Inside

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE ■ WASHINGTON, DC

APRIL 2002

Vol. VIII, No. 3

he U.S. Institute of Peace haslaunched a Special Initiative on the MuslimWorld that will address a broad range ofpolitical, social, cultural, and religious ques-tions, many of which have come to light inthe aftermath of the September 11 terroristattacks. Former ambassador Richard D.

Kauzlarich, a retired career Foreign Service officer,will head the initiative, which will focus on countriesfrom Africa to South Asia.

Institute president Richard H. Solomon notesthat the initiative will explore ways to enhance theprospects for long-term understanding between the

Special Initiative on the Muslim World

The U.S. Institute of Peace launches a Special Initiative on the

Muslim World headed by former ambassador Richard D. Kauzlarich.

Above: A whitepigeon rests on arooftop as Muslimpilgrims belowperform the sunset prayersaround the Kaabainside the GrandMosque, Islam'sholiest shrine, inMecca, SaudiArabia, last year.

3 Institute Welcomes New Directors

4 Afghan Womenin Governmentand Society

5 Filipino Muslims NeedMore Than EconomicDevelopment

6 BiologicalWeapons

See Muslim World Special Initiative, page 2

Western and Islamic worlds, focusing initially on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and developments inSouth and Southeast Asia, later including Africa andother countries and regions. It will also support relat-ed Institute activities under the Rule of Law, Reli-gion and Peacemaking, Education, and Trainingprograms.

“The Institute of Peace has done substantial worktraining in conflict management and negotiation,facilitating interfaith dialogue, promoting the rule of law, and conducting a broad range of related edu-cation activities,” Solomon says. “The new initiativewill incorporate this expertise and build on it todevelop crisis management strategies” for dealingwith and resolving conflicts in the Muslim world andbetween the Muslim and Western worlds, includingfostering and engaging in “track-two” dialoguesamong key parties to conflict, he says. “We are espe-cially pleased to have Ambassador Kauzlarich join usto direct this work.”

Institute senior fellows and grantees will under-take work associated with the initiative. The Insti-tute will make the initiative’s work and findingsavailable through Special Reports and other publica-tions as well as through seminars, conferences, andrelated public events.

“The current world situation in the aftermath ofthe September 11 attacks demands a meaningfulresponse that goes beyond short-term policy dia-logue,” Kauzlarich notes. “We need to identify newapproaches to managing and preventing conflict withpolitical and economic resources.”

Deepa M. Ollapally, a former program officer inthe Institute’s Grant Program and South Asia spe-cialist, will be the program officer for the initiative.

2 Muslim World Special InitiativeContinued from page 1

The Institute’sSpecial Initiativeon the MuslimWorld will lookat issues incountries asdiverse asIndonesia(above) andNigeria (right).

Peace Watch (ISSN 1080-9864) is pub-lished six times a year by the UnitedStates Institute of Peace, an independent,

nonpartisan federal institution created byCongress to promote the peaceful resolutionof international conflicts. The views

expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute orits board of directors.To receive Peace Watch, write to the United States Institute of Peace,

1200 17th Street NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20036-3011, call202-457-1700, fax 202-429-6063, or e-mail: usip_requests@usip.org.

President: Richard H. Solomon Executive Vice President: Harriet Hentges

Publications Director: Dan SnodderlyEditor: Cynthia Roderick

Production Manager: Marie MarrPhoto Credits: Staff, AP/Wide World Photos

Board of DirectorsChairman: Chester A. Crocker. Vice Chairman: Seymour Martin Lipset.Members: Betty F. Bumpers, Holly J. Burkhalter, Marc E. Leland, MoraL. McLean, María Otero, Barbara W. Snelling, Harriet Zimmerman.Members ex officio: Lorne W. Craner, Department of State; Douglas J.Feith, Department of Defense; Paul G. Gaffney II, National DefenseUniversity; Richard H. Solomon, Institute president (nonvoting).

Tokyo. In 1996–98, hewas a senior researchfellow at the JapanInstitute of Internation-al Affairs and, in1989–96, a senior fel-low in Brookings Insti-tution’s Foreign PolicyStudies Program. Stares has held a richvariety of fellowships—including at NATO,the MacArthur Foun-

dation’s Moscow Office, and the Rockefeller Foun-dation—and has taught at Georgetown University,the University of Sussex, and the University of Lan-caster in Great Britain.

As director of Research and Studies, Stares willdesign, direct, and supervise research projects on abroad range of issues related to international conflictmanagement and peacebuilding. The program’smission is to broaden the range of nonmilitary policyoptions available to government officials and tobridge the all-too-frequent gap between academia,the policy-analysis community, and government, byconvening meetings of academics, think-tank ana-lysts, and former officials with current policymakers.

Stares has written or edited nine books andnumerous articles on a variety of security-relatedissues, including the award-winning Global Habit:The Drug Problem in a Borderless World. He receivedan M.A. and a Ph.D. at Lancaster University in hisnative Great Britain.

William Drennan, who has been serving as act-ing director of the program, will become deputydirector, with responsibility for Asian issues.

3

The Institute WelcomesNew DirectorsKauzlarich directs Special Initiative on

the Muslim World. Stares heads Research

and Studies Program with Drennan as

deputy director.

