Peace

Human Rights

Economic Justice

What is QCEA?

Structure & Staff

Contact Us

Take Action

Subscriptions and Membership

Donate

Study Tours

Internships

Around Europe

Briefing Papers

Occasional Papers and other publications

Ordering Printed Copies

History

Meeting Rooms Available

• Prioritising Conflict Prevention

• Children in Armed Conflict

Conflict Prevention is Key EU Objective

The European Union was set up as a conflict prevention organisation. In terms of achieving this objective in Western Europe, it has been very successful and it has the potential to support conflict prevention in other parts of the world.

One of EPLO’s main recommendations to the Convention is, therefore, that conflict prevention should be one of the stated objectives of the EU and of its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

The aims of the CFSP should therefore be to:

• Strengthen and promote the adherence to international law and the UN Charter
• Strengthen democracy and the rule of law
• Strengthen human rights and minority rights and protect human rights defenders
• Eradicate poverty and reduce socio-economic imbalances
• Protect the natural environment.

Democratic Accountability

There has been much discussion about where the primary responsibility for external relations and the CFSP of the EU should sit. At present, the two areas of responsibility are split between the EU Commissioner for External Relations and the EU High Representative for CFSP.

The possibility of combining the two posts into one (as may possibly be recommended in the proposals from the Convention on the Future of Europe) raises issues of democratic accountability and may exacerbate the already significant democratic deficit within the EU structures. Friends who attended the Associate Members’ conference in October will remember that there was a good deal of discussion about this issue there.

To address some of these concerns, the EPLO submission recommends that if this joint post were created, the person responsible for both the CFSP and External Relations should be nominated by member states and that the nomination should be approved by the European Parliament.

Conflict Prevention: a Central Focus

There is much emphasis, certainly in the media reporting, on the military aspects of the CFSP. Merging the two roles could emphasise this even more. The EPLO submission highlights this latter danger and recommends that the proposed merged post should have two senior deputies who would take on responsibility for crisis management and conflict prevention respectively. This would ensure that conflict prevention becomes part of the mainstream role of this new office.

Transparency

The level of transparency in this area is also very limited. Accountability for military aspects falls on national parliaments and accountability for external relations on the European Parliament. The EPLO submission makes a number of recommendations which would enhance transparency relating to public access to documentation, an obligation on the Council of the European Union to ensure that all members of EU Affairs, Foreign Affairs and Defence Committees in all Member States receive relevant documentation, that deliberations within the Council of the European Union on these matters are made public and that there should be annual public reports on the implementation of these policies.

Martina Weitsch

To receive the full text of the EPLO submission contact the QCEA Office.

You can contact the members of the Convention for the Future of Europe representing your country directly to support the views expressed in the submission. Details can be found on the Convention website at http://european-convention.eu.int

Return to contents

The African-Caribbean-Pacific (ACP) – European Union Joint Assembly has to make sure that the issue remains on its agenda. At the ACP-EU Assembly in 2003 decision makers should talk about the grave problem of child soldiers, as well as the abduction of children. A suggestion that the Joint Assembly should discuss the situation in specific countries and publish a list of countries using child soldiers was considered counter productive by Olara Otunnu, who pointed out that in the case of the UN there is a legal basis for producing such country lists. Continued pressure via the ACP-EU Joint Assembly should ensure that ACP states ratify the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children and armed conflict, and that African states ratify the African Charter on the Rights of the Child.

We all agreed that it was important that the issue of child soldiers should be broadened out to children in armed conflict. The EU is at the forefront in bringing forward and supporting resolutions and setting standards on behalf of children’s rights. It was hoped that the EU would incorporate children’s rights into the regular work of all relevant EU bodies and institutions, including a number of Commission Directorates General and Commission delegations around the world. It was hoped that mainstreaming children into the work of the European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) would draw attention to the need for funding for rehabilitation programmes, displaced children, child development, and education and healthcare programmes in countries and regions devastated by war. The situation of children should be one of the indicators that things are starting to go wrong in Early Warning Projects.

The EU is setting up new capacity building and training modules for military and police forces which must build in special training on children’s rights in conflict areas. As part of its own capacity building effort the EU should adopt the same minimum age standards for EU civilian police and military as announced for UN personnel by the UN Secretary General in 1998, including an absolute minimum age of 25 years for civilian police and military observers as well as a preference for those troops to be engaged in peacekeeping operations to be 21 and in no case less than 18 years old.

As part of conflict preparedness, the EU should prioritise the development of lists of places and institutions where especially vulnerable children, including children in state custody, orphaned children, physically and mentally disabled children, unaccompanied and homeless children, children in detention facilities, children with chronic illnesses, and internally displaced and refugee children are housed or could be found, in order to ensure specific protection in the event of an armed crisis.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) will be able to take up child soldiers’ cases. It was suggested that a child soldiering case, perhaps in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, could become the first case for the ICC.

