NEWSLETTER REGIONAL CENTRE FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES, COLOMBO Vol. 10 No. 2 April 2004 MUMBAI MEETING: The Role of the Civil Society in the Prevention of Armed Conflict in South Asia The India National Meeting on The Role of Civil Society in the Prevention of Armed Conflicts in South Asia, organised by the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS) in collaboration with The European Centre for Conflict Prevention (ECCP) as part of the programme on Global Partnership for Prevention of Armed Conflicts (GPAC), was held at the Kohinoor Park Hotel, Mumbai, India, January 18-19, 2004. a UN conference or if there were further aims? He explained that the objective of the programme is to extend the initiative beyond 2005 to establish a global network which can oversee further work on the area of Conflict Prevention. Dr Van Tongeren further said that Catherine Barnes has already presented a working paper clearly setting its principal objectives and, subsequently, all the regions will be invited to send in their recommendations. An interactive session was also organized by RCSS in the grounds of the World Social Forum to familiarize other participants at the forum with the programme. (For an impression of the WSF see an article by Prof Ariyaratne, on Pg 5) He emphasized that research is one of the most important components of this exercise which has to be expanded in the direction of understanding of what works best,which programmes are useful, and what are the lessons learnt, and what are the best practices. It will make possible, he explained, to bring out research publications periodically, and to develop a system, whereby perhaps every two or three years, newsletters outlining short descriptions of the work accomplished and the dynamics involved in the conflict prevention process, which could provide publicity to the programme activities. He held out the hope that when some literature based on these experiences can be (Contd overleaf) A “Brainstorming Session” had been organized by the RCSS at Marawila, Sri Lanka, on November 8-9, 2003 to conceptualise the project. (See Newsletter January 2004). Paul Van Tongeren of ECCP, opened the discussion in Mumbai by explaining the objectives of the project. He said that at some of the previous meetings questions were raised as to whether the programme is just about holding Participants at the Mumbai Meeting distributed to the key people in the world dealing with conflicts, and these will then go into the like minded civil servants of the UN, thereby presenting our case more clearly to international audiences. Dr Van Tongeren concluded his speech by saying that “it is one thing to convene a conference where you will have prepared speeches and reports, but quite another to disseminate information on practical recommendations and to develop a regional action agendas. We in Europe have asked Catherine Barnes to prepare a number of books on lessons learnt from peace processes all over the world, and, in particular, do a piece of writing on elements of an action agenda for Western European Initiatives. She has, already, prepared a four paged draft-Western European Action Agenda. We have asked the other regions to do a similar job in respect of their regions. All these action agendas are to be discussed at the Dublin Conference, and will then go to Brussels, and also later to New York.” Next to speak was, Vasu Vaitla, a representative of Initiative of Change, who based his contribution to the theme: “How can the UN system be influenced?”. He went on to say that, although, a lot has been done on conflict prevention during the last ten years or so, there still remains a tendency to restart the process again, again, and again and not to take the process forward. The trend has been to add regional nuances and the regional best practices to this programme. On this issue, there are not less than four studies at UN currently, attempting to give a definition to civil society, i.e. by the Non- Governmental Liaison Service (NGLS), the Department of Social affairs, UNDP and Eminent Persons’Panel. Maria de la Fonte of Japanese Peace Group dealt with the importance of identifying regional differences and getting the academic community and social workers together, in Conflict Prevention. With her experiences, by working in Japan with students and attending meetings in Soesterberg, Philippines and Tokyo on this issue, she emphasized the fact that the nature of the issues differ from region to region. Sridhar K Khatri, Executive Director, of RCSS,outlined the work already accomplished and attempts at defining the terms being used, in this field, and said that at Marawila the consensus was, for example, to exclude what is, ‘not civil society’, when defining what “Civil Society” is, and “Armed Conflict” was defined as ‘contestation between collectives in which armed violence is used as an instrument for