Above, left toright: RichardKauzlarich andPaul Stares.Left: WilliamDrennan.

The Institute welcomes ambassador Richard D.Kauzlarich as director of the Special Initiativeon the Muslim World and Paul B. Stares as

director of the Research and Studies Program.Kauzlarich served as U.S. ambassador to Bosnia

and Herzegovina in 1997–99, and Azerbaijan in1994–97. He was senior deputy to the secretary ofstate’s and the president’s special representative tothe Newly Independent States in 1993–94. And hewas deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureauof European Affairs in 1991–93, responsible forrelations with the former Soviet Union and eco-nomic ties with the European Union and Organiza-tion for Economic Cooperation and Developmentcountries.

Kauzlarich also served as deputy assistant secre-tary of state for international organization affairs in1984–86, during which time he was in charge ofrelations with the technical and specialized agenciesof the United Nations. He was also deputy directorof the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff in1986–89, handling global and international eco-nomic issues. In addition to his ambassadorialassignments, Kauzlarich served at Americanembassies in Ethiopia, Israel, and Togo. In Decem-ber 2001, the Century Foundation published hisreport “Time for Change? U.S. Policy in the Trans-caucasus.” Kauzlarich received his B.A. from Val-paraiso University and M.A.’s from Indiana Univer-sity and the University of Michigan.

Stares comes to the Institute from Stanford Uni-versity, where he was associate director and seniorresearch scholar at the Center for InternationalSecurity and Cooperation (CISAC). Before joiningCISAC in 2000, Stares served as director of studiesat the Japan Center for International Exchange in

4Afghan Women in Government and SocietyFifty percent of U.S aid to Afghanistan should go to Afghan women, argue two

experts on Afghanistan.

Left to right:Rina Amiri,Zieba Shorish-Shamley, andJoan Winship.

There is more than one realityfor women in Afghanistan

Issues Briefing held on January29. The event, moderated by JoanWinship, adviser for strategicalliances and development at VitalVoices Global Partnership, waspart of a series of recent Institutemeetings held in conjunction withits Special Initiative on the Mus-lim World (see the story on p. 1).

In the 1980s, there was a publicdebate in Afghanistan about therole of Afghan women in societythat resulted in urban women tak-ing a more active role in publiclife, Amiri said. However, eachwave of increasing political partici-pation by women and greater edu-cation and opportunity was oftenfollowed by a backlash in whichwomen would take on more tradi-tional roles, she said. So the Tal-iban backlash against women’semancipation had a long history,though the Taliban took it muchfurther than before, Amiri said.

While most Afghan womenbefore the Taliban takeover didnot participate in the formalAfghan economy, they had activeroles in their homes as partners totheir husbands and exerted some

economic control, she said. Fur-ther, some 500,000 Afghan wid-ows from the protracted civil warand war with Russia are heads ofhouseholds, she said. And in thepast 20 years, Afghan women liv-ing in the diaspora have developedgrassroots leaders such as herselfand Shorish-Shamley who nowadvocate for women’s rights inAfghanistan, Amiri said.

Still, the pace of progress forwomen today is likely to be slow,she said. For example, only twoAfghan women participated in theBonn conference in December2001 and only two belong to thecurrent transitional government in Afghanistan, and they are now“the two most powerful women inAfghanistan,” she said. “We wouldlike to see 50 percent participationby women, but you don’t have thateven in the West.”

It is important that Afghanwomen and not outsiders advocate

While the world wasrecently inundated byimages of shrouded

Afghan women—barred fromhealthcare, education, andemployment—the reality ofwomen in Afghanistan is muchmore complex, say two experts onAfghanistan. In the months sincethe defeat of the Taliban, Afghanwomen have eagerly emerged fromtheir homes to resume their placesin public life—places they heldbefore the Taliban took power as60 percent of the country’s teach-ers, 40 percent of its students, andeven as members of parliament,says Rina Amiri, senior associatefor research at the Women andPublic Policy Program, John F.Kennedy School of Government,Harvard University. “There ismore than one reality for womenin Afghanistan,” she said.

Amiri and Zieba Shorish-Shamley, executive director of theWomen’s Alliance for Peace andHuman Rights in Afghanistan,discussed “Afghanistan: Womenin Government and Society” at aU.S. Institute of Peace Current

5

Above: Philip-pine senatorAquilinoPimentel, Jr. Left: AminaRasul-Bernardo.

for women’s issues in Afghanistan;otherwise, women’s issues mightget equated with Western issues,which would simply set Afghanwomen back further, Amiri cau-tioned. Given the history ofAfghan women’s education and participation in public life,progress among women there isinevitable, she concluded.

Shorish-Shamley pointed outthat while Afghanistan is a tradi-tional and religious society, theruling class and mullahs direct reli-gious beliefs through their controlover interpretation of the Koran.Afghan society is largely illiterate,so these elites interpret the Koranfor their own benefit, she argued.For example, she noted, in theKoran the rights of men andwomen are presented as equal inevery aspect of life. Indeed, manyedicts of the prophet stress educa-tion for men and women alike, “sothe secret lies in educating people”so that they might interpret theKoran for themselves, Shorish-Shamley said.

