Mae Anna Chokr, Ali Al-Ahmad and Abbas Aroua
Abstract
How can we foster social cohesion by engaging with informal religious and political authorities in conflict contexts, such as present-day Iraq? This report answers this question by outlining a conflict transformation approach developed by Cordoba Peace Institute – Geneva (CPI), and in Samarra, Talafar, and Iraq as a whole, between 2018 and 2023. The methodology used was a combination of: 1) a ‘safe mediation space’ approach and diapraxis, 2) collaboration between insider and outsider mediators, and 3) leveraging formal and informal sources of influence, including religious, political, and tribal. The report aims to learn from the experiences of case studies to guide practitioners applying such methods in other similar contexts
1. Introduction
The aim of this report is to explore the nature of conflict transformation activities that engage informal religious and political authorities to foster social cohesion in polarized societies, such as Iraq. To this end, it draws learnings from three conflict transformation processes that took place in Iraq between 2018 and 2023. It draws on interviews, unpublished project documents, and a published CPI report1 on the project. These three processes had as their primary goal the promotion of social cohesion in Iraq on specific conflicts at a sub-regional level, but with national implications and links. Thus, they can be considered “case studies”, with insights that may be scaled up or out to other contexts under relevant conditions. The selection of cases was based on the recommendations of Iraqi experts from a variety of backgrounds, which emerged during an in-depth pre-project analysis and scouting phase.
The essence of the project’s approach was to leverage parallel formal and informal religious, political, and tribal structures that cut across many of the conflict cleavages causing divisions in the country. The working hypothesis was that leveraging such informal sources of authority would be key to enhancing social cohesion in a polarized context where formal sources of authority may be contested. This approach also contrasts with the tendency of some Western peacebuilding and mediation agencies to rely too heavily on the more obvious and formal state structures as entry points for peacebuilding activities.
The report is structured as follows: First, we provide a summary of the context, the nature of actors, and a presentation of the case study contexts; second, we outline the elements of the conflict transformation approach that were adopted and developed. Third, we provide an overview of how the conflict transformation approach played out in the cases. Fourth, we draw some lessons. Fifth, we discuss the specificity – generalizability of the findings to other similar contexts, helping peace practitioners reflect on what lessons can be transferred.