Home Blog Page 2

This Week in Peace #75: March 21

This week, ceasefire collapses between Israel and Gaza despite international peace efforts. DRC and Rwanda presidents meet for talks in Qatar as M23 rebels pull out of talks in Angola. After minimal peace progress for Ukraine and Russia, officials to meet for talks with US in Saudi Arabia.

Ceasefire Collapses Between Israel and Gaza Despite International Peace Efforts

The fragile ceasefire between Israel and Gaza has collapsed. On March 18, Israel launched airstrikes on the strip, killing over 400 Palestinians. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said that it was attacking “terror targets.” A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said that Hamas had repeatedly refused to release hostages, and rejected all proposals from US Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff and mediators. On March 19, Israel launched what it called “targeted ground activities” in Gaza. 

These developments follow efforts by several countries to negotiate a ceasefire. On March 12, US envoy Steve Witkoff presented an updated proposal for a month-long extension of the Israel-Gaza ceasefire, which expired on March 1, in exchange for the release of at least five living hostages, and the remains of around nine hostages currently held captive by Hamas. 

Israel says that Hamas is still holding 59 hostages, 24 of whom are believed to still be alive. Palestinians and Israelis have both suffered massively from the war since October 7, with over 1,200 people killed in Israel, and nearly 50,000 Palestinians killed in Gaza, according to the strip’s health ministry. 

DRC and Rwanda Presidents Meet for Talks in Qatar as M23 Rebels Pull Out of Talks in Angola

The presidents of Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) met in Qatar for peace talks on April 18. The talks came just a day after the M23 rebel group, which has taken over areas of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)’s eastern region, announced that it was pulling out of peace talks scheduled for the next day in Angola. 

A joint statement issued with Qatar said that “The Heads of State then agreed on the need to continue the discussions initiated in Doha in order to establish solid foundations for lasting peace.” In the past, DRC President President Felix Tshisekedi has refused to meet M23 for direct talks, however, last week he indicated that he was ready for dialogue, DW reported.

The Congo River Alliance of rebel groups, which includes, said it was pulling out of talks over sanctions that the European Union (EU) imposed earlier in the day against M23 and Rwandan officials. The statement added that the EU’s actions were “obstructing” the talks, and Rwanda said that it would be cutting ties with Belgium, accusing the country of trying to “sustain its neo-colonial delusions.”

In June 2024, an investigation commissioned by the UN Security Council revealed that the DRC’s neighbor, Rwanda, has actively backed this armed group, with the Rwanda Defence Force identified as having ‘de facto’ control over M23. However, Rwanda denies supporting the group.

After Minimal Peace Progress for Ukraine and Russia, Officials to Meet for Talks With US in Saudi Arabia

Following the minimal peace progress achieved for Ukraine and Russia this week, officials of both countries plan to meet with US officials separately next week. Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelensky said in an X post about the upcoming talks, “We instructed our teams to resolve technical issues related to implementing and expanding the partial ceasefire.” 

Russia will be represented by Sergei Beseda, an adviser to the director of the Federal Security Service (FSB), and Grigory Karasin, a former diplomat who now chairs the Federation Council Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

This development comes after the two countries made minimal progress in peace this week. While Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire with Russia last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin has rejected a full and immediate ceasefire, merely agreeing to halt attacks on energy infrastructure following a phone call with US President Donald Trump on March 18. Hours after the phone call, the two countries had already accused each other of launching air attacks that caused fires and damaged infrastructure. To read Peace News Network (PNN)’s full report of these events, click here.

Keywords: Israel, Palestine, Gaza, peace, Rwanda, Ukraine, Russia, conflict, conflict resolution, ceasefire, peace talks

Peace Progress Between Ukraine and Russia Remains Minimal

Progress in achieving peace between Ukraine and Russia remains minimal following correspondence between the US and Russia. While Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire with Russia last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin has rejected a full and immediate ceasefire, merely agreeing to halt attacks on energy infrastructure following a phone call with US President Donald Trump on March 18. Hours after the phone call, the two countries had already accused each other of launching air attacks that caused fires and damaged infrastructure. 