In the EU the Office of Javier Solana is producing regular country reports. It would be useful if it could be agreed that UNICEF would make an input to these country reports. The Italian Presidency of the EU is preparing a major conference on Children in Armed Conflict for next autumn.

Anita Wuyts

Return to contents

In the context of this project, a Citizens’ Forum was convened on 18/19 November in Strasbourg. Participation in the Forum provided an opportunity for us to meet NGOs not represented in Brussels and have a first introduction to the Council of Europe where QCEA enjoys consultative status.

The aims of the Forum were:

• To define the strengths and weaknesses of NGOs in violence prevention, both at a policy and an implementation level
• To draw up proposals for rapid follow-up in the framework of the Integrated project.

The Forum was addressed by a number of speakers, including Walter Schwimmer, Secretary General of the Council of Europe who, in his opening remarks, made the connection between violence and extremism and expressed his hope that this Forum would be part of a new contract between NGOs and the Council. The keynote speaker emphasised the mutual acceptance of difference as a basis from which to work and a speaker from the floor highlighted the need to do prevention work with people rather than against or for them, so we certainly felt amongst friends.

Much time at the Forum was given to three in-depth workshops, each focusing on two specific areas of violence in everyday life.

One group focused on the effect of violence on children and young people and the violence in the media. Dr. Bruno Sandkühler from the European Council of National Associations of Independent Schools (who had never heard of Quaker schools but was keen to remedy this situation) pointed out that the perpetrators of the terrible massacres in schools which have recently occurred in Germany and in the US had all had a keen interest in playing violent computer games in which the players are rewarded for killing and can make themselves invulnerable. Violent computer games can serve as a negative influence leading to actual acts of violence being committed. We therefore talked about the need for a code of conduct both for journalists and the makers of computer games.

Dr. Sandkühler also reminded us that most of the victims of violence and most of the offenders are aged between 16 and 24. He reported that in Germany every second criminal act is committed by somebody under the age of 21. Many of these young people are disappointed and disadvantaged and lack stable human contacts. We realised that prevention of violence has to start as early as kindergarten and some of us thought that the subject should be integrated into the school curricula.

One of the most moving speakers in this group, himself a survivor of violence, spoke passionately of the need for grant-giving bodies to take risks in their investment in youth projects by reducing the red tape to a minimum. In his view, young people who have given up violence want to convince others to do the same by talking to them, not by filling out forms.

Marianne Brazda from European Drama Encounters talked about using drama in addressing conflict and prejudice amongst young people. ‘We cannot change the past’, she said, ‘but we can view it in our own way. We can change the future’.

Martina went to the workshop on urban and domestic violence. This was not as focussed and it was felt by a number of speakers that the topic area was too wide. There were strong voices supporting the view that violence against older people needed to be addressed as a separate subject. There were also representations from several NGOs on the subject of corporal punishment and the need to abolish it everywhere. Sweden has adopted a law against corporal punishment which has had very positive effects.

The conclusions from the Forum will be brought to the NGO Plenary in January when they will hopefully be adopted as an agreed view from the NGOs with consultative status at the Council. One of the more specific recommendations was to undertake active campaigning in connection with the UN Day Against Violence on 25 November. This recommendation found broad support in the final plenary session of the Forum.

I felt that it was very worthwhile for us to participate in this Forum and to ensure that Quaker voices were heard. There are a number of areas where Quakers have direct experience of relevant action. QCEA would welcome feedback from readers with practical examples of projects and action being taken. We will be attending the NGO plenary in January and may have opportunities to feed additional points into the discussion.

EVALUATOR

to undertake an evaluation of the QCEA project on The Future of Europe: Spiritual Values and Citizenship.

We would like the evaluation to assess:

- whether we have achieved what we set out to achieve, carried out appropriate activities and reached our target audience

- to what extent our aims have evolved in the course of the project

- whether the initial aims were appropriate for QCEA and whether the project was framed in the right way

- which activities worked well/less well and which could be replicated in the future

- whether there are any lessons for QCEA in terms of future projects.

The evaluation will involve the analysis of project documents, telephone contact with key members of staff and email contact with a range of people involved in the project.

The evaluation will result in a concise report which must be produced by the end of May 2003.

Please contact the QCEA Office by 17 January 2003 if you would like more details about the project and the evaluation.

Remuneration available

Return to contents

Sat 5 – Sat 12 April 2003

Cost: 445 euros / 285 pounds sterling

Deadline for applications: 31 January 2003

Young Persons’ Study Tour (ages 18 – 30)

Wed 25 June – Sat 5 July 2003

Cost: 465 euros / 300 pounds sterling

Contact Bronwen Thomas for an application form or click here for more details.

Some bursary support is available. Information will be sent to all enquirers

Return to contents

Back to the main Around Europe page