.

I hope this answers the question.

Criticisms of the UN - are they valid? Part 2 of 2

In part one of this post, I discussed how I generally believe criticism is important and can be valuable when offered in a spirit conducive to learning and growth.  To answer the title question, "Are criticisms of the UN valid?" - the answer is..."it depends".  The recently-released documentary "UN Me" raised some valid questions, and it also portrayed some outright lies, in my opinion.  Something I've learned as part of the world's largest bureaucracy over the past three months is that sometimes its very difficult to discern fact from fiction, even from the inside.

I'm very proud to be part of the UN.  And although I am part of the UN, I'm only part of one small subset of the massive body that is the United Nations.  So instead of making sweeping judgments about facets of the UN of which I have no experience, I feel it is more fair to discuss criticisms of the UN based on my direct experience in the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services (UNOMS).

I arrived at the UN three months ago with high expectations: in addition to interning at an organization that sets the global standard for conflict resolution, the office in which I was chosen to work is full of professionals who assist in resolving conflicts between UN staff members.  "Oh boy", I thought, "they'll show me how its done," especially in terms of the interpersonally-based office conflict that's such a constant source of angst in most office environments.  I expected to see exemplary conflict resolution skills dripping off my colleagues around every corner, reinforcing a working environment free from interpersonal strife.  Obviously, this is not realistic.

An important fact had been critically missing from my thought process...my colleagues are human, too.  I work with some of the brightest, most experienced professionals in my field at UNOMS, and even they struggle with "impact versus intent" and how to have a "difficult conversation."  There is tension in the office at times, and I've learned that "professionalism" is subjective, and can often be culturally dependent.

One of the most interesting parts of working in a truly international office is that, for the first time in my white privileged American life, I'm exposed to perceptions individuals from other countries have of Americans.  I love that.  I never knew how or why Americans are often perceived as being informal or inpatient - I now have a much better understanding.

I accepted this internship knowing parts of it would be a struggle for me, namely having to identify as an intern.  I left the glass-walled office at my own fitness club in the idyllic little town of Cottage Grove, Oregon for a dimly-lit, windowless cubicle with a boss looking over my shoulder at a busy office in midtown Manhattan, respectively.  The transition has been more difficult than I imagined it would be.  There have been days I wanted to get on the next flight home.  But as I enter the final weeks of this experience, I feel a renewal of gratitude for this opportunity, struggles included.

The criticisms I have regarding my experience at UNOMS aren't really specific to this office, or to the UN.  The issues are ubiquitous.  And they mostly come down to people simply being people.  The strongest commonality I can decipher between causes of conflict in the office environment of the UN and general conflict between people in everyday social settings is this - we are poor communicators.  Good communication takes time and it takes effort, and we so often lack both.  Although that's obviously an oversimplification, its given me a renewed sense of purpose and pride in my course of study.  Much of what I'm learning as a Conflict and Dispute Resolution (CRES) Master's student at Oregon is how to coach others to overcome conflict in a positive manner.  Conflict is ubiquitous, and if we want to, we can learn how to "do it" better.

There are no fast and easy solutions to overcoming conflict.  As my conflict resolution skills continue to improve, I try to remain ever cognizant of how my actions may impact on others.  I do my best to understand and take responsibility for my part in the conflict.  I strive to stay open-minded and suspend judgment, then make the decision to have the "difficult conversation," if warranted.  I don't think becoming a perfect conflict resolver is the point (or is even possible); its the learning and growth that matters most.  Although I surely have a long way to go, a day of increased knowledge is a day of success.  Viewed in this light, every single day of my internship has been a success of its own.

I'm very grateful for the knowledge I've gained as a CRES student over the past year, and for the knowledge I've gained from my colleagues at the Ombuds and Mediation office at the United Nations.  Thanks to all of you for your patience with me.