Women were leaders from thebeginning in Islam, she said. Forexample, the woman who becamethe prophet Mohammad’s firstwife was a merchant and 15 yearsolder than he. He was working forher when she proposed to him,Shorish-Shamley said. And, sheadded, when the prophet wasmarried to his second wife, healways told followers to go to herto learn his tradition as she was soknowledgeable.

Today it is imperative to pushfor women’s rights in Afghanistanbecause Afghan women need toparticipate in the country’s recon-struction to ensure a place for themin the future life of the country,Shorish-Shamley said. Activists andpolicymakers should demand that50 percent of U.S. aid go to Afghanwomen, she concluded. “We mustget women involved in every aspectof reconstruction from day one.”

Filipino Muslims Need More ThanEconomic DevelopmentThe need for economic development is at the heart of the

Muslim insurgency in the Philippine province of Mindanao,where several rebel groups are fighting to secede from the coun-try, say experts on the region. However, they add that to addressMindanao’s development issues, a new, more equitable politicalstructure is required.

Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., who represents Mindanao in thePhilippine Senate, and U.S. Institute of Peace senior fellowAmina Rasul-Bernardo discussed ethnic conflict in Mindanaoand the war against terrorism in the Philippines at an InstituteCurrent Issues Briefing held on April 2.Rasul-Bernardo, a former member of thePhilippine presidential cabinet and a for-mer research fellow with the Sycip PolicyCenter at the Asian Institute of Manage-ment in the Philippines, discussed theissues further at a meeting on her fellow-ship report held on April 11. Audio filesof both meetings are available on theInstitute’s website: www.usip.org.

The former Autonomous Region ofMuslim Mindanao is the poorest regionin the Philippines with the least access toservices and resources. Until the scourgesof poverty and development are addressed,military actions against the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF),the main rebel group in the region, will only further radicalize thepopulation, Pimentel and Rasul-Bernardo asserted.

Pimentel noted that the government’s response to successive Mus-lim rebellions has been to put them down by force and then try tointegrate Muslims into mainstream Philippine society. Muslims com-prise less than 10 percent of the Philippine population, numberingaround 6 million. They are 25 percent of the population of Mindanao.For their part, the Muslims have resisted integration, fearing it wouldwipe out their ethnicity, religion, and culture. A federal system withequitable representation at the federal level and equal access toresources is “the only solution I can see,” Pimentel said. The govern-ment is concerned about implementation of Islamic law, but Islamiclaw would apply only to Muslims, he said. In conflicts between Mus-lims and non-Muslims, national law would apply.

The Philippines and the United States are currently engaged injoint military exercises to strengthen the capacity of the Philippinemilitary for counterterrorism, especially against the only Muslim rebelgroup in the Philippines that has ties to the al Qaeda terrorist organi-zation, the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG). Rasul-Bernardo cautions that itwould be a grave error for the struggle against ASG to be directedagainst other Muslim rebels whose concerns are focused on politicaland economic grievances against the Philippine government.

iological agents thatspread illness and deathhave become theweapons of choice in

the 21st century for ter-rorists and some stateactors, says DavidHeyman, senior fellowfor science and securityinitiatives studies at the

Center for Strategic andInternational Studies.

“Biological agents are easy to pro-duce, widely available, and easy toconceal,” he warns. And in manyinstances, introducing them intothe environment is relatively easy.

Some 12 countries are currentlypursuing biological warfare pro-grams, experts say. After the Sovi-et Union collapsed, evidence of anextensive biological weapons pro-gram there emerged, Heymansaid. Today, Iraq still has thephysical assets and scientific per-sonnel capable of producing bio-logical weapons and a leadershipdetermined to produce them.Given the recent terrorist attackson the United States, the vulnera-bility revealed by the mailedanthrax spores, and evidence thatthe al Qaeda terrorist network wasseeking to acquire biologicalweapons, the prospects of a bio-

logical weapons attack seemgreater today than they did a yearago, Heyman said.

He discussed the threat frombioterrorism and related issues at aU.S. Institute of Peace CurrentIssues Briefing on “Health andSecurity” held on March 14. Pan-elists included Dr. Kenneth W.Bernard, assistant surgeon gener-al, U.S. Public Health Service;Kathleen M. Vogel, postdoctoralassociate at the Institute for PublicPolicy, University of New Mexico,and Institute of Peace grantee;and Jonathan B. Tucker, directorof the Chemical and BiologicalWeapons Nonproliferation Pro-gram at the Monterey Institute ofInternational Studies in Califor-nia. Heyman moderated the event.

Health and Security

Bernard noted that the NationalSecurity Council created the firsthealth and security position in1998, to which he was appointed.At that time, the challenge was toconvince other officials of the con-nection between health and secu-rity issues. Since then, the connec-tion has become all too clear dueto the AIDS epidemic and therecent anthrax attacks. Illustrating

6

Above, top, leftto right: Kath-leen Vogel andJonathan Tucker.

Above, left toright: DavidHeyman andDr. KennethBernard.

BiologicalWeapons

TheThreatfrom

the increased awareness of theconnection, the Department ofHealth and Human Services bud-get for bioterrorism has increaseddramatically since 1987, when itwas negligible, he said. The bud-get grew in 1999 to $59 million,in 2001 to $300 million, this yearto $3 billion, and is slated for $4.3billion in 2003.

