How can we achieve success in mediation processes and sustainable peacebuilding within the MENA region today? Pathways to Hope is a project at the AUC School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, with support from the Ford Foundation, that is working hard to find those answers.

Speaking with us today are Dr. Ahmed Morsy, project Senior Advisor, and Dr. Ibrahim Awad, project PI. 

Abigail Flynn: Hello Dr. Morsy, could you tell us a little more about how the project is connecting researchers and practitioners?

Ahmed Morsy: One of the main things that we have been doing is engaging a lot of these individuals into two working groups. One focuses on regional and international mediation and engagement in these crises, and the other looks more toward internal dynamics—everyday life and humanitarian intervention within some of these conflicts.

The main outputs that we’re hoping to get out of this project, in addition to an in-person conference that will take place in June in Cairo, include other outputs that I think will be exciting. Two special issues are planned with contributions from different individuals who have participated in the project. The first is coming out soon with the Cairo Review.

A.F: From these initial phases of the project, what has been the biggest lesson that stands out to you? 

A.M: Among the many different things that we have had so far in the two working groups and the engagements in the conversations, there is this gap between what people live through in daily life and what some of the politicians and high-level diplomacy and engagement are thinking about. While this is not a new or novel revelation, I think we’re seeing it more and more clearly, especially since the conflicts and crises we have been discussing have been ongoing for several years. Some of them have been there for over a decade, and I think it entrenches some of these daily life hurdles and challenges. People kind of get used to having to navigate some of these difficulties while the rest of the world, the rest of the interested parties, or even the conflicting and belligerent parties in these conflicts are not really doing much to alleviate some of this suffering and some of these hardships that people go through.

The other thing that I would bring to attention, based on the conversations as well, is how many participants—whether it’s states, non-state actors, international organizations, or mediation groups—have been engaged in a lot of these conflicts with really no big outcomes in the sense of conflict resolution and peacebuilding. It seems that there is a discontinuity in terms of conflict management, in the sense that most of these organizations and states are engaged in a process that tries to minimize the conflict or keep it within the borders of the country going through the conflict and crisis, rather than really resolve it. It seems everyone is looking for some sort of a deal rather than engaging directly with giving concessions and seeking a diplomatic and peaceful resolution to a lot of these crises, which have underlying factors that have not been dealt with for decades and decades.

A.F: And how do you think this project helps resolve this problem?

A.M: A couple of things are interesting and exciting about this project, despite how it’s discussing and engaging in very difficult questions and very tough situations with regards to the conflicts in the region.

One is having outputs that are written by individuals who have lived through, experienced, and engaged with others in attempting to resolve and find peaceful mechanisms that can actually help resolve these conflicts. I think these types of special issues that the Cairo Review, together with the project, is trying to bring out will be useful in that sense—highlighting voices and experiences that otherwise might not have been captured and understood. So that in itself is useful in the sense of increasing voices from the region and from people who have been living through this, rather than others, particularly non-citizens or non-regional experts who have been writing about some of these conflicts for years and decades.

The other thing is that by bringing these two different working groups together—while they are separate, they will come together in person in Cairo—this will be a way to bring those who work on the ground on a day-to-day business (pushing against some of the structural conditions and challenges they have to deal with to seek education, healthcare, go to work, or simply get access to food and services) together with high-level, high-stakes diplomacy practitioners. I think having these two different groups and two different parties together in the same room, exchanging views about the same crisis or the same conflict, is a useful exercise as well.

Finally, we hope that the project, the individuals, and the organizations that some of them represent who have participated through the working groups and the conference will continue to work together, or at least expand their networks and engagement. Hopefully, these types of lessons learned and discussions can contribute to better outputs and outcomes in the future. While we are not in the mediation business ourselves as researchers or scholars, we hope that at least by spotlighting some of these challenges, opportunities, and engagements, we are providing pathways for others to learn and to use such experiences to resolve some of the conflicts that are surrounding us.

