Interview with Claske DIJKEMA

Irenees :

May you introduce yourself, please ?

Claske Dijkema :

I’m reflecting well on where to start because the first element you mention is often indicative of the strongest component of your identification. I will never forget the moment I was introduced in France to a general and the organization that had just hired me presented me as “jeune maman hollandaise” and I was thinking. You did not hire me for either of these three reasons I hope. Of course I would have hoped to be rather introduced as professional, bright and expert on conflict issues. I think the Dutch component of the presentation bothered me least and I have noticed that since I am in France I often present myself as Dutch, which therefore has become a new component of my identity. So I will make an effort in finding a balance in how others present me and how I would like to be known.

Co-creating the organization Modus Operandi has been a great challenge in developing a structure, an institute that realizes some of my ideas about the way I would like to work, what skills I would like to develop and about what issues I would like to think. From very young on I have been attracted by issues of social justice. I also always have wanted to be part of a big family but with the years I learned that constituting a “chosen family” has important advantages. Apart from a healthy doses of intellect I don’t think I’m destined for developing grand theories. Creating networks of people who have similar objectives and sharing inspiration is one of the big pleasures in working for me.

Irenees :

What were the reasons of your commitment for peace?

Claske Dijkema :

I’m not sure whether I really consider myself as being engaged in or for peace. In thinking about social justice, social problems, power relations and conflict I have come across peace theory and people working for peace organizations. I have been inspired by their methods of work. Peace theory also sheds a light on how people and under what conditions people are willing to share and to live together which I find very interesting. I have first come across peace theory as such during my studies at Berkeley University in California which was an eye-opener for me, since up till then most of my courses fit a structural sociology approach. Peace theory was demonstrating that societies can be changed and social movements can reach a critical mass.

Irenees :

As an intellectual and researcher, what importance do you attach to analysis, to research, and to the building of tools and resources for conflict understanding and peace building ?

Claske Dijkema :

Beyond doubt, analytical tools are crucial in understanding conflict and creating change. So far, I have come across a number of very useful analytical tools like the “pillar model” which IFOR uses in its trainings as well as the conflict analysis tools that have been developed by RTC in the UK. I know that a number of partners of the Irenees network feel a frustrated by the limits of existing tools. In my experience so far I have not experienced this problem. A combination of existing tools has helped me in understaning conflict.

Where I do have experienced this sentiment is in the analytical tools for understanding state and society relations. With Karine we have been developing a simple graphic image that permits us to talk about for hours and proves good discussion in the class room. The graph shows a circle, representing the state and from it, several arrows in the opposite direction of the circle, showing a movement from the state. This graph represents the idea that if a state is not legitimate for a part of the population, that group withdraws its confidence and consequently creates alternatives for the role the state is supposed to play. For example, the state is supposed to provide security, if people do not feel that the state does this, they will develop their own private structure. Examples rate from “gated communities” separated from public life by a wall and guarded by private security companies to guerilla armies. Other examples can concern: health services, social security systems, political parties and economy. In transforming a conflict towards sustainable peace one of the challenges is to revert the direction of these arrows. What conditions allow people to reinvest in the state? What dynamics allow them to give up their private security arrangements for a larger community, that of the state and all the citizens that are part of it.

Irenees :

Co-director of Modus Operandi, can you tell us which are the activities developed by this association ?

Claske Dijkema :

• Development of Training programs and university education

• Research

• Events, debates, projects bringing people together to talk about their experiences around a number of topics strongly linked to the way politics impact people’s willingness to live together.

Irenees :

Which are the actions you are involved in, or you are developing for peacebuilding?

Claske Dijkema :

Saying that my actions contribute to the construction of peace goes a bit far. For the moment I feel that I do not have any direct influence on the construction of peace apart from in my direct surroundings. Most of the work we do is indirect: in training people who are working or will be working with conflict to do conflict analysis, I hope that their actions will at least not harm the areas in which they are active and will hopefull contribute to local peace. I would like to be more directly concerned with constructing peace or addressing tensions in the society in which I live.

Irenees :

You worked in South Africa for the « African Center for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes » (ACCORD). Which are, according to you, the most important factors of current conflicts in Africa ? Poverty? Natural resources ? ethnicity ? foreign interests ?…

Claske Dijkema :

I think the actual conflict in Africa have strong historical roots. The continent has been confronted with a series of very rapid changes economically, politically, socially that have completely transformed and undermined existing structures. Many actors have acted on this phenomenon (international organizations, African elite groups, business actors, governments, etc. ) each with their own interests. The weakened structures however have prevented societies to properly manage the influence of above actors on society, while at the same time the society is very active, mobilized and motivated, creating enormous tensions.

At the same time I also notice mounting tensions in Europe that deserve thorough analysis.

Irenees :

Do you think that Africa is able to give some innovative contributions for peace building in the entire world? Which ones?

Claske Dijkema :

Yes, Sense of community , sense of sharing, and sense of sacred, based on a strong convictions that everything and everyone is linked.

Irenees :

What is, to you, the role of the international intervention in african conflicts (other countries, African Union, financers, USA, Europe, China, United Nations)?

Claske Dijkema :

Their role is to create international consensus about the management of the resources they have in common. A common analysis of globalization is that countries and people are increasingly interdependent. The pollution of the air in place A affects the air and rain that will fall in place B where potatoes are grown that are consumed in place C with tractors produced in place A. This increasing interdependence should increasingly be well managed to deal with conflicts that arrive from it. The role of the international community is the same as in other places of the world. The least thing it can do in Africa is to limit the negative impact that international actors have on the conflict (control illegal trade, limit space of multinational companies in exploiting resources, limiting privatisation of resources, stop dumping chemical waste, force governments to implement and better control their national actors, abandon “caisses noires”). In addition, based on a thorough consultation of legitimate representation of conflict areas the y can fund an enormous range of conflict management and prevention programmes (peace education, funding labour unions, funding NGO’s, the list is limitless). These activities only will have a crucial impact though when carried out in combination with the more structural approaches cited above.

Irenees :

Which are the main challenges for peace building in political transitions and releases of crisis situations ?

Claske Dijkema :

How to create the willingness to live together? How to make the elite accept structural changes that address satisfactorily the (possibly diverging) grievances in society?

Irenees :

Conflicts’ specialists talk about a work to « abolish conflict causes », others would rather talk of « conflict management necessity », and you prefer talk about a “conflict transformation » : Why ?

Claske Dijkema :

Because I believe that if a conflict reaches a certain level of importance, often expressed in violence but not necessarily, it means that the existing structures in society are not capable of addressing the problems or grievances of important parts of the population. In resolving conflicts on the long term therefore we have to look further than the simple issues over which parties don’t agree, we have to look at the structures in society that prohibit the resolution of these conflicts. Structures underlying power relations between groups in society therefore have to be transformed to allow a society to deal with conflicts constructively. In the short run, the transformation of conflict can lead to increased conflict and violence because violent structures become visible.

Irenees :

What does « peace » mean to you?

Claske Dijkema :

This is a very personal answer but peace for me refers to what I would like to attain in life.