Posts by: Aditya Sarkar

In the countries where the Conflict Research Programme conducts research, democracy activists and external actors (we use the catch-all term ‘policymaker’ in this blog) usually have multiple goals. They want to end armed conflict, build governance institutions (once conflict ends), reform the security sector, and promote democracy and justice. Since these goals are extremely […]

Continue Reading

What causes violent conflict? And how can it be prevented in an interdependent world? These are the key questions taken up in the new World Bank – United Nations report: Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict. These questions are not new, of course, and a huge amount has been written on […]

Continue Reading

WPF’s researcher, Aditya Sarkar,  published a piece with Caroline Wanjiku Kihato, Loren Landau, and Romola Sanyal in Citiscope on April 25, 2017. We re-print it below.

In October, world leaders gathered in Quito to officially adopt the 20-year road map on sustainable urban development known as the New Urban Agenda. Notably, that document […]

Continue Reading

I recently came across a very interesting research proposal which was focused (in part) on the following question: How do public authorities in Central Africa respond to the displacement and return of refugees and migrants? Public authorities were defined as all forms of authority greater than the family, for instance, clans, religious institutions, aid agencies, […]

Continue Reading

On 11 November 2016, the World Peace Foundation held consultations in Addis Ababa with policymakers and experts on the proposed deployment of a ‘Regional Protection Force’ (RPF) for South Sudan. A policy memo summarizing those consultations is now available on the African Peace Missions website.

You can read an excerpt from the policy memo below.

[…]

Continue Reading

Security: the unmentionable debate

While there are genuine points of disagreement between Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump, the centrality of ‘security’ is not one of them. I wish this were not the case.

Both candidates seem to agree that security ought to be the basis of foreign (or even domestic) policy decision-making. They differ, […]

Continue Reading