Hiking in New Jersey

Hiking in New Jersey

Criticisms of the UN - are they valid? Part 1 of 2

View of UNHQ from the East River

A core value of mine is to speak up when I feel I have something important to say about an issue I care about, and to do so in the spirit of "appreciative inquiry."  I am genuinely curious about the way the world works and I strive to gain answers to my questions in a productive and respectful manner.  I've learned that it's really more about how you say it, not what you say.  In the conflict resolution field we discuss this in terms of "impact versus intent;" indeed, at the heart of many interpersonal disputes lies a difference between people's perceptions of the same event.  In this and my next blog post, I will weigh the validity of external criticisms of the UN, and offer some of my own from my perspective as a UN "insider/outsider."

View from UNHQ across the East River

The United Nations is no stranger to criticism.  I've heard everything from, at best, the UN is useless, and at worst, is a haven for officials to commit crimes.  As with most things, I think the truth is somewhere in between.  UN officials would likely be the first to admit that the organization is not perfect; no organization is.  I believe that because officials acknowledge the UN's shortcomings and are working to improve them, half the battle has already been won.  That being said, there is much work to be done.

The fab four UNOMS interns: Abby, Jing, Valentina, and I at Bryant Park

Recall the last time you got in a fight with your partner: the hot emotions, raised voices, perhaps a desire to get as far away from him or her as possible.  During conflict we tend to show enmity for even those closest to us.  This enmity may be manifested with thoughts such as, "s/he can't do anything right" or "s/he never appreciates anything I do."  If the conflict resolves positively, these feelings of enmity fade and things return to "normal" (if the conflict doesn't resolve or resolve well you may instead be headed for divorce).  My point is that during the conflict, it's very hard to recall the wonderful things your partner has done for you and the reasons you are with them.

My friend Valentina at UNHQ

I see this same pattern happening in the relationship between the people of the world and the UN, with one important distinction - with the UN there's rarely a return to "normal."  As the world is in a perpetual state of conflict, and because we view the role of the UN to keep international peace, we often only see the UN as failing to fill this role.  Just like during the argument with our spouse, we forget about all the great things the UN is doing in the world and about the numerous other roles the UN plays, and plays well.  Like bringing food, water and shelter to millions of people who would otherwise go without, researching and maintaining data on every culture in every country on every continent on earth including maps and geographical information unavailable anywhere else, creating a forum for thought leaders from across the globe to come together and express their ideas...the list goes on and on.

The fab four with our colleague Susannah in front of Grand Central

To that last point, take a second to think about even just the logistics involved in successfully managing such an event - creating a welcoming environment for literally every country in the world to discuss ideas in the same room.  A key aspect to success in this environment is language - obviously there are hundreds of languages spoken by those participating in UN functions.  The UN has six official languages - English, French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, and Arabic - in which every meeting is translated into.  Translators sit in sound booths in every conference room, hear what is being said, and immediately translate it for real time broadcast into the five language not being spoken, not only to the entire room, but often to the world (many meetings available live at http://webtv.un.org/).  The abilities of the amazing translation team hard at work everyday at the UN is just one of many "small" things I've gained appreciation for during my time here.

My friends Valentina and Jing on Valentina's last day

While I believe it is important to criticize, I believe it is equally important to do so in a constructive manner and for the purpose of attempting to foster learning and growth.  Last Friday a documentary entitled "UN Me" was released by a first time filmmaker.  I viewed the film and was disappointed.  I was disappointed not because a main purpose of the film was to point out the UN's shortcomings, but because that was the ONLY purpose of the film, from my perspective.  From taking facts and interviews out of context to bordering on outright lying, the filmmaker was clearly ignorant about UN culture and history in many ways.  And here's the real problem with this type of criticism - the average viewer doesn't have the knowledge to separate fact from fiction, respectively.  Had the filmmaker pointed out flaws then offered solutions, or spent any amount of time on all the great things the UN does, I would be much more supportive of the film.

In the next post I will discuss my experience at the UN from a more personal perspective and offer what I can in terms of solutions to issues raised.