Protecting national securityinvolves not just guns and bullets,Bernard said, but economics,democracy, and human rightsissues at home and abroad as well.The maxim, “Think globally, actlocally” has been turned around.Today, the United States needs toact globally to protect its citizenrylocally. “Our back yard hasexpanded to include everybody’sback yard,” he said.

For example, the nation’s foodsupply is vulnerable to a bioterrorattack, which could be perpetratedin other countries where much ofthe supply originates or en routehere, he noted. Some 8 percent ofthe nation’s vegetables are import-ed, 40 percent of its fruit, and 60percent of its seafood. Therearen’t enough food inspectors toexamine most imported food,Bernard said. “How much reallygets looked at?”

Converting Biological WeaponsComplexes

The threat from existing biologi-cal weapons production facilitiesin the former Soviet Unionremains a concern, panelists said.According to estimates, 70,000scientists worked on biologicalweapons programs at some 50complexes in the Soviet Union. Itis critical to help employ these sci-entists in more constructive work,lest they sell their expertise torogue states or terrorist groups,panelists agreed.

For the past three years, Vogelhas investigated one former Soviet

biological weapons complex, theState Research Center of Virologyand Biotechnology, commonlycalled Vector, in Koltsovo, Russia,where the United States hashelped to support an ongoingconversion to other scientificactivities. The United States needsto give priority to such complexesto safeguard pathogen collections,reduce concerns about lingeringoffensive activities, and ensuretransparency and access, Vogelsaid. Further, the United Satesand Russia can benefit fromexpanded scientific and technicalcooperation on research projects atsuch complexes. The ultimate goalshould be to downsize biologicalweapons facilities and help todesign more appropriate programsto maximize the social, scientific,and economic benefits from workat complexes like Vector, Vogelconcluded.

The Biological Weapons Convention

A strengthened internationalframework is needed to providethe moral and perhaps legal forceto deter the development by statesof biological weapons and to pre-vent them from getting into thehands of terrorists, Tucker said.The recent anthrax-tainted letterskilled five people, infected severalmore, disrupted the operations ofall three branches of government,and frightened millions of Ameri-cans, he said. This incident“demonstrated the deadly poten-tial of bioterrorism and raised seri-ous concerns about the nation’sability to defend against moreextensive attacks,” he said. “Themore countries that acquire bio-logical weapons, the greater therisk they will fall into the hands ofterrorists through state-sponsoredterrorism or rogue scientists.”

Although the 1925 GenevaProtocol prohibits the use of bio-

logical and chemical weapons inwar, it is essentially a no-first-useagreement because many countrieshave reserved the right to retaliatein kind if attacked, Tucker said.In 1997, a number of countriesbegan to negotiate a draft protocolto the 1972 Biological WeaponsConvention (BWC), which bansthe possession and use of biologi-cal weapons, but lacks measures tocheck or enforce compliance. Thedraft protocol would have createdan inspection regime designed toenhance BWC compliance anddeter countries from aquiring orusing biological weapons. Lastyear a set of compromises failed tosatisfy many countries concernedover the need to balance the intru-siveness required to build confi-dence in compliance against theneed to protect sensitive nationalsecurity information and industrialtrade secrets.

The United States rejected thedraft protocol, proposing in itsplace a series of voluntary mea-sures for countries to follow. Themeasures, to be implemented byindividual nations, would amongother things criminalize activitiesrelated to production, use, anddistribution of biologicalweapons. However, the lack ofuniformity among national lawswould undermine control efforts,Tucker said. The alternative pack-age offered by the United Stateswould provide a basis for develop-ing multilateral agreements thatcould be effective, Tucker said.However, if the United Statespersists in opposing negotiatedagreements, the consequencescould be quite grave, he warned.The biological know-how andtechnology needed to develop and produce such weapons isavailable worldwide, spreading the capability to inflict massinjury, he concluded. “We mustdo everything in our power toprevent that.”

The biological

know-how

and technolo-

gy

needed to

develop and

produce such

weapons

is available

worldwide,

spreading the

capability to

inflict mass

injury. “We

must do

everything in

our power to

prevent that.”

7

human rights lawyer; Meto Jovanovski, a writer andformer president of both the Macedonian Pen Cluband the Helsinki Committee; Drita Karahasan,former editor in chief of Birlik, a Turkish-languagedaily newspaper; Blerim Kolalli, a researcher for theInstitute for Sociological, Political, and JuridicalResearch; and Branislav Sarkanjac, a professor ofpolitical philosophy at Skopje University. IWPR’sprogram director in Macedonia, Agim Fetahu,helped establish the council.

Discovering Macedonia’sCurrent HistoryFourteen Macedonian high school teachers and two

Macedonian history researchers have developed anobjective account of the recent conflict in Macedoniathat can be taught in Macedonia’s high schools. TheAlbanian, Macedonian, and Turkish educators andresearchers reached consensus on a fact-based com-mon history during a workshop on “UnderstandingCurrent History,” funded by the U.S. Institute ofPeace’s Balkans Initiative and held in Ohrid on Feb-ruary 11–14. Former Institute senior fellow VioletaPetroska-Beska, director of the conflict resolutiondivision of the Center for Human Rights and Con-flict Resolution at the University of Skopje, orga-nized and taught the workshop, in conjunction withMirjana Najcevska, director of the center’s humanrights division. A representative of the Bureau forEducational Development under Macedonia’s Min-istry of Education attended the proceedings.

