From A Culture of Violence To A Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Society's Proposals For Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador

University for Peace
Universidad para la Paz
Master of Arts in International Peace Studies Graduation Research Project Report Colette Christine Hellenkamp Advisor: Dr. Victor Valle
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Societys Proposals for Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador July 2, 2012 Motivated by personal experiences with El Salvadors culture of violence, noting a glaring disconnect between the government and civil society in their work for peace, and observing steadily increasing rates of violence in the country, the author seeks deeper understanding of this phenomenon through the eyes of civil society. Interviewing 59 members of Salvadoran civil society with a diversity of backgrounds in peace work, she asks them to explain their understandings of the countrys violence including the variety of forms it takes, its root causes, effective approaches to violence reduction, the roles of the state and of civil society in this process, as well as which of El Salvadors traits serve as its most advantageous assets in its work for peace. Synthesizing these concepts, the author presents a proposal for cultural transformation from the perspectives of civil society those who possess the most intimate understanding of the countrys violence, yet whose voices have been time and again disregarded in the countrys pursuit for peace. The perspectives presented here add valuable insight to the discourse regarding peacebuilding in El Salvador. Acknowledging that the experiences and visions presented here only represent a small fraction of the realities lived in the country, this study is presented in hopes of spurring continued dialogue, collaboration and creativity in this peace process amongst all sectors of Salvadoran society. In an important post scriptum, the author addresses the gang truce enacted in El Salvador in March of 2012, as well as how this studys proposal can be used as a framework for analysis of this important and groundbreaking negotiation process. This research report is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, International Peace Studies.
La paz no es producto del terror ni del miedo. La paz no es el silencio de los cementerios. La paz no es producto de una violencia y de una represin que calla. La paz es la aportacin generosa, tranquila, de todos para el bien de todos. La paz es dinamismo. La paz es generosidad. Es derecho y es deber. Peace is not the product of terror or fear. Peace is not the silence of cemeteries. Peace is not the silent result of violent repression. Peace is the generous, tranquil contribution of all to the good of all. Peace is dynamism. Peace is generosity. It is right and it is duty. - Monseor Oscar Arnulfo Romero January 7, 1978 El Salvador
Gratitude MIL GRACIAS to the many friends, family, mentors, colleagues and nahuales that have patiently accompanied, loved, guided and inspired me throughout this cumulative life project. Each of you has played an essential role in making this work possible: Dr. Victor Valle, Dr. Victoria Fontan, Dr. Elias Chaboud, Kai Frithjof Brand-Jacobsen, Mom, Dad, Jake, Em, Grandpa, Rosie H., Ravi Kalwani, Rosie Ramsey, Fredy Granillo, Tedde Simon, Pipilis Tripis, Beth Tellman, Laura Hershberger & Cesar & Ali, Danny Burridge, Danielle Mackey, Alex Early, Junkyard, Dandelion, la Casa Club, Megan Horton, Erin Yost, Kali Moran, Mariana Melara, Marllory Oliva, Karla Montalvo Molina, Anita Boyd, Rico Suave, Las Musas Batucada, Kali Raisl, Robin Graham, Craig Burrows, Keeley Flaherty, Shawn McAllister, Andrew Shanstrom, Nicole Johnson, Marty Chorkey, Jennifer & Jay Errante Paidipati, Marisol Escobar & family, el Crculo de Reconciliacin, the Ubuntu IPS Class of 2011, Rosanne & Matt Steller Burke, Carli Barrios, Dr. Christopher Staeheli, mi familia Equipo Nahual, Sarah Blakeslee, Heidi Rose Resetarits, Nura Suleiman, Bianca Bockman, Diana Coumantarakis, Mackenzie Barton-Rowledge, Sara Ford, Avra Heller, Maralise Hood Quan, Julio Quan, mi familia CRISPAZ, Roddy Hughes, Marcy & John Ramsey, Michael Murphy, Nicki Olivier, Tommy Hoolihan, Diego Murcia, Emily & Kelly Holland, Lyn McCracken, Christine Coe, Rishi Kalwani, Vidya Kapadia, Amar Ashar, Shana Rabinowich, Eric Ares, Rhoman Goyenechea, Jana Carmack, Matthew Holland, Roxanne Partridge, Sally Hansen, Voices on the Border, Jeanne Rikkers, Dr. Ren Olate, Dr. Christopher Salas-Wright, lxs muchachxs, the entire extended Hellenkamp and Dederick families, amongst a multitude of other people I hold near and dear to my heart... I also very sincerely thank all of the courageous participants of this study, who spoke so willingly and open-heartedly about their experiences of violence and visions of peace for their country and who in the meantime work tirelessly for a more peaceful tomorrow in El Salvador. And I will forever be indebted to the gracious and resilient people of El Salvador. Youve left an indelible mark on my heart, and you continue to teach me more every day about the true spirit of solidarity and community.