producing an outcome’. At Marawila the 2 issues prevailing in South Asia were prioritized and now the need is to address these objectively. O.P. Shah of Centre for Peace Progress, stressed the value of lessening human suffering when dealing with conflict prevention issues. Building consensus among conflicting parties, bringing them to talk to each other, bring about reconciliation, demonstrating sincerity of purpose is necessary to achieve results, he said. Vijayalakshmi of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, spoke of the need to draw women into civil society’s role in Conflict Prevention. When the perceptions on security issues are broadening, when the need for inspiring trust, transperancy, accomadating viewpoints, and non partisanship is becoming, important, women’s role has become paramount. Experiences like Naga Mothers,’Association and the Association of Parents for Disappearing People show their significance. Women had been an inclusive group in conflict situations in South Asia, but the whole conflict discourse had been male oriented; from the commencement of military conflicts up to the peace processes women had been marginalized.Even the U.N. resolutions 1325 and 1366 had not helped women to play an active role in conflict situations ; this should be corrected by including them in the processes, forming groups like daughters of Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir, and making constitutional provisions, for political participation of women at local, national, and regional levels, and also peace processes. Yoginder Singh Sikandh of International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World in his presentation outlined the role of religion in conflict prevention methodologies especially in India. The Kashmir Issue, for example, although, projected as an Islamic Issue dominated by extremists of Sufi faith, there are moderate Muslims in other parts of India who want Kashmir taken out of an Islamic prism, and treat it as a National Issue. They could be organized to influence Kashmiri Muslims, which will also, neutralize extremist Hindu Groups like RSS who use it as a Islamic Issue .Similarly, alternative Hindu groups and groups from other religious faiths should be called into the resolution of this conflict. Noor Baba, of Kashmir University, reflecting on the Kashmir Issue said that Civil Society comprising the sum total of people informally or formally, organized, has not been used in India. For example, When in 1987 elections, people who took to violence participated in elections, they were punished whereas, they should have been rewarded. Both in and out of Kashmir the civil society did not attempt to infuse concepts such as freedom, democracy and federalism as tools which could have been used to meet such situations, and resolve this problem. Indian Civil Society should intervene in the Kashmir Situation, both when it is violent and also peaceful, to rehabilitate resettle and reintegrate people. Gul Wani, University of Kashmir, reposed the blame for the exacerbation of Kashmir Problem on the State .From the time of Nehru, not enough was done to establish civil society, free elections and economic reforms, until militancy took over. Nehru once said that Democracy does not flourish in Kashmir, because, Kashmir Soil is not fertile for it, Sheikh Abdulla once remarked, that Indian Democracy stops at Patanpur, and a journalist said that Indian Democracy has a problem with Kashmir because it never travels by bus. Basically, the conflict is between National Interest of Kashmir and Party Politics of India.The Civil Society too is sandwiched between Government and the militants. However, after the Islamabad SAARC Summit, initiatives could be taken like opening conflict resolution centers in Universities, in Jammu and Kashmir and restoration of Kashmir Identity; for example, Kashmir Pundits now called themselves as Kashmiri Hindus, as against Kashmiri Muslims, whereas both groups are Kashmiris. Two examples of mutual concern, cited are of, Kashmiri Muslims renovating a Hindu Temple during Amarnath yatra and Kashmiri Pundit Prakash intervening in securing the acquittal of Delhi University’s Rahman Gilani. He, referred to Sri Lankan Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar’s statement that future of South Asia lies with India and said that, he, too, endorses it. Wasbir Hussain, of The Sentinel, Guwahati, dealing with The North-east Scenario, outlined the various demands of the 30 insurgent groups, spearheaded by the Naga rebels, Assamese, Manipuris, Tripuris, their demands ranging from secession, autonomy, to self-determination. The attempts by the Government for talks through a mix of political and military means have not been positive, but the question now hinges on whether the Government will agree to ULFA demands of a presence of a third party supervision and a venue out side India. In any