Steinar bryn biography of albert

The Americanization of Norwegian culture. The Experience of the Nansen Dialogue Network. Together, GPPAC members work to inform policy, improve practice and facilitate collaboration and action to prevent conflict and build sustainable peace. GPPAC is composed of civil society networks in fifteen regions, and brings together members from across the world in thematic working groups and projects.

This allows us to link national, regional and global levels of action and learning. The views expressed in this publication are those of the respective authors. Colophon Creating Spaces for Dialogue: a Role for Civil Society Dialogue and Mediation Series, Issue 1 The steinar bryn biographies of albert presented in this book are authored by those who initiated a conversation between communities and societies polarised and divided as a result of conflict.

They carried out their efforts in challenging environments, with opposing sides convinced that their enemy was the epitome of injustice driven by the pursuit of power and domination. A careful conversation was needed to offer a way out of the trap of dehumanising "the other" and to change the aggressor-victim paradigm. Download Edit.

Log in with Facebook Log in with Google. It is hard to keep a conflict alive. A conflict needs incidents like these to develop. One might speculate if the lack of inter-ethnic commissions is a deliberate effort to keep competing narratives alive. Dialogue — More Than Words? Dialogue is not a tool to solve problems like constitutional status, repatriation, economic development, and European integration.

Dialogue is a tool to increase the understanding between the parties in a conflict. My argument is that dialogue and reconciliation must not become a neglected element of peace-building. One must recognize that dialogue and reconciliation are a necessary part of this process. Dialogue is not an alternative to mediations or negotiations but both could benefit from a stronger dialogue component.

The first challenge for Nansen Dialogue was to take the dialogue from the more exclusive long-term setting in Lillehammer, to a more intense short-term setting closer to home Herzeg Novi. Nansen Dialogue stressed in this period the meaning of an open dialogue about the causes to what happened and the consequences it had for people living through the conflicts and wars.

This is a necessary step in reconciliation, and must be recognized as such. Still donors and other critics wanted to see more concrete results. It is nice when people come together to dialogue, but then — what? Also the coordinators in the Nansen Centers started to become more ambitious, as their position in their respective local communities was strengthened.

Is it possible to mobilize dialogue participants to take part in social change at large? The challenge became to recruit participants that had an arena of action upon return home; participants that belonged to institutions in society that could implement change. A much stronger criterion was then developed for the recruitment of participants that was hardly possible in the beginning when we looked like a horse with no name — but as we built our experience we also built our reputation, particularly as a network focusing on inter-ethnic dialogue in deeply divided communities.

Our patience, stamina and the fact that we were setting up local registered centres staffed by locals, and not perceived as foreigners, gave us more credibility. So when we started to invite strategically important people in the local community: they accepted the invitation. Like the mayor, chief of the municipal administration, president of the municipal assembly, director of the local high school, editor of the local newspaper et al.

The idea was to develop concrete integrative projects. By developing more of a dialogue culture we hoped that the community would become more receptive toward integrative legislation, integrative projects, and the creation of dialogue arenas. The most prominent of such dialogue arenas is the new Fridtjof Nansen bilingual school that just opened in Jegunovce, Macedonia.

Through long-term dialogue work with village leaders, teachers, parents, students, and municipal leaders, four villages that were in violent confrontation in the summer of have turned confrontation to cooperation. A similar long-term effort has taken place, including heavy lobbying toward both local and national politicians. In Bosnia-Herzegovina there are 52 divided schools.

Steinar bryn biography of albert: From , Dan Smith, Director of

NDC Sarajevo has been involved on a large scale to work for a more unified school system. During the years toNansen Dialogue had built up a certain expertise dealing with interethnic dialogue in Kosovo and Macedonia. As the conflict intensified in Southern Serbia, the question raised itself, Can we do something? Can we apply our experience from Kosovo and Macedonia in a useful way in South Serbia?

The problem was that the previous strategy of Nansen Dialogue was to work only in areas where previous participants in Lillehammer could prepare the ground, recruit new participants to dialogue seminars and in other ways pave the way for meaningful work. They were barefoot soldiers on the ground. In the case of South Serbia we had no connections of this kind, which explains why we were somewhat slow in responding to the escalating inter-ethnic conflict in that region.

