For Question 1 please can I have a response to the following post:
The conflict in between Chechnya and Russia was driven by two distinct national outlooks. â€œThe Chechensâ€™ collective viewpoint was focused on nationalism and having to defend their land against foreign invaders which over the centuries has molded their characterâ€ (Yevsyukova, 1995). â€œThe Russians were focused on expanding their national borders in order to secure the Russian homeland with a combination of military actions and to reign in the Chechens and other Caucasus ethnic groupsâ€ (Yevsyukova, 1995). â€œThese ethnic groups continuously resisted the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Unionâ€™s continuous (over 200 years) pacification efforts to ensure complete control over Chechnyaâ€ (Yevsyukova, 1995). In these circumstances, the opportunities for both Chechens and Russians to directly negotiate, or willingness to allow third party mediators to resolve this situation without violence was limited.
The war can still be resolved without engaging in violence. The best way to end the war is by dismantling the bases whereby both Russia and Chechen can withdraw their military forces so that there will be no one to fight. According to Zhukov (2012), â€œthe bases are often the roots that support and facilitate wars because every side would want to show how far they can function.â€ Withdrawing the bases also threaten political actors so that they would not chart any course of wars but focus on the welfare of the local populations. Supporting independent economic development would prepare every state to build themselves and stop depending on others whilst being exposed to dictatorship. Interdependence of economic provisions has often exposed countries towards being controlled off their financial, human and natural resources and such cause conflicts.
There are possibilities for this conflict to be resolved without violence. For any non-violent methods of engagement to begin both sides will have to rely on the citizens, politicians, religious leaders, and scholars with an understanding of the opposing sides positions. Dr. Reza Najafbagyâ€™s article, Problems of Effective Cross-Cultural Communication and Conflict Resolution, identifies â€œco-orientation of any effort that may be necessary to familiarize and train an individual in the life, work, social and political relations, norms, values, traditions, religion and other aspects of oneâ€™s own culture and those of other concerned nationsâ€ (Najafbagy, 2008). â€œAt its most basic level co-orientation identifies a level of knowledge and understanding not only of your own countryâ€™s culture and history, but also your adversaryâ€™s culture and history in order to facilitate cross-cultural communication to encourage discussion, mediation, and negotiation instead of violent conflict resolution methodsâ€ (Najafbagy, 2008).
The mechanisms for intervening in intra-state conflicts also require some elaboration. For example, â€œthe United Nations identifies three goals in terms of resolving ongoing conflicts: preventative diplomacy, peacemaking, and peacekeepingâ€ (Buotros-Ghali, 1992). Both Russians and Chechens, across every level of their respective societies, need education and training such as the â€œUnited Nations Core Pre-Deployment Training Materials (CPTMs) for peacekeepersâ€ (UN, 2017). The training spells out the importance of working with all actors and not just the host government, with regular dialogue maintained by religious leaders, women and student associations, academics, professional organizations, and other parts of civilian society (Curran, 2013). in order for Russians and Chechens to seek nonviolent methods to find ways to start resolving their long and violent interactions. â€œPeacekeeping and peacebuilding can thus maintain their conflict resolution potential (Curan, 2013). â€œThe training of communication and negotiation skills for military personnel seeks to inculcate non-violent solutions to potentially violent situations and the training in â€˜civilâ€“military coordinationâ€™ can prepare military personnel for the earliest stages of peacebuildingâ€ (Curan, 2013).
Curran, David. â€œTraining for Peacekeeping: Towards Increased Understanding of Conflict Resolution?â€ International Peacekeeping 20.1 (2013): 80â€“97. Web. DOI: 10.1080/13533312.2012.761841. https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/doi/pdf/10.1080/13533312.2012.761841?needAccess=true
Najafbagy, Reza. 2008. â€œProblems of Effective Cross-Cultural Communication and Conflict Resolution,â€ Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics & Culture, Vol. 15/16 Issue 4/1, p146-150, 5pages. Accessed November 12, 2019 from https://allianceforclas.org/wp-content/uploads/201…
United Nations, 2017. â€œCore Pre-deployment Training Materials,â€ United Nations Peacekeeping Resource Hub. Accessed November 12, 2019 from https://research.un.org/revisedcptm2017
Yevsyukova, M. 1995. â€œThe Conflict between Russia and Chechnya,â€ Conflict Information Consortium (the former Conflict Research Consortium) at the University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. Working Paper No.95-5(1). Accessed November 12, 2019 from http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/full_text_search/AllCRCDocs/95-5.htm
Zhukov, Y. M. â€œRoads and the diffusion of insurgent violence: The logistics of conflict in Russia’s North Caucasus.â€ Political Geography, 31(3), (2012):144-156. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/zhukov/files/201…
Question 1. With reference to pre-deployment training, what are the cultural attributes of the Chechens; and the cultural attributes of the Russians; and how does this knowledge play into developing a peacekeeping strategy?
Has the growing number of international institutions led to the enhancement of their respective operational effectiveness? Are there also some examples of collaboration among different international organizations?