negotiations, the role of the Church is important, for example, in Nagaland, where the Christian population is 90 percent; the women, as represented by the Naga Mothers’ association formed in 1984, have assumed a peace making role by being in the legislature. On the contrary, in Assam the rebel movement which started 30 years later than in Nagaland, the situation is worse as 11th Summer Workshop 2004 and th 6 Winter Workshop 2004 Interested applicants are advised to check our website regularly for the announcement http://www.rcss.org there is no credible or structured Civil Society. Being a multi-religious society, even a religious institution has not got much of a say. It is necessary, therefore, to build Civil Society structures, identify and train peace makers in this region. Ajrimand Hussain, Director, United Mission Foundation, analyzing the role of Civil Society in the Prevention of Armed Conflict in India and Kashmir, said, that people should be empowered to prevent armed conflict. In addition the governing circles should reach out to the marginalized and vulnerable groups of the society, without political bias, in reducing a conflict situation. In the ensuing discussion, the participants arrived at a consensus that conflict situations differ from one another, and the application of one solution will not suit another. The different Civil Society groups should analyze these placing them in the correct perspective gathering the support of all segments of the society. Participants at the first India National Meeting were: Prof Noor Ahmed Baba, Head, Dept of Political Science, Kashmir University, Srinagar, India; Ms Aditi Bahaduri, Calcutta Research Group, Kolkata, India; Ms Ashima Kaul Bhatia, Consultant, Women in Security, Conflict, Management and Peace, (WISCOMP), New Delhi, India; Ms Maria de la Fonte, Japanese Peace Group, Japan; Mr Wasbir Hussain, Consulting Editor, The Sentinel, Guwahati (North-east India) & Associate Fellow, Institute of Conflict Management, New Delhi, India; Mr Karan Sawhny, Director, International Centre for Peace Initiatives, New Delhi, India; Mr O P Shah, Chairman, Centre for Peace Progress, Kolkata, India; (Contd in page 4) 3 THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE PREVENTION OF ARMED CONFLICT Dublin Action Agenda T he above Conference was held in Dublin, Ireland , from March 31st to 2nd April. Professor Khatri, the Executive Director participated in this Conference as the Representative of South Asia in the Global Partnership regional initiation for the Prevention of Armed Conflict, the European Conference being a part of this Global project, (GPPAC). The European Conference, is the first of such 17 Conferences which will be held by different regions under this Project. As reported in the previous News letters, RCSS is the Regional Co-ordinator for South Asia of Prevention of Armed Conflict Programme. The Dublin Programme was done in different layers, with the broad perspectives of the project being provided by Mr. Paul Van Tongeren, (Executive Director, European Centre for Conflict Prevention )Prof. Mari Fitszduff (Director MA Program in Coexistence and Conflict, Brandeis University) and Ms. Catherine Barnes (consultant involved in the global process and co-editor of the Action Agenda) There were in depth discussions on different issues. There were two panel debates on the, ‘War on Terrorism’ and responding to the new security threats, and Interaction between Civil Society and the United Nations. Ms. Sandra Melone , Executive Director Brussels Office of Search for Common Ground, facilitated the first panel while the members were Prof. Sridhar Khatri, Executive Director of RCSS, Dr Cornelio Sommaruga , former member of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignity, and Mr. Dan Smith, Secretary General, International Alert. The discussions centered on the War (Contd from page 3) Dr Yoginder Singh Sikand, Post-doctoral Research Scholar, C/o International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World, The Netherlands; Dr Paul van Tongeren, Executive Director, European Centre for Conflict Prevention (ECCP), The Netherlands; Mr Vasu Vaitla, Initiative of Change, Representative to the UN; Dr K P Vijayalakshmi, Associate Professor, Centre for American and West European Studies, 4 on Terrorism and the resurgance of military responses on promoting security, promotion of alternative security paradigms like human security, the impact of war and terrorism in the work towards Conflict Prevention. Prof Khatri presented a paper in this panel. The second panel debate facilitator was Mr. Jack Patterson, Chair, NGO-UN Conflict Prevention Working Group, while the panelists were Mr. Danilo Turk (UN Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs), Ms. Birgitta Dahl (Member of UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Eminent Persons on Civil Society and United Nations Relationships) and