Putin expressed concerns that Ukraine could use the ceasefire as a chance to militarily mobilize and rearm, and that Ukraine seeks a ceasefire due to Russian forces gaining almost full control of the Kursk region. However, commentators have criticized Putin’s standards on the conditions for a ceasefire. 

Dan Sabbagh, defence and security editor of the Guardian, points out that Russia’s main condition for resolving the conflict is, “the complete cessation of foreign military aid and the provision of intelligence information to Kyiv,” according to a statement by Russia made after the call between Putin and Trump. He notes that Ukraine cannot accept this as it has spent three years fighting and experiencing thousands of casualties to prevent a full takeover, and has still lost one fifth of its territory. 

Prior to the phone call, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko said that, “We will demand that ironclad security guarantees become part of this agreement,” in an interview with Russian media outlet Izvestia.  Some of the guarantees that Russia demands include, he said, “…the neutral status of Ukraine, the refusal of NATO countries to accept it into the alliance.” Even though Britain and France have both said that they were willing to send a peacekeeping force to monitor any ceasefire in Ukraine, Grushko said that the deployment of unarmed post-conflict observers can only be discussed after a peace agreement is achieved. 

These developments come after last week, in response to Ukraine agreeing to the ceasefire, the US has agreed to lift the pause on intelligence sharing, and resume security assistance to Ukraine. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said last week that the “ball is truly in their [Russia’s] court,” and that the US believes that peace negotiations are the only way to end the fighting. Trump, despite having had recent tensions with Zelensky, warned Russia that he would put additional sanctions on the country if it doesn’t accept the ceasefire.

Civilians on the ground are continuing to suffer. Earlier this month, Russian strikes killed at least 25 in Ukraine, and Ukraine’s largest ever drone attack on Moscow killed at least three employees of a meat warehouse and wounded 17 others.

Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelensky on March 4 said that Ukraine was ready to take steps toward peace if Russia would take them as well. Zelensky said in a post on X that the first stages of an end to the war could be, “…the release of prisoners and truce in the sky — ban on missiles, long-ranged drones, bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure — and truce in the sea immediately, if Russia will do the same.”

Keywords: Ukraine, Russia, ceasefire, energy infrastructure, Putin, conflict, conflict resolution, peace, progress,

Addressing Heresy in Peacebuilding: Lessons from Indonesia’s Ahmadiyya and Shia Communities

Heresy claims have long been a source of conflict in religiously diverse societies, often resulting in violence and social exclusion. In Indonesia, accusations of heresy against minority groups have led to severe consequences, including forced displacement and prolonged marginalisation. Two groups marginalized this way include Ahmadiyya communities on the island of Lombok, and Shia communities in the town of Sampang, East Java, 

These communities have been labelled as deviating from Islamic orthodoxy, triggering social tensions that have persisted for years. While efforts such as reconversion have been attempted to resolve these conflicts, they have often failed to address deeper mistrust and systemic exclusion. For instance, despite agreeing to convert to Sunni Islam in 2020, displaced Shia families in Sampang remain unable to return to their homes. Incidents like this underscore the limitations of theological solutions in addressing such disputes, and the need for new approaches to sustainable peacebuilding.

Heresy as a Construct: Beyond Theological Deviations

Heresy, derived from the Greek hairesis, meaning choice, is not simply a theological disagreement, but a socially constructed label used to reinforce orthodoxy and socio-political control. In Islamic contexts, heresy is closely associated with zandaqah, a term historically used to describe beliefs seen as threatening to Islamic teachings. Unlike religious outsiders, those accused of heresy (zindiq) are considered “deviant insiders,” remaining within the religious fold while challenging established norms.

Interpretations of orthodoxy have varied across regions and historical periods. The variability in interpretations often reflects local dynamics, including political power struggles and cultural differences.

Wisma Transito, a displacement shelter of the Ahmadiyya community in Mataram, Lombok Island, photo by Nadia Furabi.