The final product of the workshop is the basis for“a very meaningful history lecture containing onlyfacts,” Petroska-Beska notes. The participants wereeager to get copies of the common history so thatthey could share it with their colleagues, she said.The representative from Macedonia’s Ministry ofEducation also praised the workshop process andproduct, she said.

During the meeting participants explored strate-gies for communication in a conflict situation andthe influence of perception on intergroup conflicts.

8

Macedonian Media Advisory Council FormedThe Macedonian Media Advisory Council was

established in Skopje in January, with supportfrom the U.S. Institute of Peace. The council willpromote freedom of expression and access to infor-mation as well as responsible reporting, coordinatorMeto Jovanovski said at a February 28 press confer-ence announcing the organization. He noted thatthe council is an independent, locally operated non-governmental organization whose members areMacedonian nationals. Council members representall ethnic groups and are not involved in politics orthe media.

The Institute of Peace’s Balkans Initiative and the Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR),London, provided funds for the initial launch of the council, which was conceived and developed byIWPR. The council’s monthly reports will appear inEnglish, Albanian, and Macedonian on the IWPRwebsite at www.iwpr.net/Macedonianproject.

“The Institute of Peace has documented, inBosnia and elsewhere, the role of the media in esca-lating ethnic tension and making violence an accept-able response to threats by others,” says Daniel Ser-wer, director of the Balkans Initiative. “This patternemerged in Macedonia over the past year. So itseemed crucial that the peacebuilding process nowunderway include a prestigious, multiethnic group of Macedonian professionals who would look at themedia critically, identify coverage that contributes tothe conflict cycle, and encourage moderation.”

Alan Davis, IWPR director of programs, addsthat the advisory council will “draw local publicattention to the fact that an increasingly polarizedand nationalistic media is contributing directly todivisions in the country—divisions over the ethnicconflict, international involvement, and possiblepaths toward resolution and reconciliation.”

Council members include Ali Aliu, a literary critic and professor at Tetovo University; OliverBelopeta, a music producer; Shpend Devaja, a

M A C E D O N I A

The Institute’s Balkans Initiative recently supported two important activities

in Macedonia that will likely contribute to peace and reconciliation there:

formation of the Macedonian Media Advisory Council and convening of a

workshop on the teaching of recent Macedonian history.

9They also looked at ethnic stereotypes, prejudice,majority-minority relations, and discrimination.Then they explored Macedonia’s current history froma human rights perspective and began drawing upaccounts of recent Macedonian history from radicaland moderate perspectives. The final step was toidentify the common elements in the perspectivesand reach agreement on a common history.

“No problem has troubled post-conflict societiesmore profoundly than how to teach about a conflictafter a peace agreement is signed,” notes Daniel Serwer, director of the Institute’s Balkans Initiative.“The separate ethnically based schools and local con-trol that often result from conflict lead to educationalprograms that continue to paint negative pictures ofother ethnic groups and perpetuate divisive historicalaccounts,” he says. “We attempted to counter thistendency in Macedonia, where last year’s conflictbetween Albanian guerrillas and a Macedonian-dominated army and police force brought the countryto the brink of civil war. The workshop for highschool teachers was one of many steps needed toovercome prejudices and hostilities in Macedonia.”

THE ADVOCACY PROJECT, Brooklyn,N.Y. “Enhancing the Use of InformationTechnology in Community Peace-building.” Teresa Crawford. $36,650.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THEADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE,Washington, D.C. “Empirical ResearchMethodologies of Transitional JusticeMechanisms.”Audrey R. Chapman.$38,000.

MERON BENVENISTI, Jerusalem, Israel.“The Morning After.” $38,000.

BROOKINGS INSTITUTION,Washington, D.C. “Pakistan: MisdirectedState.” Stephen P. Cohen. $35,000.

CATTICUS CORPORATION, Albany,N.Y. “Precarious Peace: Religion andPeacemaking in Guatemala.” RudyNelson. $45,000.

CENTER FOR CIVIC COOPERATIONAND ACTIVITY, Odzak, Bosnia andHerzegovina. “Posavina Cross-EntityNetwork.” Valentina Calic. $20,000.

CENTER FOR FREE ELECTIONS ANDDEMOCRACY, Belgrade, Yugoslavia.“Educational Program for CESID’sActivists in the Fields of PreventiveDiplomacy and Conflict Resolution.”Sokovic Soada. $35,000.

CENTER FOR INTERNATIONALPOLICY, Washington, D.C. “BuildingPeace and Security in Nigeria: The Roleof Indigenous NGOs and External Aid.”Paul Olweny. $35,895.

CENTER FOR INVESTIGATIVEREPORTING, San Francisco, Calif.“Global Gunrunners.” Burton Glass andDan Noyes. $30,000.

THE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OFTORTURE, Minneapolis, Minn. “NewTactics in Human Rights Projects.” KateKelsch. $40,000.

JAE HO CHUNG, Seoul, South Korea.“Challenges to Governability: LocalDefiance, Rural Unrest, and Falungong inChina.” $36,400.

CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK,RALPH BUNCHE INSTITUTE, New York,N.Y. “Visions for the Sudan: The Search

for a Comprehensive Peace.” Francis M.Deng. $38,000.