Ms. Felicity Hill (United Nations Development Fund for Women). Their deliberations covered the current mechanisms for interaction between United Nations and Civil Society, in the field of peace and security, areas where more cooperation is needed, and what are the more effective mechanisms. The meeting coincided with the Irish European Union Presidency Seminar, on the concluding day, chaired by Mr. Dermot Gallagher, Secretary General, Irish Department of Foreign Affairs. The keynote address was made by Irish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Brian Cowen T.D. Among the other speakers, were the South African Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma, and Mozambiqan Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Chairin- office of the African Union Mr. Leonardo Simao . At the end of the two day meeting the Dublin Action Agenda on the Role of the Civil Society in the Prevention of Armed Conflict in Western Europe was formulated. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India; Dr Gul Mohammad Wani, Reader, Department of Political Science, University of Kashmir (Srinagar), Kashmir, India; Mr Arjimand Hussain Wani (Talib), Director, United Mission Foundation, Columnist, Greater Kashmir, India. Prof Sridhar K Khatri, Executive Director, Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Colombo, Sri Lanka; and Dr R AAriyaratne, Member, Board of Directors, Regional Centre for Strategic Studies. GLOBAL DEFIANCE OF GLOBALISATION? THE WORLD SOCIAL FORUM SESSIONS AT MUMBAI, JANUARY 16-21 2004 A Prof. R A Ariyaratne nyone who visited the sprawling NESCO Grounds, Western Highway, Goregaon, Mumbai, where WSF sessions were held, would have occasioned some surprise at the sheer multitude of people who poured into the premises and kept wandering through dusty pathways into and out of the makeshift canvas-canopied stalls, exuding an air of déjà vu. A man, young, middle aged or old, in formal Western attire was nowhere to be seen. (What is a formal Western female dress is something beyond my comprehension.) Apart from the ethnics and tribals sporting their clourful traditional costumes, almost all were in casual dress – trousers/jeans and T shirts/shirts with short sleeveless. The few individuals in their national dress looked out of place and they themselves were showing signs of feeling uncomfortable. In the food stalls, Indian rotties and masala paste had largely displaced Western junk food, except for a few stalls serving Chinese (of course, vegetable) mixed- fried rice. Beverage bottles and Cola-cans produced by Western multinational companies, though much sought after elsewhere in the city, were conspicuously absent on the Grounds, and almost everyone was religiously clutching on to his/her ‘sacred’ mineral water bottles. The seemingly never ending stream of group demonstrations were punctuated by traditional dances and slogan chanting in vernacular, but almost all the hand-written and printed posters, hoardings, and brochures were in English. Everywhere the seminar/ workshop/discussion sessions were conducted in English so that anyone from any part of the globe, even with a nodding acquaintance of the lingo of the former empire and the remaining Super Power, could participate in them. It seemed as though all those who trekked vast distances to be there were shouting, separately, but, strange though it sounds, in unison, “We Want Another World”. However, whether or not “Another World is Possible” is something that could not be gauged purely on the basis of the events that took place on the NESCO Grounds on those eventful six days. Instead, what WSF Mumbai effectively demonstrated was that the multitude of ‘forsaken’ masses all over the world are no longer content to remain as hewers of wood and drawers of water for the rich countries, and that they are now ready to prepare the way for an alternative to the existing World Order. As I have perceived it, the uncertainties, contradictions and the lack of close coordination are part and parcel of birth pangs of a deeply felt worldwide concern striving to see the light of the day. Like so many similar collective compulsions to end various aspects of socio-economic and political anomalies adversely affecting the day-to-day lives of people living in all nooks and corners of the globe, such as the threat of armed conflict, misgovernance ranging from constitutional majoritarianism to minority despotism, gender discrimination, political hegemonism coupled with subtle forms of neo-colonial exploitation, WSF could more aptly be described as a movement in the making. Its Charter of Principles calling people to oppose “new liberalism and domination of the world by capital and any form of imperialism” and to commit themselves to “building a planetary society centered on the human person” is more declaratory and exhortatory than action oriented. It is, nevertheless a clarion call to come together