Home Blog Page 5

Why Digital Peacebuilding Must Start with Local Realities: What Local Digital Peacebuilding Looks Like in Practice in Kenya and Nigeria

By
Sokfa John
-
0

In Kano, northern Nigeria, women who do not use smartphones or social media are being trained to call radio stations and challenge hate speech on air. In western Kenya, university students are using memes, Instagram stories, and football tournaments to reduce political and ethnic tensions. At first glance, these efforts may not fit the familiar image of “digital peacebuilding.” But that is exactly why they matter.

Too often, conversations about technology and peacebuilding treat digital tools as symbols of progress, suggesting that the more advanced the technology, the better the peace work. That way of thinking suggests there is a single model of progress, with ideas flowing from global experts down to local communities. 

But my research on initiatives operating at the intersection of the local and the digital in African peacebuilding suggests something different. In practice, digital peacebuilding is not mainly about sophisticated tools. It is about how people adapt technology to the realities of their own communities. 

A Local Response in Kano

One example comes from the Women and Youths for Justice and Peace Initiative (WAYJPI), a grassroots organization based in Kano State, Nigeria. Kano is a predominantly Hausa-speaking, Muslim-majority city with a long and complex history of political, ethnic, and religious tension. During election periods, those tensions can be inflamed quickly through radio broadcasts, social media posts and other forms of public messaging.

WAYJPI’s response is rooted in local knowledge. Volunteers verify misleading images and videos, flag harmful content, and engage directly with people spreading it. The organization also recognizes the importance of local media and local political culture. For example, WAYJPI recognized a political phenomenon unique to Kano, known as Sojojin Baka, or “political gladiators.” They include articulate, charismatic figures hired by politicians to dominate local media and shape public opinion, often through divisive and inflammatory language. The organization connected to some of these individuals and trained them to repurpose their skills and platforms for peace.  People who once amplified hate now promote dialogue.

WAYJPI also works with living and evolving lexicons of hate speech terms and phrases in Hausa, Nigerian Pidgin, and local slangs, updating them with input from the communities where it works. This matters because hate speech is highly contextual.  Words that seem harmless to outsiders can carry a very different meaning locally. In other words, effective digital peacebuilding in such situations depends on understanding how people speak, listen, and interpret messages in a specific context.

Maskani Commons in Western Kenya

A second example comes from Maskani Commons in western Kenya. The project emerged in 2020 through a partnership between Rongo University’s Center for Media, Democracy, Peace and Security and Build Up. It brought together students from several public universities to address online and offline polarisation in a country still shaped by memories of the 2007 post-election violence.

The students were trained in storytelling, depolarisation, and platform-specific communication. They learned how different tools could serve different purposes, such as using X for real-time dialogue, Instagram for Visual storytelling, and WhatsApp for community conversations. But as they practiced, it became clear that some of the most important peacebuilding opportunities were away from screens.

When students returned home during school holidays, many found that several community members rarely used social media. So, they met people where they were: at family gatherings, religious events, cultural festivals, and football matches. These offline conversations were not separate from their digital work. They brought these conversations back to online platforms, creating a constant exchange between physical and digital spaces.

In this kind of work, online and offline peacebuilding are not opposites, compromises or workarounds. They are intertwined.

The Digital Is Always Local

What stands out in both Nigeria and Kenya is that these peacebuilders themselves do not draw a hard line between “digital” and “local” work. For them, the same tensions, rumours and political divisions move across radio, WhatsApp groups, Facebook pages, religious gatherings and street conversations. The platform may change, but the social reality behind it remains the same. 

This has major implications for how peacebuilding programmes are designed, funded, and evaluated. When a student identifies as a digital peacebuilder during a peace conversation at a football match, she is not straying from digital work. She is doing the real work. When volunteers sit with local residents to identify new coded phrases being used as hate speech, they are not supplementing their digital monitoring, they are conducting it. 

Seen this way, digital peacebuilding does not float above everyday life. It grows out of language, trust, memory, identity, and local relationships. A Facebook group in Kano is not the same as a Facebook group in Nairobi or New York, even if the technology is identical. What matters is who is speaking, who is listening, what the words mean in that context, who is affected by the words, and who has the credibility to respond.

Tools can be shared across borders, but peacebuilding strategies cannot simply be copied and pasted, even when they use shared tools. They have to be translated into local realities.