CONCILIATION RESOURCES, London,United Kingdom. “Accord: PublicParticipation in Reaching PeaceAgreements.” Catherine Barnes. $35,000.

CRIMES OF WAR EDUCATIONPROJECT, Washington, D.C.“International Humanitarian Law.” ElisaMunoz. $30,000.

DAVIDSON COLLEGE, Davidson, N.C.“Protracted Conflicts in the Horn ofAfrica.” Ken Menkhaus. $39,000.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY, Cambridge,Mass. “Skilling the Military andGuerrillas for Peace in Colombia,2002–2004.” David Maybury-Lewis,Jennifer Schirmer. $40,000.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY, Cambridge,Mass. “Assessing the Role of InformationTechnology in Global Peace BuildingEfforts.” Jane Mansbridge. $20,000.

HERBERT M. HOWE, JR., Washington,D.C. “Democratization and MilitaryProfessionalism: Dilemmas of MilitaryReform in Democratizing States.” $38,000.

HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATIONINSTITUTE OF BURMA, Chiang Mai,Thailand. “Transitional Justice Trainingsand Workshops.” Patrick Pierce. $30,000.

INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONALCRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS, SanFrancisco, Calif. “IICI Pilot Course.”Raymond McGrath. $25,000.

INSTITUTE OF WORLD AFFAIRS,Washington, D.C. “Conflict ResolutionSkills Training for the Inter-AmericanSystem.” Hrach Gregorian. $30,000.

INTERFAITH ENCOUNTERASSOCIATION, Jerusalem, Israel.“Interfaith Seminars Across Social Linesin Israel.” Yehuda Stolov. $32,000.

INTERMEDIATE TECHNOLOGYDEVELOPMENT GROUP, EASTERNAFRICA (IDTG), Nairobi, Kenya.“Grassroots Solutions to Pastoralists’Conflicts in Kenya.” Sammy Keter.$30,000.

GrantAwardsThe Institute’s Board of Directors approved the followinggrants in March.

Burundi’s Next ChallengeNegotiating a cease-fire with the rebel factions inBurundi is one of the greatest challenges facing the

country’s transi-tional govern-ment, which “willspare no effort toget the rebels tothe negotiatingtable,” says Presi-dent Pierre Buy-oya. He dis-cussed “Burundi:The PeaceProcess andSecurity in theRegion” at a U.S.Institute of PeaceCurrent Issues

Briefing held on February 8. Buyoya became presi-dent in November 2001 to lead the first half of athree-year transitional period. Despite the peaceagreement signed in August 2000, rebel factions havenot yet agreed to a cease-fire. Compared to theBalkans and Afghanistan, Buyoya noted, the interna-tional community has committed few resources tohelp bring peace to the Great Lakes region of Africagenerally.

See Grant Awards, page 10

JUDY BARSALOU, director of the Grant Program,discussed “The Middle East: Hope for Peace” at theUniversity of Wisconsin and other locations in Mil-waukee on February 25 and 26, sponsored by theMilwaukee Institute of World Affairs.

An article on “Virtual Diplomacy: Rethinking For-eign Policy Practice in the Information Age” bySHERYL J. BROWN and MARGARITA S. STUDEMEIS-TER, co-directors of the Institute’s Virtual DiplomacyInitiative, appeared in a special issue of Information& Security entitled “The Internet and the ChangingFace of International Relations and Security.”

JOHN T. CRIST, program officer in the JenningsRandolph fellowship program, discussed the Insti-tute’s funding opportunities at the annual meeting ofthe International Studies Association held in NewOrleans on March 25–26.

TIMOTHY W. DOCKING, Africa specialist and pro-gram officer in the Jennings Randolph fellowshipprogram, contributed a chapter on persistent violent

InstitutePeople

A new documentaryfilm “Bringing Down aDictator” by award-winning filmmakerSteve York, an Institutegrantee, features com-mentary by DANIEL

SERWER, director of theBalkans Initiative. Thefilm, which tells thestory of the nonviolentoverthrow of Serbianleader Slobodan Milo-sevic, premiered at theNational Press Club onMarch 18 and aired nationally on PBS stations inMarch and April. Serwer participated in a panel dis-cussion of the film at the Woodrow Wilson Interna-tional Center for Scholars on March 19. Serwer alsoparticipated in two overseas conferences related tothe Balkans. In March, he was a guest of the Ger-man Foreign Ministry in its discussion of “PoliticalStrategy for the Stabilization of Southeast Europe,”and in February he traveled to Paris to discuss “TheAlbanian Question” at the European Union Insti-tute for Security Studies.

INTERNATIONAL RESCUECOMMITTEE, New York, N.Y. “FillingThe Protection Gap in Burundi: A Modelfor Building Sustainable Peace.” MargaretGreen-Rauenhorst. $40,000.

JUSTICE AFRICA, London, UnitedKingdom. “Liberation Movements inPower.” Alex De Waal. $40,000.

CHENG LI, Clinton, N.Y. “Techno-Nationalism vs. Techno-Globalism:Choices for China’s Fourth-GenerationLeaders.” $40,000.