In cases like those of the Ahmadiyya and Shia communities in Indonesia, accusations of heresy have been used not only to uphold religious orthodoxy but also to justify social exclusion and violence. These claims serve to marginalise groups seen as challenging the dominant socio-religious order, framing them as threats to community harmony. This highlights the dual nature of heresy as both a theological and socio-political construct.

The Social Consequences of Heresy Claims

The labelling of groups as heretical has far-reaching social consequences, particularly for minority communities. In Lombok, members of the Ahmadiyya community, after facing harassment and mob attacks throughout the early 2000s, have been forced to live in temporary shelters for nearly two decades, cut off from their homes and livelihoods. In Sampang, the displacement of Shia families in 2012 due to similar violence has led to long-term social isolation. Even when attempts are made to reconcile, such as through reconversion, these efforts often fail to address the underlying mistrust and systemic exclusion that fuel conflict.

Puspa Agro, a displacement shelter of the Shia from Sampang. Located in Sidoarjo, East Java. Photo by Nadia Furabi.

Religious Leadership in Navigating Heresy

Religious leaders have a unique role to play in addressing heresy-related conflicts, as their influence within communities allows them to mediate disputes and challenge exclusionary narratives. The 11th-century Sunni theologian Abu Hamid al-Ghazali offers a relevant framework for navigating such conflicts. In his treatise Faysal al-Tafriqa bayna al-Islam wa al-Zandaqa (The Decisive Criterion for Distinguishing Islam from Masked Infidelity), al-Ghazali argued against the monopolisation of religious truth and emphasised the importance of theological diversity. 

For al-Ghazali, disagreements over religious interpretation should not lead to accusations of disbelief or exclusion, as long as the core tenets of Islam— belief in God and the Prophet Muhammad— are upheld. His perspective highlights the potential for coexistence within religious diversity, encouraging dialogue and mutual respect instead of division. This approach offers a powerful model for modern peacebuilding efforts, where theological disagreements often escalate into social conflicts.

Toward Sustainable Peacebuilding

Resolving heresy-related conflicts requires moving beyond theological debates to address the social, political, and structural factors that perpetuate division. The displacement of the Ahmadiyya in Lombok and the Shia in Sampang illustrates the urgent need for comprehensive strategies that rebuild trust and foster inclusion within communities.

Efforts to reintegrate displaced groups must begin by fostering open dialogue between majority and minority communities. Such conversations create opportunities to dispel misconceptions and promote understanding, reducing the stigma associated with heresy claims. Facilitating these dialogues in safe, neutral spaces ensures that all voices are heard and respected, laying the groundwork for long-term reconciliation.

Strengthening legal protections is equally critical. Impartial legal frameworks that safeguard religious freedoms and prevent violence or exclusion based on theological differences are essential for creating a foundation of equality. Legal systems must actively protect the rights of marginalised groups, ensuring their safety and enabling them to participate fully in society without fear of persecution.

Wisma Transito, a displacement shelter of the Ahmadiyya community in Mataram, Lombok Island, photo by Nadia Furabi.

Religious leaders play a vital role in peacebuilding. Their influence within communities makes them uniquely positioned to mediate conflicts and promote tolerance. By emphasising shared values and challenging divisive narratives, religious actors can shift the focus from exclusion to inclusion, fostering a culture of coexistence.

Finally, addressing structural inequalities is a necessary component of sustainable peacebuilding. Displacement often exacerbates existing inequalities by limiting access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities. Providing resources and opportunities for displaced communities helps reduce tensions and fosters social cohesion, ensuring that peacebuilding efforts are both inclusive and durable.

Reframing Heresy for Harmony

Heresy claims, while deeply divisive, also offer an opportunity to address the roots of exclusion and build more inclusive societies. The cases of the Ahmadiyya in Lombok and the Shia in Sampang highlight the limitations of theological solutions and the need for a broader approach to peacebuilding. 

By engaging religious leaders, fostering dialogue, and addressing systemic inequalities, peacebuilders can transform heresy-related conflicts into opportunities for reconciliation and social harmony. Heresy is not an insurmountable challenge. With inclusive and thoughtful approaches, it is possible to create a society where diversity is not just tolerated but celebrated as a strength.