to exchange experiences and strengthening alliances between incipient social movements, socio- economically marginalized people and oppressed classes, and to create space for the ‘forsaken’ people in general to form a forum to speak for themselves, rather than to wait in the sidelines to be patronized by the well-established ‘do-gooders’, who have all along been speaking for them but never with them. From its modest beginnings at Porto Allegre in Brazil in January 2001, WSF was primarily concerned about the discriminatory trade practices and capital manipulation against the world’s poor. Its first meeting was timed to coincide with the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, a country where the world’s most affluential transnational corporations transacted business deals impacting on billions of people world over, the majority of whom live below the poverty line. Scampering its way through the annual forums held in 2002 and 2003, the WSF grew rapidly in terms of the number of participants at each meeting, and social organizations seeking registration under its umbrella and widening its scope from economic woes to a broad range of social evils flowing directly or indirectly from policies adopted by IMF, World Bank and more recently by WTO. WSF opposes their efforts to impose so-called free market practices in the 5 Third World countries while safeguarding the economic interests of the Developed Nations through a network of rigid protectionist policies under the guise of attempting to make less uneven the standard of global Gross National Product per capita. WSF activists argue that such policies will further widen the rich-poor divide and facilitate the powerful trade conglomerates in the West to tighten their viselike grip on Third World economies. Paradoxically, beyond challenging economic globalisation, the Forum betrayed a growing trend in the direction of globalising many other socio-economic and vaguely political ills adversely affecting humanity. Its motive was plainly evident: to bring to global focus anomalous situations which had long been languishing as matters of local interest and relevance. Thus adivasis, persons displaced by violent conflict and inroads of development projects, the disabled on crutches and wheel-chairs, poorlypaid labourers from Sri Lanka’s tea plantations, anti-war groups from Latin America, human rights activists from Africa, students and intellectuals from Asia, had a place in the NESCO formation. These issues formed the crux of the academic sessions that took place in the makeshift stalls located adjacent to the procession paths of dancers, drummers, percussionists, youth bands, and the loudest of them all, lively slogan chanting demonstrations. A cursory glance at the seminar titles will show the diversity of subjects deliberated upon: child abuse, women’s liberation, human rights; conflict resolution and peace; ecology and environmental protection, casteism and social marginalisation, corporisation of agriculture, U.S. hegemony et al. As far as these objectives are concerned, the strategies purportedly being pursued seem to fall within a twilight zone between globalization and anti-globalization; on the one hand, they need to be focused at a global level to highlight their harmful effects on society; on the other, they are either by-products of the globalisation of a world economic system which enthrones money and profit as the be-all and end – all of all human activity, to the callous neglect of all else – social welfare, culture, ethical norms and spiritual well being. Such inconsistent and, sometimes contradictory, traits are perhaps unavoidable since gobalisation is a pull and push process operating simultaneously. Some, like the Mumbai Resistance Forum, have critiqued WSF on this and other counts. The crucial questions are, will this process in the final analysis unwittingly subserve the purpose of global imperialism?; Whether reflective thinking at the seminar 6 stalls and colourful parading would have a cathartic effect on the discontent that is brewing at the grassroots level of society? Figuratively, is this an exercise to push back the protruding canine teeth of the unscrupulous and aggressive capitalism? Could the WSF’s call for improving the oppressive local conditions engendered by globalisation through urgent socio-economic reforms be a part of the subtle agenda to ensure a trouble free reign for transnational capital mobilisation? Similarly, eyebrows have been raised on the choice of an Indian locality to host a meeting of this magnitude to highlight the ill effects of globalisation at a global level when it could be conducted more effectively to restrict the scope to the South Asian Region. It could also be argued that, since many of the objectionable facets of life highlighted at Mumbai had an Indian flavour, the root cause of the malaise is, partly at least, the spectacular expansion of