A Lesson for Peacebuilding

As artificial intelligence, algorithmic recommendation systems, and encrypted messaging make harmful content spread faster and further, there is understandable pressure to find scalable technological fixes. But the experiences of groups like WAYJPI and Maskani Commons suggest that the most effective responses will not come from technology alone, no matter how advanced. They will come from people who understand their communities well enough to adapt tools to local needs.

Across Africa, digital peacebuilders are already doing this. They are working in local languages, using trusted networks, and adjusting their methods as conflict dynamics evolve. Their work is a reminder that peace is not built by platforms. It is built by people.

This Week in Peace #132: June 19

By
Tara Abhasakun
-
0
Gulf of Thailand, photo via Pexels.

This week, UN commits to helping 60,000 displaced South Sudanese by December 31. German and South African experts will help Thailand and Cambodia with arbitration. Civilians face dangers moving in Sudan.

UN Commits to Helping 60,000 Displaced South Sudanese by December 31

On January 15, the UN committed to reducing the number of displaced South Sudanese people by December 31, 2026, and supporting “their stable integration into communities.” The UN’s joint communique on the plan involves the government’s and UN’s assistance in the following areas: land and housing security; basic services and infrastructure development; peacebuilding, safety, and security; coordination and data; and resource mobilization and transparency.  

The “land and housing security” point involves the government ensuring the provision of land and housing support for relocation, return, and settlement initiatives. 

The communique noted that there were around 2.7 million Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and 3 million returnees by the end of 2025. 

South Sudan’s conflict is between the military, which is loyal to Kiir, and insurgents believed to be allied with the suspended vice-president Riek Machar. Fighting between government and opposition forces continues to kill and injure civilians in several states, with 169 people killed and 4,000 displaced in the Abiemnhom area of Unity state on March 1. 

German and South African Experts Will Help Thailand and Cambodia with Arbitration

German and South African experts will help Thailand and Cambodia with a UN-backed conciliation process to resolve the maritime dispute between the two countries, Thai foreign minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow said on June 16. 

Cambodia initiated the compulsory conciliation process in early June after Thailand unilaterally withdrew from the 2001 memorandum of understanding that had provided a framework for negotiations on overlapping maritime claims in the Gulf of Thailand.

Cambodia’s government said it “welcomes the Thai Government’s announcement that it has decided to ​participate in the conciliation process.”

The dispute is over around 10,000 square miles of sea in the Gulf of Thailand, known as the Overlapping Claims Area, which is estimated to hold ​nearly 12 trillion cubic feet of natural gas ​and ⁠large quantities of oil, worth about $300 billion.

Adding to tensions between the two countries is the conflict that broke out along the border in July 2025, which came to a ceasefire in December 2025.

Civilians Face Dangers Moving in Sudan

In Sudan, moving from one place to another has become dangerous to civilians. On June 15, the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan reported that both sides in the conflict—the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), along with allied groups—are stopping civilians at checkpoints and accusing them of supporting opposing forces, detaining them without legal process. 

Those targeted include journalists, humanitarian workers, traders, community leaders, and other civilians trying to reach safer areas or maintain livelihoods, the Mission said.

The Mission warned that extortions linked to these arbitrary arrests are compounding the country’s humanitarian crisis, citing cases when families were told to pay large sums to secure the release of detained relatives. Some reportedly faced demands equivalent to around US$40,000, an impossible amount of money for families already caught in conflict. 

Meanwhile, the Mission noted that at least 70 individuals, including humanitarian workers, were arrested in El Geneina during May 2026 and have not been heard from since.

The Mission called for renewed international efforts to ensure accountability. 

Keywords: peace, South Sudan, Thailand, Cambodia, Sudan, humanitarian, maritime, MOU, refugees, displaced, IDPs, conflict, conflict resolution, peace journalism

Israeli and Palestinian Groups Fight to Save Two-State Solution at Paris Meeting

By
Tara Abhasakun
-
0
Scenic view of the Dome of the Rock from the Mount of Olives, Jerusalem. Photo by Michelle Chadwick via Pexels.

What was the meeting in Paris with Israeli and Palestinian civil society groups about? What is the two-state solution? Can the two-state solution be saved? What are Israeli and Palestinian civil society groups doing for peace? Will there be peace between Israelis and Palestinians? What is settler violence? How are settlements impacting the possibility of a two-state solution?