Keywords: Indonesia, heresy, Ahmadiyya, Shia, Islam, peacebuilding, conflict, religious conflict, conflict resolution

This Week in Peace #74: March 14

This week, Ukraine agrees to 30-day ceasefire with Russia, US officials visit Moscow for talks. After recent attacks, is there hope for South Thailand peace talks? US presents proposal for Israel-Gaza ceasefire extension.

Ukraine Agrees to 30-Day Ceasefire With Russia, US Officials Visit Moscow for Talks

Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire with Russia, following talks in Saudi Arabia on March 11. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned allies the next day to not let Russia “deceive” them, saying, “Because right now, Russian strikes have not stopped.”

In response to Ukraine agreeing to the ceasefire, the US has agreed to lift the pause on intelligence sharing, and resume security assistance to Ukraine. US envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in Moscow on March 13 to discuss the ceasefire, and it remains to be seen what will come of the visit.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that the “ball is truly in their [Russia’s] court,” and that the US believes that peace negotiations are the only way to end the fighting. US President Donald Trump, despite having recent tensions with Zelensky, has now warned Russia that he will put additional sanctions on the country if it doesn’t accept the ceasefire.

Meanwhile, Russia has laid out demands for talks with the US and Ukraine. These demands include, Reuters reported, no NATO membership for Ukraine, no deploying foreign troops in Ukraine, and international recognition of Putin’s claim that Crimea and four provinces belong to Russia. Russia has made many of these demands over the past two decades. According to US documents reviewed by Reuters, the Biden administration tried to forestall Russia’s invasion of Ukraine by engaging Russia on several demands, while rejecting some of them.

After Recent Attacks, Is There Hope for South Thailand Peace Talks?

Attacks by suspected insurgents killed five people and injured 13 in Thailand’s Narathiwat and Pattani provinces in the country’s conflicted southern region on March 8. On March 10, Deputy Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai said that the attacks have raised questions on whether those involved in the peace dialogue around the conflict have the authority to represent insurgent groups.

South Thailand has a Muslim-majority population, and was forcibly incorporated into a Buddhist Siam in 1909. The region’s separatist insurgency escalated in the early 2000s, and has been met with violent suppression from the state. The latest peace talks between Thai government negotiators and South Thailand’s main rebel group, the Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) took place in early 2024. Since Thailand’s Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra assumed office in August 2024, there have not been signs of Malaysia- brokered peace talks reigniting.

On March 11, Wechayachai said that a new peace negotiating team chief will not be appointed until a strategic plan to resolve the conflict is finalized. He noted that a plan is under review.

Some activists have criticized the government for the lack of renewed peace talks. Anchana Heemmina, chairperson of the Duay Jai (with Heart) Association for Humanitarian Assistance, told Benar News that the government had ignored earlier signs of dissatisfaction in South Thailand, such as people burning electricity poles and putting up protest signs, adding that the government was “not showing clear intentions” on the peace dialogue process. 

US Presents Proposal for Israel-Gaza Ceasefire Extension

On March 12, US envoy Steve Witkoff presented an updated proposal for a month-long extension of the Israel-Gaza ceasefire, which expired on March 1, in exchange for the release of at least five living hostages, and the remains of around nine hostages currently held captive by Hamas. Witkoff presented the proposal in Qatar.

Witkoff’s original proposal two weeks ago had called for around 10 living hostages released, along with the remains of around 18 deceased hostages.

Under the updated proposal, the ceasefire would run until the end of passover on April 20, and Israel would lift its blockade of humanitarian aid to Gaza, which has been in place for almost two weeks, CNN reported. Israel and Hamas would use the extended ceasefire to come to a long-term truce in Gaza, according to the proposal.

The Israeli Prime Minister’s office did not respond to CNN’s request for comment. However, the Hostages and Missing Families’ Forum said in a statement that the outline to return only a few hostages was concerning, and that, “We demand a comprehensive and immediate agreement that will return all 59 hostages in one fell swoop and leave no one behind.”