Indian capitalism, which sometimes moves hand in glove with and sometimes operating independently of Western capital formations. Alongside this development, a huge middle class has come into being in the midst of the Indian society, whose needs and exclusive life styles have as much to do with the neglect and the alienation of common masses as do the corrosive effects of gobalisation. But the fact that it managed to attract a gathering of approximately 100,000 local and interrnational participants, mostly through self-support, is proof enough of its organizational capability and demonstrative of the ‘mood’ of the common man. The ‘mood’ was resentful, but seldom, if ever, verged on desperate rabblerousing, or romantic quixotism. As reports of the nearly one thousand-odd seminars held during the five days indicate, none had been as brash as to call for the rout of capitalism, but rather urged radical reforms in the existing World Order. A noteworthy disposition underlining many of these discussion sessions is the tacit understanding that it is futile to expect the ruling elites to carry out the desired changes on their own volition. Hence the loud and hoarse call for civil society in each country to organize, interact and coordinate its activities on a regional and international level, and bring pressure to bear on the government decision making processes to create a better World Order. If the world community heeds the warning blared out at the NESCO Grounds, there will be less demonstrations and posters, but more positive and coordinated constructive action at the next WSF sessions. (The writer is Member, Board of Director, Regional Centre for Strategic Studies). Our New Publications RCSS Policy Studies 25 Nuclear Risk Reduction Measures and Restraint Regime in South Asia Zafar Nawaz Jaspal (Manohar Publishers, New Delhi, India, 2004) The stockpiles of nuclear fissile material in India and Pakistan continue to mount. Both countries are committed to strengthening their missile programmes. The defence strategies of both India and Pakistan – together with the problems posed by the unresolved Kashmir dispute, deep animosity and distrust between them – make South Asia a conflict-prone region. The nuclear deterrence versus non-proliferation debate does not mitigate the situation in the ongoing strategic competition between India and Pakistan. Nuclear Risk Reduction Measures and a Nuclear Restraint Regime in South Asia between India and Pakistan are practicable solutions for limiting the use of a nuclear conflict in the region. Both states have already signed some agreements, such as non-attack on each other’s nuclear installations. But new nuclear-related arrangements which may prove more effective in promoting trust are imperative, while leaving the nuclear deterrence of both states intact. This book examines the prospects of “Nuclear Risk Reduction Measures and a Restraint Regime in South Asia” which would minimize the risks of accidental, unauthorized, or inadvertent use of Indian and/or Pakistani nuclear weapons. It recommends effective barriers against the danger of loose nukes and facility-related problems. Furthermore, the book explains the nuclear perils in the South Asian strategic environment, along with possible solutions for viable nuclear risk reduction measures and a nuclear restraint regime in South Asia. Defence, Technology and Cooperative Security in South Asia: Report on the Proceedings of the Tenth Summer Workshop (RCSS, February 2004) The Tenth Summer Workshop is the second of its kind to be held in China. Like the earlier one in 1998, this workshop was organized in collaboration with the Centre for American Studies, Fudan University, in Shanghai. This is the first time that the proceedings of the workshop have been published by RCSS. As the meetings always brings together a constellation of experts on various security issues, it was felt that ideas which emerges from such a gathering should be collated and shared with those interested in security matters in the region. However, with the exception of the Keynote Address, the summary that is presented here does not attribute any specific views to individuals who participated in the meeting. This is in keeping with the Chatham House Rules that has served as the basis of deliberation for the workshops in order to encourage frank and open discussion among faculty members and participants. We are grateful to the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) for supporting the workshop 7 RCSS’ Library Collection ... on Women in War and Peace-building Violence Against Women: Its Causes and Consequences.–Colombo: ICES, 1994, 116p. Coomaraswamy, Radhika. The Disrobing of Draupadi: Women, Violence and Human Rights/ by Radhika Coomaraswamy. – Colombo: ICES, 2000, 26p. Women and Armed Conflict: “Good Practices, Lessons Learnt, Challenges and Emerging Issues” for Implementing the Beijing Platform for Action. – A United Nations Inter-agency Project, 1999, 47p.