Interview with Mr Itonde Kakoma, President of Interpeace, in the context of his visit to FSPI in March 2024 and his presentation “Peacebuilding and multilateralism: making a compelling case for peace in contemporary times”. (interview translated from French)

***

Interpeace has been involved in peace processes for 30 years now. Can you tell us whether the growing number of security risks emerging in the context of internal conflicts has had an impact on its strategy and its Track 6 approach? And how does its work differ from that of the many other NGOs active in the field of peace and security?

The proliferation of internal conflicts has only confirmed Interpeace’s approach, which insists on the involvement of all actors in war-torn societies in conflict resolution, in order to achieve lasting peace. Placing local populations at the heart of efforts is essential to address the root causes of tensions in a sustainable way. No group, especially those traditionally excluded from talks, should be neglected.

Rather than fostering confrontation, the relentless pursuit of constructive dialogue between a country’s different constituencies – be they leaders, communities, opinion-makers or NGOs – offers the prospect of lasting peace. This is the added value of Track 6, the link between Tracks 1, 2 and 3 that Interpeace has been implementing for 30 years. For this process to work, it is imperative to re-establish trust between all stakeholders, a sine qua non condition for preventing any recurrence of conflict in a country.

 

As one of your main donors, Switzerland is committed to dealing with the past as part of peace-building, while encouraging reconciliation after serious violations of human rights or international humanitarian law. It was in this spirit that it supported Interpeace’s commitment in Rwanda to inter-ethnic reconciliation following the Tutsi genocide in the early 1990s, which was made very difficult by successive governments who used the ethnic question to divide people. What contribution has your organization been able to make, and what results have you been able to achieve?

Interpeace has been supporting many local players in Rwanda for many years. In the past, we have worked with Never Again Rwanda, through discussions broadcast on community radio stations, to encourage citizen involvement in decision-making at all levels of government. Efforts have also been made to encourage dialogue between members of the population, including genocide survivors, to prevent any escalation of disagreement towards violence.

In recent years, the release from prison of people involved in or associated with atrocities has required careful preparation, while many Rwandans continue to suffer from the mental scars of the genocide. It is against this backdrop that Interpeace and its partners are working to facilitate the reintegration of these former prisoners. Since 2020, a pilot project has been running in the Bugesera district. On the one hand, an accompaniment program aimed at creating professional opportunities for released prisoners has been launched in the prison environment. On the other hand, on the outside, collective therapeutic approaches have been set up to enable everyone to express their suffering. A mobile mental health clinic has been deployed, along with motorcycles to ensure better access to care in the region’s hospitals and health centers. Tablets have also been provided to improve the collection and preservation of patient data in the area.

For further information, please consult the following link: https://www.interpeace.org/mhpss-rwanda/

 

Some people in international Geneva are critical of NGOs involved in peace-building, arguing that they still operate too much in silos. In your opinion, isn’t the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, which clearly illustrate the interconnection of problems, a godsend for International Geneva, whose ambition is to establish better, more transversal governance?

Interpeace shares the objective of strengthening links between organizations working in the fields of peacebuilding, humanitarian action and development. Although this objective was first set out at the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016, there is still considerable room for improvement in its full implementation. With this in mind, Interpeace has launched the “Proactivity for Peace” initiative, aimed at bringing these different actors together to make a cross-cutting contribution to the 2030 Agenda and in particular to Goal 16 of the SDGs: that of promoting sustainable peace, justice and strong institutions. For further information, please consult the following link: https://www.interpeace.org/fr/peace-responsiveness/

The responsibility for seeking peace cannot be entrusted solely to entities specialized in this field. The “Proactivity for Peace” initiative aims to strengthen the capacities of humanitarian and development institutions operating in countries in conflict, so that they can actively contribute to the promotion of peace in their technical operations. This initiative encourages these institutions to integrate a conflict-sensitive approach into all their policies and activities with affected populations. More and more organizations are expressing an interest in this collaboration, and International Geneva offers an ecosystem that is particularly conducive to this initiative.

 

Are you among those who believe, as many experts in peace and security promotion do, that the international fora that emerged from the Second World War are not adapted to today’s world? If so, do you believe that innovative solutions should be sought from the private sector, through greater involvement in the cause of peace? In this respect, how would you assess the contribution of the World Economic Forum?

The dynamics of conflict, and the strategies for dealing with it, have evolved considerably in the 21st century; one example of these changes is the growing involvement of non-state armed groups. Intergovernmental bodies continue to play a central role in the management of international peace and security issues, and the Black Sea Grain Agreement, albeit temporary, is a recent example of this. In this context, the private sector, whose activities can influence factors of conflict, must make an increasing contribution to the implementation of sustainable solutions and peace-building. However, it is essential for private sector players to have confidence in the situation of countries in order to make financing decisions that promote peace.