The first contacts were made and a strategy was developed. The challenge became to identify the individuals that exercised influence on the political and cultural life, particularly lawyers, journalists, politicians, medical doctors, teachers and other professionals that could make a difference. A segregated society with little or no communication across the ethnic division lines, reflected in divided schools, fairly homogenous villages Veliki Ternovac has 9, Albanians and hardly a single Serbunmarked division lines creating Serbian and Albanian cafes, restaurants, shops, information systems etc.

Little or no confidence and trust between the ethnic groups. Serbs started leaving Albanian dominated areas, at the same time as they could neither understand nor respect Albanian claims to Serbian territory. The Albanians were clearly treated like second-class citizens and gathered in the areas bordering to Kosovo. Their civil status as citizens of Serbia had worsened after the war.

They felt little or now hope of gaining powerful positions or any meaningful influence within the Serbian state.

Steinar bryn biography of albert: Steinar Bryn and Nansen Dialogue have

The Serbs felt they gave up too much power to Albanians, and Albanians didn't feel they gained the position they deserved. Serbs felt they were becoming a minority in the very country they were a majority how is that possible? This looked like a situation where Nansen Dialogue could make a difference. Nansen coordinators from NDC Serbia used their contacts in OSCE and the NGOs to identify the important people, through travelling to the region, spending time, individual talks, many cups of coffee, they slowly succeeded in convincing important actors on both sides, that time was long overdue for gathering both Serbs and Albanians for political dialogue.

The first seminar was planned in Vrjnska Banja in March The same process as in Kosovo and Macedonia was observed, while the participants showed quite some reluctance and defensiveness in the beginning, the experience of the dialogue space and the opportunities it gave to discuss meaningful political issues in a safe and supportive setting changed their attitude toward the dialogue itself.

The dialogue facilitators gained authority through their long experience in Kosovo. The foreign presence gave the process a sense of importance and seriousness, as well as giving the participants the feeling that somebody out there cared about their situation and wanted to assist and stimulate the process of dialogue between the conflicting groups.

The hardest job in these initial seminars is always to identify and to recruit the right participants. The recruitment process is tough, and direct contact must be kept with the participants every day to counter potential cancellation arguments. He would also focus on the warning signs, which could escalate a conflict to a violent level. I would focus more on the critique of ethnic thinking as the basis for political action, and would present alternative models for understanding identity.

I would then stimulate the participants through dialogue to identify their common interest in joining forces to solve the problems. Underlying the Nansen Dialogue is the understanding that respect for democratic principles and human rights must inform political strategies rather than ethnic affiliations. The techniques utilized by both Smith and myself were by now tested and refined on previous groups.

It was important to provide plenty of time for the participants to identify the variety of problems they were facing, to discuss their causes and how they could be solved. Through this process of widening the horizons, looking at their situation from a larger European perspective, making them see their own conflict as related to similar conflicts between majority and minority — the participants moved from individualizing the problems to see them as part of larger structural patterns.

The conflict was not as much caused by ethnic hatred, as the lack of finding proper ways for both groups to influence the future development of their own society — a future they somehow will have to share whether they like it or not. A serious effort was made by the Nansen Coordinators to stay in touch with these participants between the seminars.

This stems from the strong emphasis within Nansen Dialogue on follow up. The follow-up work is often the most important part of any seminar. Some of the most meaningful visits were spent in this way. The strength of our approach was that it moved the participants from looking at each other as the main problem, to seeing how the combination of underdeveloped infrastructure, high level of unemployment, local corruption, ethnic stereotypes and no clear minority politics created an extremely vulnerable situation, particularly when the neighbouring regions, Kosovo and Macedonia, were full of similar tensions and outbreaks of violence.

This reduced the strong blaming of the other, and opened the space for human interaction. The question of Serbia's minority politics became an important issue. Subotica in Vojvodina had segregated schools, somewhat similar to Bujanovac. When experiences from these three regions are brought together it provides an opportunity for the participants to share experiences, both on what is problematic and what can be done about it creative solutions.