Israeli and Palestinian groups are fighting to save the two-state solution. Several Israeli and Palestinian civil society groups gathered in Paris on June 12, 2026 to plead to the international community not to abandon the two-state solution. The meeting came ahead of a G7 summit in France.

The meeting included foreign ministers and officials from many countries. It was held on the one-year anniversary of the U.N.-backed New York Declaration, which established a path toward Palestinian statehood and prompted around 12 countries to recognize a Palestinian state, including France, Britain, and Canada.

The groups at the meeting urged that “the window of opportunity” was closing. The event concluded with an eight-point action plan urging a permanent ​ceasefire, a halt to settlements, reconstruction in the Gaza Strip, governance reforms, and stronger international support for civil society. 

The action plan noted that “The region continues to fracture. Gaza is devastated, Israel remains under threat. Settler terrorism, settlement expansion, and de facto annexation and threats ​to the Palestinian Authority continue to undermine the viability of a future Palestinian state.”

French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot stressed France’s support for the two-state solution, adding that “this year could be decisive.”

The meeting came after, on June 9, 2026, Britain, Canada, France and Norway announced new sanctions against Israeli networks involved in financing, enabling and carrying out violence in the West Bank. This was after Australia and New Zealand had announced sanctions the previous week. 

Britain, Canada, France, Norway, and Australia said the steps aimed to “hold extremist settlers accountable for the horrific levels of settler violence against Palestinian civilians.”

In September 2025, France, Britain, Canada and several other countries recognized a Palestinian state, defying long-held norms for Western countries. However, hopes for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine have been dimming for decades, largely due to Israel’s settlement expansion, as well as continued violence between Israelis and Palestinians. 

Israeli settlers in the West Bank continue to brutally attack Palestinians, in some instances depopulating entire villages. On June 11, the UN said that settler attacks have hit record levels and surpassed 1,000 this year. Settlements also use Palestinian resources including land and water. 

Meanwhile, progress on Palestinian self rule in Gaza and Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza have been delayed, with each side blaming the other for not taking the steps listed in US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan. On June 7, 2026, Palestinian factions met in Cairo to discuss the next phase of the Gaza ceasefire. A source familiar with the talks told Times of Israel that the implementation of the plan would advance, regardless of Hamas trying to avoid disarmament.

On April 16, 2026 the left wing pro-Israel group J Street published an assessment of the Gaza ceasefire, six months after it was announced on October 10, 2025. J Street noted that the plan has “largely stalled on all its promises beyond the initial pause in fighting, hostage exchange, and surge in humanitarian aid.” Since the ceasefire was announced, the assessment reported, over 700 Palestinians and four Israelis had been killed in Gaza. 

The assessment added that although Gaza’s humanitarian situation has improved significantly, it remains dire. Seventy-seven percent of the population still faces acute food insecurity, and severe shortages in medical supplies, fuel, and shelter materials persist, largely due to Israeli restrictions on items classified as “dual-use,” including temporary shelters. 

Despite setbacks at the political level, grassroots peace initiatives are still fighting for peace. Israeli and Palestinian civil society organizations are working to save the possibility of peace amidst increasingly dire conditions in the decades-long conflict.

Keywords: Israel, Palestine, civil society, peace updates, peace, conflict, conflict resolution, settler violence, Gaza, Paris, two-state solution

How Tourism is Helping Build Peace Along the U.S.-Mexico Border

By
Connor Clark
-
0
Big Bend National Park, photo via Wikipedia.

Can tourism build peace? How is tourism helping build peace on the U.S.-Mexico border? How does conservation relate to building peace on the U.S.-Mexico border?

When many people think about the U.S.-Mexico border, they picture walls, immigration debates, and political conflict. Every month, U.S Border Patrol apprehends thousands of people at the U.S-Mexico border, with 8,268 apprehended in March 2026. There are also tensions surrounding the 1944 Water Treaty, with Mexico struggling to maintain its water deliveries. Yet in one remote corner of the border, a different story is unfolding—one centered on cooperation, conservation, and community relationships.

In the Big Bend-Río Bravo region, where Texas meets the Mexican states of Coahuila and Chihuahua, residents, tourism operators, conservationists, and park managers are quietly building connections across the international boundary. Their efforts show how tourism can become an unexpected tool for peacebuilding.

Our recent research explored how these cross-border relationships develop and what they mean for the future of the region. Through interviews with tourism and conservation stakeholders on both sides of the border, we found that tourism is doing much more than bringing visitors to the area. It is creating opportunities for dialogue, trust, and cooperation around shared environmental resources.