With this in mind, Interpeace recently launched “Finance for Peace”, an initiative that brings together investors, companies, standard-setting bodies, development finance institutions, governments, peacebuilding and development actors, civil society and local communities. The aim of this initiative is to create a financial market conducive to peace, by mitigating perceptions of risk in vulnerable countries that could deter certain economic players from investing. The initiative promises to put in place guiding principles and innovative solutions. To find out more, visit https://financeforpeace.org/

All initiatives aimed at encouraging greater involvement of the private sector, provided they take into account the needs and participation of local communities, are to be welcomed. The World Economic Forum, which brings together a diversity of entities and decision-makers, can play a crucial role in this respect. I am always pleased to take part in the discussions organized by the Forum to which I am invited.

 

You recently returned from a mission to Somalia, where you signed a strategic peacebuilding partnership agreement with the Somali authorities. Can you tell us about the main thrusts of this cooperation aimed at promoting national reconciliation?

Somalia is one of our organization’s oldest and most active programs. Interpeace launched its Somalia program in the north-eastern part of Somalia in 1996; the program was extended to Somaliland in 1999 and to southern Somalia in 2000.

In the current context, marked by an offensive and territorial gains made by the government, the Somali authorities are particularly aware of the importance of capitalizing on these recent gains and pursuing efforts to consolidate peace and national reconciliation, particularly in the recently liberated territories. With this in mind, during my mission to Somalia, we signed a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Reconciliation to renew our partnership. Our contribution will revolve around substantial support for the National Reconciliation Framework, by accompanying the Ministry in its implementation, for example by facilitating the establishment of a National Dialogue Institute, as well as experience sharing, notably by drawing inspiration from the work of the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission in Rwanda.

 

At a time when the security approach does not seem to have made a decisive contribution to restoring lasting peace in the DRC, and when the UN peacekeeping force (Monusco) is struggling to control most of the territory, what approach does Interpeace advocate for restoring peace in the DRC?

Faced with the security challenges in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Interpeace advocates an inclusive, multi-actor approach to preventing conflict and restoring lasting peace. We focus on building the resilience of individuals, particularly women and young people, as well as communities and institutions, to generate local solutions to priority peace issues. Our experience of over twelve years in the DRC has enabled us to develop an innovative methodology based on a three-level dialogue involving local communities, civil society and government, with the aim of reducing the horizontality of relations between these levels.

A concrete example of our method is our intervention in Ikassa, where we established spaces for dialogue and involved the government in peace and social cohesion programs. This approach facilitated the emergence of a consensus on peace priorities and actions to be taken, taking into account the needs expressed by local communities, provincial authorities and national officials. These priorities were then translated at programmatic level to integrate the actions of development and humanitarian actors involved in the peace process.

We have identified that one of the main obstacles to stability in the DRC lies in the management of border areas, even though MONUSCO’s mandate is limited to national territory. To address this challenge, we advocate a strengthened regional strategy and coordination to tackle cross-border conflicts, including working with regional partners such as the Economic Community of the Great Lakes Countries and the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region. Over the past twelve years, Interpeace has developed a program of cross-border dialogue for peace and stability in the Great Lakes region, in collaboration with local, regional and national authorities, which functions as an effective tool for conflict prevention and a platform for inclusive discussion between populations and authorities to prevent the escalation of tensions.

Finally, we underline the importance of a successful transition of MONUSCO in the DRC, advocating inclusive consultations and an adequately budgeted action plan to build local capacity for security and population protection.

 

Interpeace aims to strengthen the capacity of societies to manage conflict in a peaceful, non-coercive manner, and to assist the international community, in particular the UN, in its peace-building efforts. It is one of the most important global players in this field, bringing together players from the international community, governments, civil society and local communities to meet security challenges and build lasting peace. What are the peace processes to which your organization has made the most decisive contribution in recent decades?

Two examples can illustrate our action. In Colombia, following the signing of the peace accords, a special police unit, UNITEP, was set up with a mandate to implement the police security component of the accords. Given the predominant militarization, the Colombian police were traditionally limited in their role. The 2016 agreement marked a turning point in security and police reform. With twenty years’ experience in security sector reform, our organization was asked to contribute to the peace process in Colombia. Interpeace supported the redefinition of the role of the police as part of the implementation of the peace agreements, working closely with police forces. A major success of this intervention concerns support for victims, particularly women victims of violence, an area where the police were initially ill-equipped to intervene, particularly in cases of sexual violence. Interpeace has worked to build trust between victims and the police, ensuring that women are properly cared for, notably through a training and awareness-raising program for staff and community members, as well as the recruitment of female police officers and the appointment of gender focal points.

Meanwhile, in Kenya’s Seguta Valley, commonly known as the Valley of Death because of the violence there, Interpeace played a crucial role in facilitating the negotiation of local ceasefires. Interpeace supported the establishment of ceasefire monitoring committees, with the training of guarantors responsible for monitoring their implementation and acting as early warning mechanisms in the event of suspected violence, thus contributing to conflict prevention. After our intervention, violence diminished considerably, and the impact of this peace agreement was significant: for fifteen years, no development, health or education actor had been able to operate in the region due to militarization. With the establishment of these configurations, the peace players were able to return, and for the first time in twenty years, the population had access to basic services, particularly health care. The military have also expressed their willingness to help rebuild infrastructure, paving the way for a promising development path for the region. In addition, the Kenyan armed forces are using the methodology of this intervention as a model for their current engagement with local communities.