MINNESOTA PUBLIC RADIO, St. Paul,Minn. “The Promise of Justice: BeyondWar Crimes in Kosovo, Bosnia, andRwanda.” Stephen Smith. $35,000.

THE NIXON CENTER, Washington, D.C.“U.S.-Russian Relations after September11: Prospects for Cooperation in theMiddle East and Caspian Basin.”Geoffrey Kemp. $25,000.

THE NIXON CENTER, Washington, D.C.“U.S.-China Relations in the Post–September 11, 2001 World.” David M.Lampton. $28,000.

OPEN UNIVERSITY OF ISRAEL, TelAviv, Israel. “A Shattered Dream: TheIsraeli Peace Movement and the Collapseof the Oslo Process.” Tamar Hermann.$23,500.

OPPORTUNITIESINDUSTRIALIZATION CENTERSINTERNATIONAL (OICI), Philadelphia,Penn. “Emergency Response to SupportWomen and Girl Survivors of SexualViolence in Sierra Leone.” Jeffrey L.Gray. $35,000.

M. C. OTHMAN, Dar-Es-Salaam,Tanzania. “Accountability forInternational Crimes.” $34,000.

P.I.C. ALTERNATIVE, Tbilisi, Georgia.“NGOs and Mass Media Strategies in theGeorgian-Ossetian Conflict ResolutionProcess.” Irene Tsintsadze. $30,000.

PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS,Seattle, Wash. “Web-Based ForensicTraining for Human Rights andHumanitarian Investigations.” WilliamHaglund. $35,000.

PURDUE UNIVERSITY, West Lafayette,Ind. “The Tragedy of Yugoslavia:

Controversies Revisited.” Charles W.Ingrao. $35,000.

LAUREL ROSE, Pittsburgh, Penn. “Landand Violent Conflict in Rwanda: TheRole of Local Elites.” $37,000.

SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND,Washington, D.C. “Common GroundUniversity Film Series.” Susan Koscis.$30,000.

SECURITY POLICY GROUP, Belgrade,Yugoslavia. “Platform Design andTraining for Fighting Organized Crimein Serbia as an Element of RegionalInsecurity.” Aleksandar Fatic. $25,000.

UNITED NATIONSASSOCIATION–USA, New York, N.Y.“Euro-American Dialogue: Managing21st Century Threats to Peace andSecurity.” Jeffrey Laurenti. $35,000.

UNITED RELIGIONS INSTITUTE, SanFrancisco, Calif. “United ReligionsInitiative Peace Building TrainingProgram.” Barbara Hartford. $30,000.

UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD, Bradford,West Yorks, United Kingdom.“Genomics, Neuroreceptors, and FutureChemical Weapons.” Malcolm Dando.$15,000.

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA,Philadelphia, Penn. “Predicaments ofPalestinians and Jews: The Meanings ofCatastrophe, Historical Knowledge, andthe Return of Exiles.” Ann M. Lesch, IanS. Lustick. $45,000.

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA,Philadelphia, Penn. “The PsychologicalSequelae of Torture among PoliticalDetainees in South Africa.” S. AshrafKagee. $28,608.

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA,Charlottesville, Va. “PromotingGeorgian–South Ossetian CollaborationThrough Assisting Victims of Trauma.”Vamik Volkan. $35,000.

WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL OFPHILADELPHIA, Philadelphia, Penn.“Latin America: Culture, Conflict, CivilSociety.” Margaret H. Lonzetta. $30,000.

YOUTH CENTER FOR HUMANRIGHTS, Moscow, Russia. “Opposition tothe ’Enemy Image’: EducationalPrograms for Russian Regions.” YelenaRusakova. $30,920.

10Grant AwardsContinued from page 9

11

conflict in West Africa to the International Instituteof Strategic Studies’ Strategic Survey 2001/2002 (May2002).

WILLIAM M. DRENNAN, deputy director of theResearch and Studies Program, discussed “The Unit-ed States and the Two Koreas” at meetings of theWorld Affairs Councils of Western Michigan andHouston, Tex., on March 11 and 12, respectively.Some 200 people turned out for the first, and about100 for the second.

MICHAEL DZIEDZIC, program officer in the BalkansInitiative, addressed the Council on Foreign Rela-tions in St. Louis on “Forging Durable Peace inFailed States: What Have We Learned?” He alsodiscussed the failed state phenomenon and the roleof the international community as a guest lecturer atthe Center for International Studies at the Universityof Missouri at St. Louis. In March, Dziedzic wasinvited by the United Nations High Commissionerfor Human Rights to travel to Geneva to help devel-op plans for the future of UN human rights fieldpresences. He traveled to Sweden at the invitation ofthe Stockholm International Peace Research Insti-tute to present “Policing from Above: The StrategicFunctions of Executive Policing,” a chapter for anupcoming book on the role of international police intransitional administrations.

DEEPA M. OLLAPALLY, program officer in the Spe-cial Initiative on the Muslim World, participated ona panel discussing “War Threats, Crisis Manage-ment, and Escalation Control,” at a symposium heldon April 6 in Washington, D.C. The National Advi-sory Council on South Asian Affairs sponsored themeeting, entitled “Is South Asia the Most Danger-ous Place on Earth?”