Gracias a la vida que me ha dado tanto. Me ha dado la risa y me ha dado el llanto. As yo distingo dicha de quebranto. Los dos materiales que forman mi canto, Y el canto de ustedes que es el mismo canto, Y el canto de todos que es mi propio canto.
- Violeta Parra
Table of Contents List of Figures Chapter One: Introduction ............ Some Observations ....... Motivation for Research ................ Research Topic ...... Chapter Two: Background & Context .......... Violence in El Salvador ..... Interests in Maintaining this Culture of Violence .............. State Responses ..... Civil Societys Responses to the Violence ..... An Opportunity for Peace ......... Significance of Study ..... Chapter Three: Theoretical Framework and Literature Review .......... Definitions of Key Terms ......... Civil Society .......... Government/State ........ Violence ........ Peace ............. Culture ...... Culture of Violence ............... Culture of Peace .................... Peacebuilding ........................ Development of Cultures of Violence .... Culture of Peace & Peacebuilding in El Salvador ......... Civil Participation in Peacebuilding .......... Chapter Four: Methodology ............ Conceptual Framework ............................................. Participants ....... Data Collection ..... Data Analysis .... Limitations to the Study .... Chapter Five: Findings .......... Preface: A Note on Reading this Data .......... Introduction ...... Perceptions of Violence in El Salvador ......... Forms of Violence ..... Personal Experiences with Violence ..... Protagonists of the Violence ......................... Root Causes of the Violence ................................. 1 1 5 5 7 7 10 12 13 14 15 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 19 19 20 21 25 33 38 38 38 40 43 43 45 45 46 47 47 51 53 54
Recollection & Evaluation of Efforts to Reduce Violence and Build Peace ........... Government Efforts ................................................................................................... Efforts on behalf of Civil Society ............................................................................... Factors that Contribute to the Success of Peacebuilding Efforts ............................... Dynamics Detrimental to Peacebuilding Efforts ................................................................ Proposals on how to Build a Culture of Peace in El Salvador ................................................ Proposals for the State ............................................................................................... Proposals for Civil Society ......................................................................................... Proposals for Other Key Actors ................................................................................ Principal Strengths of El Salvador that will Contribute to Successful Peacebuilding ............ Chapter Six: Discussion .................................................................................................... Introduction ........................................................................................................................... Recalling our Framework of Analysis ..................................................................................... Perceptions of Violence in El Salvador ................................................................................. Forms of Violence ...................................................................................................... Root Causes of the Violence ...................................................................................... Recollection & Evaluation of Efforts to Reduce Violence and Build Peace .......................... Government Efforts to Curb Violence and Create Peace ........................................... Civil Societys Efforts to Curb Violence and Create Peace ........................................ Factors that Contribute to the Success of Peacebuilding Efforts ............................... Dynamics Detrimental to Peacebuilding Efforts ........................................................ Proposals on how to Build a Culture of Peace in El Salvador ................................................ Proposals for the State ............................................................................................... Proposals for Civil Society ......................................................................................... Proposals for Other Key Actors ................................................................................. Principal Strengths of El Salvador that will contribute to Successful Peacebuilding .............. Chapter Seven Conclusions and Recommendations Post Scriptum: Gang Truce of March 2012 ....................................................
