Why Peace Processes Fail to End Violence Research Paper

Why Peace Processes Fail to End Violence - Research Paper Example The failure of talks among governments, societies, rebels, communities and other parties faced with conflict to come to consensus is discussed in the paper. Various examples of such instances have been given, and the challenges they face in the negotiation process outlined. Attempts and failure of dialogue in solving a conflict eliciting new beginning of the conflict have also been illustrated in this document. Factors hindering peace methods in curbing the conflicts have also been widely discussed. In various cases, both international and domestic, mediation has always failed; this is discussed with various relevant examples in the world.  Most warring parties embark on physical confrontation as a means of solving the problem. Political and fiscal reforms will be noted to assist in decision-making during the negotiation process. This often results in the elimination of peace as a solution to the problem that resulted in war. This idea has been viewed from different angles in this document such that it is realized that peace often fails in the process of ending violence.  The definition of peace may be varied, but, in this context, it can be summarized or explicated as the absence of hostilities or war. It can be attained by various applications depending on the context. Establishment of peace through peace method has proved inefficient in most cases thus termed to have failed in ending violence. This method is mostly applied through negotiations and settling of disputes through peacebuilding and peacekeeping. Political factors, in most cases, are the culprit of war thus making peace a difficult avenue to take in bringing things under control. The willingness of the warring parties to have a round table talk is a problem.

2 page letter to the editor Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

2 page letter to the editor - Assignment Example This involves an ability to clearly think through an issue, formulate opinion / policy, communicate it effectively and argue successfully the merits and demerits of the opinion and alternatives. In other words, a leader has to talk, listen and argue coherently to win over skeptics if any. Since we are all individuals from different socio-economic and political backgrounds, we manifest our leadership qualities in different styles. Some of us are authoritative, some are democratic and yet others are of please-all by nature. These styles appear appropriate in different situations e.g., military commanders are in general more authoritative, HR managers are more democratic etc. Authoritative leaders impose their will on the subordinates or even colleagues by the force of their personality and the power of their hierarchical status. Persuasive leaders opt for a more democratic approach Since the topic of healthcare reform is with the political leaders, I wish to draw a parallel with the council member of our neighborhood and the successful way he practices his leadership skills. On the one hand, this council member has to listen to the suggestions and grievances of his constituency (voters), prioritize them and do his best to get them executed through the administration. On the other hand, he has to contend with similar (and sometimes, opposing) demands from the other council members who have obligations to their own voters. There are political careers involved here and the contest is, as in the National Congress, among local leaders. Our council member is a soft spoken Republican. His priorities are dictated by public opinion and national policy. His interactions with the other council members can be seen as the flip side of his interactions with his own voters. Skillfully, he persuades the other council members to support his priorities within reasonable limits and extends similar support to them. By this way, he has