A.F: Thank you, Dr. Morsy. Now we’ll hear a bit more from Dr. Awad. Hello Dr. Awad, I hope you’re doing well. Can you tell me about why this project was created? 

Ibrahim Awad: There was a need because of the different conflicts that the region witnessed in the last decade or decade and a half. In most cases, to bring about peace and to mediate between parties, resort was made to international efforts. Resort was made to the United Nations and to other international non-governmental organizations that also became active in peacemaking and mediation.

This was, to a great extent, because of the absence of specialized, trained institutions and individuals within the regional architecture who can act between parties to conflicts. If you look at the United Nations Charter, regional efforts should be exerted first, and when regional efforts fail, you resort to the international system. In fact, what happened in many cases is that resort was made first to the international architecture of peacemaking, including intergovernmental mediation represented by the United Nations and other international organizations, but not to potential regional institutions and individuals.

This absence, I think, prompted the thinking of developing such resources in the region, for the region. This does not mean excluding international efforts or international institutions, but it means resorting first to regional resources—resources that are familiar with the parties to the conflicts, the origin of the conflicts, and the political culture of the region.

A.F: Today, there have been four workshops that have taken place within the context of this project and its teams. Could you tell me more about how these projects came about?

I.A: Four workshops took place across two set-up working groups. One was for discussing the long-term settlement of the conflicts in Sudan, Yemen, Syria, and Libya. The other one was about the mediation that needs to take place during conflicts, aimed at ensuring that populations can live, survive, and meet at least part of their needs.

Obviously, in times of conflict, populations will not be able to meet all their needs; this is the tragic consequence of conflict. But people still need to eat, and in order to eat, they need to grow vegetables and fruits. They need to cater to their medical needs, ensure there is potable water, and ensure there is a minimum of healthcare.  

The first, as I said, was about the conflict in general: how do you progress toward settlements that have been elusive so far?

Perhaps that elusiveness is because of a lack of credible efforts by trained resources. I say “perhaps” because I am aware that this is not the only factor impacting whether a settlement is reached. It is not just about having very capable mediators. At times, you may have very capable mediators, but the conflict is at a stage where it cannot be mediated yet, or you have a severe fragmentation of the conflict, you have too many parties to the conflict. 

A.F: And in having these discussions, what kind of experts were you bringing into the workshops?

I.A: We brought in people and institutions that have been active in direct action that fits under these two working groups. Some institutions have tried to bring together the parties to conflicts, starting with regional individuals who acted independently or within non-governmental organizations—the so-called “Track II” actors—and even experts from the United Nations itself.

These individuals have real-world experience, they have met with these problems firsthand, and they know what the challenges are. Some know one set of problems well, while others know another. When it comes to mediating conflicts, there is also a vast academic literature that identifies these issues. For instance, I mentioned a few minutes ago the fragmentation of conflicts, the multiplication of actors, and conflicts that go beyond borders to become regionalized. We know that the fragmentation and multiplication of parties makes it incredibly difficult to identify who should take part in meetings, how to discuss the different areas of the conflict, and how to draw up an agenda for a mediation session—such as what to put first and what to put last.

We hope that what came out of these discussions will be helpful for the project and for all of us as we head toward the final conference, which will be the “end game” of the project, if you wish. I think what we accomplished can help us have highly productive discussions at the conference aimed to be held in June.

Again, this will not be the end of all efforts. I am not pretending that we will have fully reached everything necessary for regional peacemaking and mediation efforts to instantly prosper and be efficient. But I think we have made a very good stride. We have advanced, and either the American University in Cairo or another institution can take it from here—or perhaps a number of institutions working together can build on what we have achieved.

A.F: Thank you very much, Dr. Awad. For more information on the project and deeper insights into mediation processes, look out for the Pathways to Hope special edition of the Cairo Review, scheduled to come out later this month. Also, the Pathways to Hope upcoming regional conference will be taking place at AUC in early June.