- (Online Working Group on Women and Armed Conflict). The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action: A Guide for Women and Women’s Groups, Pankhurst, Donna. Mainstreaming Gender in Peacebuilding: A Framework for Action - From the Village Council to the Negotiating Table: The International Campaign to promote the role of women in peacebuilding/ by Donna Pankhurst; edited by Sanam Naraghi Anderlini. – Bradford University: Dept. of Peace Studies, 42p. Women, Violent Conflict and Peacbuilding: Global Perspectives. – London: International Alert, 2000, 72p. ISBN: 1-898702-06-3. International Alert - Annual Review 2000 – London: International Alert, 2000, 15p. Lindsey, Charlotte. Women facing War/ by Charlotte Lindsey – Geneva: ICRC, 2001, 274p. Machel, Graca The Impact of Armed Conflict on Children: A critical review of progress made and obstacles encountered in increasing protection for war-affected children/ by Graca Machel. – www.waraffectedchildren.gc.ca/machel-en.asp, 2000, 39p. People Building Peace: 35 Inspiring Stories from Around the World. – Netherlands: ECCP, 1999, 411p. ISBN: 905727-029-3. Uyangoda, Jayadeva. Sri Lanka’s Peace Process 2002: Critical Perspectives/ by Jayadeva Uyangoda and Morina Perera. – Colombo: Social Scientist’s Association, 2003, xiii, 286p. ISBN: 9-559-102540. Rai, Mugdha. Women Reporting Conflict/ by Mugdha Rai and Niloufer Afridi-Qazi. – New Delhi: WISCOMP, 1999, vi, 33p.(WISCOMP Working Paper: No. 1). More than Victims: The Role of Women in Conflict Prevention. – Washington: Woodrow Wilson International Center, 2003, 56p. Johnston, Nicola. UNSC Resolution 1325: South Asian Women’s Perspectives - report of the regional consultation/ by Nicola Johnston. – UK: International Alert, 2003, 56p. Rehn, Elisabeth. 8 Women, War and Peace: The Independent Experts’ Assessment on the Impact of Armed Conflict on Women and Women’s Role in Peace-building by Elisabeth Rehn and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. www.unifem.undp.org/, 2002 xii, 155p. ISBN: 0-912917-66-0. Women, Peace and Security. –www.un.org/womenwatch/ daw/public/eWPS.pdf, 2002, xii, 179p. ISBN: 92-1130222-6 Bushra, Judy El. Women Building Peace: Sharing Know-how/ by Judy El Bushra. – www.peacewomen.org/resources/NGO_reports/ IAWBPKnowHowPaper.pdf, 2003, 88p. ISBN: 1-89870226-8 Journal Articles/Chapter of Books/Web Reports Siddiqui, Tasneem(1999) Cross currents of Empowerment and Marginalisation: Women of Bangladesh in Transition. BIISS Journal. 20(4):524-549. Karam, Azza M. (1997) Islamisms, the State and Women: Violence and Counter-Violence in Egypt. Peace Initiatives. III(III): 18-25. Islamisms:power:legitimacy and violence:women’s activism. Karki, Madhavi Basnet(1996). Women’s Position in South Asia: A Socio-Political Aspect. In: The Human Rights Community and Conflict Resolution in South Asia-the Applicability of European Examples.116-122, Malla, Sapana Pradhan(1996) Law as an Instrument of Violation of Human Rights of Women. In: The Human Rights Community and Conflict Resolution in South Asia-the Applicability of European Examples.154-55. Palmer, Nicola(2002) Women in War: Importance of Gender in Humanitarian Responses. Pravada. 8(3):23-25. Schmeidl, Susanne; Piza-Lopez, Eugenia(2002) Gender and Conflict Early Warning: A Framework for Action. www.peacewomen.org/resources/Early_Warning/ IASWF.pdf:1-44. Hill, Felicity, The Elusive role of women in early warning and conflict prevention. www.peacewomen.org/resources Early_WarningHillACCORD.pdf:11-17. Sikoska, Tatjana; Solomon, Juliet Introducing Gender in Conflict and Conflict Prevention: Conceptual and Policy Implications. www.peacewomen.org/resources/ NGO_reports/inconflict/INSTRAW.pdf: 1-11. Marshall, Donna Ramsey(2000) Women in War and Peace: Grassroots Peacebuilding. w w w. p e a c e w o m e n . o rg / r e s o u r c e s / O rg a n i z i n g / Peaceworks.pdf:1-30. RCSS’ Library Collection ... on Ballistic Missiles Books De-Alerting Strategic Ballistic Missiles/ –US: Sandia National Laboratories, 1999, 54p.- (Cooperative Monitoring Center Occasional Paper: 9) Bermudez Jr., Joseph S. A History of Ballistic Missile Development in the DPRK/ by Joseph S. Bermudez Jr.– California: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 1999, 45p..(Center for Nonproliferation Studies Occasional Paper: No.2). Wilkening, Dean A. Ballistic-missile Defence and Strategic Stability/ by Dean A. Wilkening.–London: IISS, 2000, 96p..- (ADELPHI Paper: 334;ISSN 0567-932X) ISBN: 0-19929004-0 Prospects for a European Ballistic Missile Defence System/ .– UK: Mountbatten Centre for International Studies, 2001iv, 32p..- (Southampton Papers in International Policy: No. 4), ISBN: 0-85432-747-9. Huisken, Ron. ABM vs BMD: The Issue of Ballistic Missile Defence/ by Ron Huisken.–Canberra: Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, 2001, 44p..