It provides the opportunity to discuss what might be structural steinar bryn biographies of albert, partly because they are similar in all three regions and what might be more anchored in stereotypes, attitudes and behaviour of individuals, but supported by home education, school education and indirectly also by the media. When the issue of structural problems is addressed, it is very hard, almost impossible to avoid dealing with the national politics of the state of Serbia.

Why are their future plans of infrastructure support geographically biased? Why do they keep talking about Serbia as a multi-ethnic state when the level of segregation is so high? How will the new election laws affect minority voting, and what is the rationale behind these laws? And so on. Interestingly enough, in both sides seemed to agree that to comply with European standards regarding minorities and to move toward a deeper integration with Europe seemed to be the only road that could provide the economic reconstruction necessary in the region.

I deliberately joked about the possibility of a new political party across the ethnic divide, but Serbs and Albanians were united on this particular issue. Furthermore a certain unity was also obvious with respect to dissatisfaction with how Belgrade was dealing with the larger European issues, as well as how they were dealing with the more regional South Serbian issue.

Seen from South Serbia Belgrade politics seemed unable to respond to the larger international challenges as well as the more local Serbian challenges. Belgrade politics seemed trapped in its own closed rhetoric and political power games. Community-Based Peacebuilding. Dialogue — more than words. A wish to see how Norway dealt with some of these problems was clearly expressed by many of the participants in the Bujanovac seminars and a trip to Norway was carried out in the summer of Visits to schools, media institutions, meetings with local politicians from municipalities of different size, even an encounter with Jostein Gaarder, was part of the program.

Steinar bryn biography of albert: Steinar. Bryn held a Ph.D. in

But the underlying goal was of course that the Serbian and Albanian delegations that were to visit Norway would do so together — with plenty of space to continue their own political dialogue in a safer, and for them, more free environment. The main purpose of the visit was not to learn from "Norwegian ways" but for this inter-ethnic group to explore Norway together.

Most people know each other. Most people know who did what during the violent uprising in It is difficult to hide behind lies and evasions. This visit was a breakthrough in the local reconciliation work. To sit on the white benches outside the Nansen Academy at midnight provided space for conversations that would have been almost impossible in Bujanovac.

A new level of honesty was reached. Furthermore, local contacts were made in Lillehammer municipality, that triggered a return visit in October same year. The mayor of Lillehammer, the Deputy Mayor of Oppland county, the Deputy Chief of Administration and 4 other delegates developed during this visit personal relations with local Bujanovac politicians.

Lillehammer municipality visited Bujanovac again one year later and interviewed around 50 people in the administration. Based on these interviews, Lillehammer came with 64 different recommendations to Bujanovac. The assumption was that Serbia, in addition to spending too much material and human resources being preoccupied with conflicts and wars, had also lost 20 years of normal municipal development.

Steinar bryn biography of albert: CHAPTER 16 Can Dialogue Make

A country like Norway had, under more peaceful circumstances, developed more efficient municipal administrations. Through discussions with the Bujanovac mayor and the local administration, Lillehammer and Bujanovac agreed to focus on five areas: business development, further development of the local service center, training of the head of departments, strengthening of local politicians and the development of a city manager position.

In addition, a separate school project was developed. While Lillehammer obviously had a reconciliatory effect, they learned fast that "politics" could still get in the way of modernizing the local municipal administration. There are no quick fix solutions. The ethnic tension is still strong in south Serbia and northwest Macedonia, and a strategy for how to deal with that must be an integrated component in all municipal development strategies.

The Nansen approach stresses the need to work on different levels in the community. Dialogue work among students and youth was followed by a unique theater performance. They identified 20 scenes from everyday life, among them corruption in schools and in the health care center, inefficiency in the post office and a remarkable scene when an Albanian boy is taking a Serb girlfriend home to his family.

The actors were amateurs, but performing for a mixed audience of This was the largest multiethnic event in Bujanovac, probably ever. These groups of youth are together challenging the divided structures of Bujanovac and are currently working for an integrated youth centre. Kosovo Polje is a municipality only five kilometres from Pristina.