A Border Defined by Nature

Unlike many parts of the U.S.-Mexico border, the Big Bend-Río Bravo region is dominated by mountains, deserts, canyons, and protected natural areas. The Rio Grande (known in Mexico as the Río Bravo) forms the international boundary. The region contains a network of national parks, protected areas, and wildlife habitats on both sides of the river. Wildlife regularly crosses the border. Black bears, birds, and other species do not recognize political boundaries. Rivers, ecosystems, and landscapes are shared resources that require cooperation if they are to be protected. These shared natural resources provide the foundation for tourism. Visitors come to hike, raft, observe wildlife, experience local culture, and enjoy some of the most remote landscapes in North America. Because nature itself crosses the border, many residents see cooperation as a practical necessity rather than a political choice.

Tourism Creates Shared Interests

One of the strongest themes that emerged from our research was the widespread enthusiasm for collaboration. Residents on both sides of the border recognized that tourism creates economic opportunities while encouraging environmental protection. Many communities in the region depend heavily on visitors who come to experience the area’s unique landscapes and culture. For example, residents of the Mexican village of Boquillas del Carmen benefit directly from visitors who cross the border from Big Bend National Park. Tourism supports guides, restaurant owners, transportation providers, artisans, and families throughout the community. But tourism’s value extends beyond economics. Stakeholders repeatedly described how tourism creates reasons for people from different backgrounds to communicate and solve problems together. Park managers, conservation groups, business owners, and community leaders often share the same goal: maintaining healthy natural resources that visitors want to experience. This shared interest creates opportunities for cooperation even when larger political relationships may be strained.

Building Relationships Around a Campfire

Perhaps the most striking example of peacebuilding in the region comes from a practice known as “down-river seminars.” These multi-day river trips bring together tourism operators, conservation professionals, park staff, and other stakeholders from both countries. Participants spend several days rafting together through the canyons of the Rio Grande. The trips are not formal diplomatic meetings, which would require a lengthy bureaucratic process to obtain all the necessary travel and visa approvals. Instead, these down-river seminars are opportunities for stakeholders to talk as neighbors and colleagues as they engage in what is considered a legally acceptable and permissible border activity that does not require a passport or tourist visa: river tourism.

During these seminars, participants discuss challenges such as visitor management, environmental protection, river access, and conservation. Conversations happen around campfires rather than conference tables. Several interviewees explained that these informal gatherings often accomplish more than traditional meetings because participants leave behind official titles and institutional barriers. The result is relationship-building based on trust, shared experiences, and mutual respect. These relationships often become the foundation for future cooperation.

Solving Problems Together

Peacebuilding is not always about resolving major conflicts. Often, it involves finding practical ways to address shared challenges. The Big Bend-Río Bravo region faces many such challenges. Water shortages, tourism seasonality, infrastructure limitations, wildlife management, and economic development all require ongoing cooperation. Stakeholders described numerous examples of collaborative problem-solving.

Tourism operators and government agencies have worked together to develop policies that allow river recreation while respecting border regulations. Conservation organizations collaborate across the border to protect wildlife habitat. Community leaders advocate for improvements that can benefit residents while preserving natural resources. In many cases, the solutions are informal and locally driven. Rather than waiting for national governments to create large-scale agreements, people in the region often focus on what they can accomplish through personal relationships and community partnerships. This bottom-up approach was one of the most important findings of our research.

The Importance of Trust

Many participants emphasized that successful cooperation depends on trust. In a remote region where protected areas, private lands, tourism businesses, and local communities overlap, formal rules alone are not enough. Personal relationships play a critical role. Landowners, tourism operators, conservation agencies, and community leaders often rely on years of trust-building to coordinate activities and manage resources effectively. These relationships help people navigate differences and work toward common goals. Peacebuilding scholars frequently identify trust as a key ingredient for long-term cooperation. The experiences of stakeholders in the Big Bend-Río Bravo region strongly support this idea.

Challenges Remain

The region still faces significant obstacles. Economic inequalities, political tensions, border regulations, limited infrastructure, and environmental pressures all create challenges for tourism and conservation efforts. Many communities on the Mexican side have fewer tourism opportunities and less access to infrastructure than neighboring areas in the United States. Water scarcity continues to create concerns throughout the region. Border crossing procedures can also complicate collaboration. Despite these difficulties, stakeholders generally expressed optimism about the future. Rather than focusing exclusively on barriers, many participants emphasized opportunities for expanding tourism, strengthening partnerships, and improving access to shared natural resources.