DAVID R. SMOCK, director of the Religion andPeacemaking Initiative, discussed “Clash of Civiliza-tions or Opportunity for Dialogue?” on March 18 atSt. Anselm’s College in Manchester, N.H. On April4, he gave a talk on religion and peacemaking at aconference on Catholic peacemaking at Notre DameUniversity, South Bend, Indiana.

Institute president RICHARD H. SOLOMON dis-cussed “The Impact of Culture on How CountriesNegotiate” at a Harvard University faculty seminarheld on February 12. The meeting featured the

Lovett-WoodsumPledge

$100,000 to the Institute’s Project to

Build a Headquarters

nne R. Lovett and Stephen G. Woodsum of Boston, Mass., havepledged $100,000 to the U.S. Institute of Peace for its project to

build a permanent headquarters adjacent to the National Mall inWashington, D.C. The pledge was made in memory of Lovett’s grand-father Dr. A. Sidney Lovett of New Haven, Conn. The Lovett-Wood-sum Family Fund at the Boston Foundation awarded a $50,000 granttoward payment of the pledge in January.

Dr. Lovett (1890–1979) was the renowned university chaplain of YaleUniversity in 1932–58. Known universally as “Uncle Sid,” he also taughtbiblical literature and was master of Pierson College. Dr. Lovett wasactive in social concerns for peace and, during World War II, he servedas president of the World Student Service Fund. In retirement, he wasexecutive director of Yale/China in Hong Kong. In honoring Lovett’smemory, Yale president A. Bartlett Giamatti said, “Sid Lovett embodiedall that Yale stands for and wants to be. Perhaps no Yale person in thiscentury touched as many lives in this community and beyond.”

Dr. Lovett is the father of the Rev. Sidney Lovett of Holderness,N.H., who was a member of the Institute’s first Board of Directors and has been a major figure in its evolution.

Institute’s Cross-Cultural Negotiation Project,which is analyzing the influence of culture on inter-national negotiations through a mixture of Institutegrants, fellowships, and in-house research. Otherpresenters included Charles G. Cogan and W.Richard Smyser, who are writing books for the pro-ject on French and German negotiating behavior,respectively.

On February 27, Solomon gave a presentation on “The Shanghai Communique and U.S.-China Relations” on the 30th anniversary thereof at a meet-ing sponsored by the U.S.-China Policy Foundationand held at the National Press Club. Solomonexplored “Prospects for U.S.-China Relations Fol-lowing the President’s Summit” at a March 14breakfast presentation to congressional members onCapitol Hill preparing to depart for China under thesponsorship of the Aspen Institute.

United States Institute of Peace1200 17th Street NW, Suite 200Washington, DC 20036-3011www.usip.org

ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED

Nonprofit Org.

U.S. Postage

PAID

Washington, DC

Permit No. 2806

Recen

t Pub

licatio

nsThe following Institute publications are avail-

able free of charge. Write to the Institute’sOffice of Public Outreach, call 202-429-3832,or download them from our website atwww.usip.org.

■ Training for Peace and Humanitarian ReliefOperations: Advancing Best Practices, by RobertSchoenhaus (Peaceworks 43, April 2002)

■ Space Aid: Uses of Satellite Imagery in UNHumanitarian Organizations (Virtual DiplomacySeries 12, March 2002)

■ Enhancing International Civilian Police in PeaceOperations (Special Report 85, April 2002)

■ Serbia Still at the Crossroads (Special Report 84,March 2002)

■ Taking Stock and Looking Forward: Intervention inthe Balkans and Beyond (Special Report 83,February 2002)

■ Islamic Perspectives on Peace and Violence(Special Report 82, January 2002)

■ Responding to War and State Collapse in WestAfrica (Special Report 81, January 2002)

■ The Role of International Financial Institutions inInternational Humanitarian Law, by Laurie Blank(Peaceworks 42, January 2002)

■ The Diplomacy of Counterterrorism: LessonsLearned, Ignored, and Disputed (Special Report80, January 2002)

■ Good Practices: Information Sharing in ComplexEmergencies (Virtual Diplomacy Series 11, January2002)

■ Training to Help Traumatized Populations (SpecialReport 79, December 2001)

GR

AN

T P

RO

GR

AM

AB

Fall 2002 Unsolicited andSolicited Grant CompetitionsThe U.S. Institute of Peace is accepting appli-

cations for its Fall 2002 Unsolicited andSolicited Grant competitions. The Grant Pro-gram offers financial support for research, edu-cation, training, and the dissemination of infor-mation in the fields of international peace andconflict resolution. The Unsolicited Grant com-petition is open to any project that falls withinthe Institute’s general mandate of internationalconflict resolution. The Solicited Grant compe-tition is open only to projects that fall withinthe themes and topics identified in advance by the Institute.

The topics for the Fall 2002 SolicitedGrant competition are:

Religion, Conflict, and Peacebuilding

Democratic Governance and the Roleof the Military

For further information and materials, please call,write, or e-mail:

Grant Program, U.S. Institute of Peace1200 17th Street NW, Suite 200Washington, DC 20036-3011

(202) 429-3842, Fax (202) 429-6063TTY (202) 457-1719e-mail: grant_program@usip.org

Application materials may also be downloaded fromour website: www.usip.org/grants.html.

The closing date for receipt of Fall 2002 Unsolicitedand Solicited Grant applications is October 1.