- (SDSC Working Paper. Australian National University. Strategic Defenc Studies Centre: No. 357), ISBN: 0-7315-5407-8 The Impact of US Ballistic Missile Defenses on Southern Asia - Report No. 46/ edited by Michael Krepon and Chris Gagne.–Washington, DC 20036: The Henry L. Stimson Center, 2002, 95p. Swaine, Michael D. NBR Analysis: Ballistic Missiles and Missile Defense in Asia/ by Michael D. Swaine and Loren H. Runyon.–Washington: The National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR), 2002, 82p. Dawn: The Challenges to Peace and Security,Chapter 21.194-215 Salik, Naeem Ahmad (2001) Pakistan’s Ballistic Missile Development ProgrammeSecurity Imperatives, Rationale and Objectives. Strategic Studies. XXI(1):18-42 (2001) Defending the US (and Allies?)from Ballistic Missile Attack. In: Strategic Survey 2000/2001.13-23 Kile, Shannon N.(2001) Nuclear arms control and ballistic missile defence. In: SIPRI Yearbook 2001,Chapter 6.423456 (1999) New Momentum for Ballistic Missile Defences: Strategic Survey 1998/1999.39-50 Smith, Mark (2001) The MTCR and the Future of Ballistic Missile Non-Proliferation. Disarmament Diplomacy. (54):19-25 Dean, Jonathan(1998) Controlling Ballistic Cruise Missiles. Disarmament Diplomacy (The Journal of the Acronym Institute - formerly Disarmament Intelligence Review). (31):2-11 Our Forthcoming Publications Studies 24 RCSS Policy Spencer, Jack The Ballistic Missile Threat Handbook/ by Jack Spencer.–, 2000, x, 90p. ISBN: 0-89195-251-9 623.5 SPE Journal Articles/Chapter of Books/Web Documents Valentino, Benjamin (1997) Allies No More: Small Nuclear Powers and Opponents of Ballistic Missile Defenses in the Post-Cold War Era. Security Studies. 7(2):215-34 Falkenrath, Richard A.(1994-95) Theatre Missile Defence and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Survival. 36(4):140160 Ramachandran, R.(1999) Pakistan’s ballistic response. Frontline. 16(9):29 Kartha, Tara(2000) Ballistic Missiles: Challenges in Asia. In: Asia’s New udies 24 RCSS Policy St aring River Water Sh een Problem Betw istan: ak P d India an e Indus Case Study of th Waters Treaty um Shaiata Tabass um Shaista Tabass for Stra Regional Centre tegic Studies udies 26 RCSS Policy St ns in Foreign Elite Perceptio Print Media Policy Role of dia - Pakistan Influencing In -1999 Relations 1989 naik Smruti S Patta 9 Happenings @ Home A meeting of the International Research Committee (IRC) of the RCSS and a joint meeting of the IRC members and the Board of Directors was held at the Ceylon Continental Hotel, Colombo on April 23-24, 2004. RCSS also hosted a dinner to all its members and partners in honour of the IRC members on April 23, 2004. During the meeting, the committee undertook to assist the Centre in all its programmes and future activities. Important recommendations and suggestions were made for new projects. The International Research Committee members present at the The International Research Committee members meeting were: Dr Arzu Rana Deuba, SAMANTA, Kathmandu; and the Associate Director of RCSS Dr Meenakshi Gopinath, Principal, Lady Sri Ram College, New Delhi; Prof Krishna P Khana, Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies, Kathmandu; Shri IP Khosla, Former Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi; Mr Ahmed Naseem, Director General Investments, Foreign Investment Services Bureau, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Male; Dr Amera Saeed, Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Regional Studies, Islamabad; Amb Teresita Schaffer, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC, USA; Amb Farooq Sobhan, Former Foreign Secretary, Dhaka; Mr Bradman Weerakoon, Former Secretary to the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, Colombo and Prof Sridhar K Khatri, Executive Director, RCSS. The IRC and BoD at the meeting The Members of the Board of Directors participating in the joint meeting were: Prof R A Ariyaratne, formerly from, University of Colombo; Dr Lorna Dewarajah, Director, Bandaranaike International Diplomatic Training Institute, Colombo; Mr Dilip Kodikara, Managing Director, DutchLanka Trailers; Dr Tressie Leitan, Professor Emeritus, University of Colombo; Dr Vernon L B Mendis, Director General, Bandaranaike International Diplomatic Training Institute, Colombo and Prof Sridhar K Khatri, Executive Director, RCSS. Some of the distinguished guests at the dinner Views expressed in materials published in rcss newsletter are of contributors, and not necessarily of the RCSS. The rcss newsletter is published quarterly. For copies, comments, contributions and further information please write to: Associate Director Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, 2, Elibank Road, Colombo 5, SRI LANKA. Tel: (94-1) 2599734-5; Fax: 2599993 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.rcss.org Published by: Regional Centre for Strategic Studies 10 Printed by: Ceylon Printers Ltd. Colombo.