Hamas is still holding 59 hostages in Gaza, and US and Israeli officials believe that 22 of them are still alive, Axios reports.

Keywords: Ukraine, Russia, Thailand, Israel, Palestine, South Thailand, South Thailand insurgency, conflict, peace, conflict resolution

Is Peaceful Coexistence Possible in Kosovo?

Much of the world only knows of Kosovo as a conflict zone, fought over between Serbs and Albanians. Based on such media representations, one can get the impression that there is not even one example of positive relations or events in Kosovo. 

But the town of Kamenica challenges this notion. It is a small town and the center of a municipality of around 26,000 people with the same name, located in the eastern part of Kosovo. Kamenica offers an example of a rare coexistence between Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo. There is a long-lasting coexistence embodied in the ordinary everyday life of members of two or more ethnic groups within a deeply divided post-conflict society.

Kamenica is a place where local Serbs and Albanians succeeded in preserving peace during the 1998-1999 war in Kosovo. The representatives of the international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions in the municipality also succeeded in maintaining peace in the years after the end of this war. 

Based on our research, we recognized the following factors that affected the peaceful coexistence of local Albanians and Serbs in Kamenica: historical-demographic, geopolitical, institutional, and economic factors, as well as the role, approach, and efforts of the representatives of international peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions.   

Although historical, demographic, and geopolitical factors show that the locals of Kamenica worked hard to maintain peace in turbulent times during and after the war, our research showed that the decisive factor was the role played by representatives of international peace and security forces. This was assisted by the city’s geopolitical location and distance from areas of revolt and arms transfer. Relatively far from Pristina and Mitrovica, cities that have been the centers of discontent and revolt, as well as the border with Albania, Kamenica benefitted from being on the conflict’s sidelines. 

Additionally, the local Serb and Albanian populations lived among each other for only about 50 years before the 1999 war. Kamenica was a village inhabited almost exclusively by Serbs before World War II (Stanković, 1910), except for a few households that belonged to Roma and Gorani residents. Given that the Serbs welcomed their new Albanian neighbors, who were first a minority after World War II, the groups coexisted well together.

All of these factors were the basis for good inter-ethnic relations, but not the only necessary conditions. Immediately after the end of the war in 1999, a major threat to the survival of Kamenica’s remaining Serb population was attacks by Albanians from surrounding areas. The biggest threat was from the Liberation Army of Presevo, Medvedja, and Bujanovac. The work of the Kosovo Force (KFOR) peacekeeping force’s Russian contingent, which was deployed in Kamenica municipality from the end of the war until 2003, along with representatives of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), prevented— according to the respondents of Serbian nationality— a complete exodus of Serbs from the town. Satisfaction with their work was also expressed by respondents of Albanian nationality, who said that the presence of the Russian KFOR contingent was good for the remaining Serbs. 

Representatives of the UNMIK administration in Kamenica made major efforts to reintegrate local Serbs into the regular flow of everyday life after the war. They worked to ensure that the number of employees of different ethnic groups in all institutions in Kamenica is proportional to the number of inhabitants of those groups. 

They also made great efforts to revive some of the positive social practices that existed in this city before the war. For example, they significantly contributed to the revival of the market in the city center, which before the war was a kind of symbol of the coexistence of the local population. Respondents confirmed that it was not easy to convince local Serbs to sell their products again at the local market, as they lived in great fear. With its “revival” by representatives of the UNMIK administration, it became the first “multi-ethnic” market in Kosovo after the 1999 war.   

We do not claim that the work of the representatives of the Russian KFOR contingent and UNMIK in Kamenica was ideal, but our research has established that it was dedicated, systematic, and purposeful, which was not the case in many municipalities in Kosovo.

The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (in English), specifically the project “Anxieties in “divided cities” in post-conflict societies: developing and testing innovative (experimental) approaches in peacebuilding” (N5-0178), and the research programme Obramboslovje (P5-0206).

Keywords: Kosovo, Kamenica, Serbs, Albanians, coexistence, peace, conflict, conflict resolution, unmik, kfor