Kosovan Nansen Dialogue was responsible for the dialogue between the returning Serb community and the receiving Albanian community. During the first meeting in return was not discussed. It was their first meeting in 6 years and a lot of curiosity about everyday life issues. Is your cow still alive? What has happened to my field? How are your kids doing?

On the second meeting the issue of return was opened up — and the questions and worries discussed. One Albanian in Nakarade had lost 17 of his male family members. In the first seminar he did not participate, but he was convinced to participate in the second seminar. How can one deal with such a destiny and welcome the Serbs back to the village?

Through focusing on the good memories from his youth with some from the Serbian group who planned to return he managed to overcome his initial fear and started to be a positive force in the group. Dialogue is a slow process, so is reconciliation. These are delicate issues. One criterion for coming on the list for houses was economic need.

But those with economic need are also more likely to sell their steinar bryn biographies of albert. Unless more return is stimulated to the same area, the chances the Serbs will remain are small. But we hope to start return process to a third village in the same manner, in cooperation with Kosovo Polje municipality and UNDP. Dialogue is more than words.

Ethnic Conflict. Serbs in Kosovo are most often referring to history during the periods when they believed Albanians had the upper hand; —45, —89, and —now. In these periods the Albanians have been the majority on the Kosovo territory. The Albanians on the other hand refer to history when Serbs have had the upper hand, the historical periods Kosovo has been defined as a part of Serbia; ,—74 and — During these periods Serbs defined themselves as a majority in Serbia and the Albanians as a minority.

A similar situation is perceived in South Serbia. When politics becomes ethnicized as in Kosovo and Serbia, one might respond that it is the same thing. Ethnic politicians fight for power over the territory. Ethnic politicians fight to define the borders of the territory in such a way that they get the ethnic majority and thereby the power.

This illustrates the problem with liberal democracy. When politics become ethnicized — the ethnic majority perceives itself and is perceived by the steinar bryn biography of albert as having all the power. In spite of democratic theory's attempt to include the protection of minorities, the only weapon the minority seems to have is the refusal to cooperate with the majority and not to recognize the institutions controlled by the latter.

Still, I will argue that it is possible to de-ethnicize politics through the professionalization of the political administration, delegation of power and through stimulating civic responsibility among the citizens and to develop bipartisan thinking among the politicians. These are central elements in the Lillehammer-Bujanovac cooperation.

In Serbia, dialogue and reconciliation are a prerequisite for democratic development. The tolerance needed for opposing political views must be developed. Continuous ethnic conflict will stop any wish to develop a democratic multiethnic state. To what extent dialogue can foster democratic changes is an issue yet to be explored. The Serbian government cannot continue to segregate and at the same time claim to be governing a multiethnic state.

A main challenge for the Serbs is to realize that the development of Serbia into a civil state does not have to threaten the Serbian nation. My experience is the complete opposite. I have learned tremendously from listening to Serbs and Albanians telling their stories. The first years we had three month long seminars in Lillehammer, including people from Serbia, Macedonia, Bosnia Herzegovina, Croatia and Montenegro.

That gave space for long conversations, and possibilities of learning to know each-other not only as a representative from an ethnic community, but as lawyers, teachers, music lovers, basketball players and dancers. After the war in we had multiple seminars with people from Mitrovica. The most used way of communication was sharing how the conflict had affected our lives and question and answers.

Each group got hours to formulate the most important questions they wanted answers to, and then they exchanged questions and got hours to reflect on how they would answer. Individually or as a group. And participants built networks across ethnic division. Several Nansen Dialog Centers were built, and most of them focused on breaking down segregated education.

They all cherish their own culture, at the expense of the others. If we want to build a functional society in Kosovo, it must be a society that prepares the youth for a multicultural future. Mono-ethnic states are slowly disappearing, in spite of great resistance, particularly in the old Eastern European countries. How to improve our understanding of each other is the key question for the future?

It will affect how we teach literature, history and every subject in the school. Students must meet each other, interact across ethnic division. How did Germany and France manage such a successful reconciliation? Partly by an extreme high number of student exchanges and by the year almost 70 percent of cities had some friendship alliance with another city across the border.