Search results
91 in the context of Peace and Conflict Studies does accord better attention to ‘the local agency’, this analytic lens suffers from two serious shortcomings. First, these are mostly perceived as ‘willing local partners’ – albeit cast in a subordinate position with the international agencies setting the peace agendas – or as ‘spoilers’ referring to those who refuse to yield to the international peace agendas. Second, it tends to ‘romanticise’ the local, which entails an uncritical acceptance of everything local in the name of ‘cultural engagement’ without
emphasis seems to remain on declaratory standards, which while important can give a false promise of clarity, rather than on the shared activities normally associated with learning. Despite the work of a range of UN organisations, as well as various bilateral and multilateral bodies and programmes, opportunities for learning at the sites of abuse – and so for changes in both behaviour and understanding among those engaged in abusive relations – remain relatively unexplored. These are areas of dialogue and practical cross-cultural engagement, supported by a range of non