Peacebuilding Through Everyday Cooperation

One of the most important lessons from this research is that peacebuilding often happens through ordinary activities. People do not need formal peace treaties to build peace. When tourism operators work together across a border, when conservationists coordinate wildlife protection efforts, when community members host visitors from another country, and when stakeholders gather to solve shared problems, they are helping create conditions that support peaceful relationships. These efforts may not receive international headlines. They may not involve national leaders or major diplomatic initiatives. Yet they contribute to something equally important: building trust, understanding, and cooperation between communities.

The Big Bend-Río Bravo region reminds us that peacebuilding is not only something that happens in government offices. It can also emerge along rivers, in protected areas, around campfires, and through the everyday work of people who share a landscape and a desire for a better future.

Keywords: US-Mexico border, US, United States, Mexico, border, border patrol, ICE,

This Week in Peace #131: June 12

By
Tara Abhasakun
-
0
Grand Market of Lomé, Togo, where the African Union (AU) held a meeting on June 7. Photo by Dan Sloan via Wikipedia.

This week, African Union (AU) holds meeting to review Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) peace mediation. South Sudanese youth lead “Hear Us Now, Act Now” campaign for peace. Hopes for peace drift further away as Pakistan strikes Afghanistan.

African Union Holds Meeting to Review DRC Peace Mediation

On June 7, the African Union (AU) held a meeting in Lome, Togo, to review peace mediation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The two-day meeting gathered key stakeholders in the AU-led facilitation process, MedAfrica reported.

This development follows another meeting in Lome held in January. The June 7 meeting revolved around implementing previous recommendations, and obstacles to the peace process in conflicted areas of DRC. 

Attendees stressed the importance of continued collective action by African countries, the AU, and international partners, to achieve peace and reconciliation. 

After the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the chief of the World Health Organization (WHO) Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is urging an immediate ceasefire in the country’s conflict-devastated eastern region. Despite being under government control, insecurity is worsening in eastern DRC’s Ituri province, with the UN humanitarian office reporting nearly 1 million displaced in the province. 

South Sudanese Youth Lead ‘Hear Us Now, Act Now’ Campaign for Peace

Amidst an uptick in violence, South Sudanese youth are leading a new UN initiative called “Hear Us Now, Act Now for a Peaceful World.” The initiative aims to amplify the voices of young people on issues impacting them and their communities including conflict, limited access to education, economic opportunities, and leadership roles. The initiative has now spread to most of South Sudan’s states. 

Thousands attended the initiative’s launch event in Wau, including authorities, chiefs, women, media, artists, forces, civil society, and religious figures. Several South Sudanese musicians performed at the event. Stakeholders, including South Sudanese elites, warmly welcomed the initiative. 

Progress has stalled on implementing South Sudan’s 2018 Revitalized Agreement. The agreement includes five key points, which are: security-sector reform; the formation of unified forces; disarmament, demobilization and reintegration; arms and ammunition management; and efforts to address conflict-related sexual violence.

A global outcry is taking place now that South Sudan’s president unilaterally made changes to the agreementl. On May 19, the embassies of Australia, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Britain and the United States released a joint statement urging South Sudan president Salva Kiir Mayardit immediately return to dialogue. 

Pakistan Strikes Afghanistan Amidst International Peace Efforts

Pakistan carried out airstrikes on Afghanistan on June 10, causing hopes for peace to drift further away. Afghan spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid said 13 people, including 11 children, one woman, and an elderly man, were killed, Associated Press reported.

Pakistan said it targeted militant hideouts and infrastructure linked to recent attacks inside Pakistan, and that it killed 26 militants. 

This development comes after other countries have tried to negotiate peace between Pakistan and Afghanistan. In April, the two countries confirmed they were holding talks in Urumqi, China, in an attempt to secure a ceasefire. 

Pakistan accuses the Taliban in Afghanistan of harboring militants who attack Pakistan. Meanwhile, Afghan officials claim that that Pakistan harbours hostile groups and does not respect its sovereignty, RTL Today reports. The UN’s office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs in Afghanistan posted on X on April 7 that the conflict had displaced 94,000 people.

Keywords: DRC, Congo, Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Sudan, peace, ceasefire, efforts, African Union, AU, conflict, conflict resolution

1...456...192Page 5 of 192