62 62 66 70 73 76 76 82 87 88 91 91 91 92 92 94 101 101 104 107 110 112 112 119 125 125 127 131 137 138 139 140
...................................................................... ......................................................
Annex A: Research Summary Page for Participants Annex B: Interview Guide
.................................................................................................. .................................................................................
Annex C: Participant Consent Form References
...........................................................................................................................
List of Figures
Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14
Contrasts between a culture of violence and a culture of peace Delineation of UNESCOs Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador A Typology of Violence, from WHOs World Report on Violence and Health Forms of current-lived violence in El Salvador Participants personal experiences with violence Root causes of El Salvadors violence Government efforts to reduce violence and build peace Efforts on behalf of civil society to reduce violence and build peace Elements that contribute to success in peacebuilding Dynamics detrimental to peacebuilding efforts The Salvadoran governments role in the countrys peace process Salvadoran civil societys role in the countrys peace process Roles of other key actors in El Salvadors work for peace El Salvadors greatest assets in its work for peace
20 27 48 49 52 55-57 63 66-67 71 74 76-78 83-84 88 89
From a Culture of Violence
Chapter One: Introduction Some Observations Okay, are you ready for your first lesson in this country? my boss asked, as we drove out of the airport parking lot upon my arrival in El Salvador. Always lock your doors when youre driving, he said. Shocked, I was left speechless at the thought that here one must maintain such a high level of precaution and vigilance even when driving. I quickly learned, however, that this warning was sound advice. And in the years that followed, I witnessed and experienced first-hand exactly why one must always be on guard in El Salvador: sadly, violence and threats to ones safety and well-being are around every corner. This seems like such a paradox, considering the extreme contrast of the violence to El Salvadors breathtaking landscapes and beaches, the warmth and generosity of its people, and the countrys history of struggle for justice and peace. Yet the reality remains that violence in the country has become so widespread and comes in such a variety of forms that everyone is affected by it in one form or another. During my time in El Salvador, my personal encounters with this phenomenon were frequent. Violence touched my friends, acquaintances, co-workers and me in serious ways on a daily basis: As women in public spaces, my female friends and I were inevitably harassed by men either verbally in the street or physically on buses or in other tight spaces. Children I worked with were unable to attend school because they did not have the resources to pay for uniforms or school supplies or because it was too dangerous, as they lived in one gang territory and their school was located in the other gangs turf. I was robbed at gunpoint in front of my apartment. A friend was forced to flee the country because he did not have the money to pay extortionists the amount they were demanding.
Police routinely beat-up and blackmailed the gang youth I worked with. Friends of mine have had family members go missing, only to find their mutilated bodies dumped in the woods or on the side of a country road, weeks or months later. One friend still does not know what happened to his mother, three years after her disappearance.
In my first few months living in El Salvador, there was a period of time when the government was silently transferring 30 or so prisoners of one gang into prisons of the opposite gang, creating the perfect equation to ensure the ensuing massacres.
Friends of mine from the community of sexual diversity1 have been brutally attacked in hate crimes.
I was robbed in a bus by a group of adolescents armed with knives. Many kids I knew and loved were killed in cold blood due to the gangs long-standing rivalries and the ensuing vicious circle of vengeance.
Friends of mine are frequently profiled and discriminated against by the police and other people in the street for being youth, being poor, having darker skin, having tattoos, wearing certain clothing or hair styles, etc.
I once received an email that had been circulated throughout El Salvador within a matter of days, purportedly on behalf of an active death squad. In it, they threatened to kill all of the gang members in the country if the government themselves did not find a solution to the problem by the end of the month.
Bus drivers on my daily routes were sporadically shot and killed for not paying their dues to the extortionists.
The community of sexual diversity (or la comunidad de diversidad sexual in Spanish) is the current name that the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender/transsexual/intersexual community prefer to call themselves in El Salvador. This is the term that I will use to refer to this community throughout this paper.
1
Young people I have worked with have been unlawfully arrested and imprisoned. Oftentimes, they are also then indefinitely left in prison because they are never tried before a judge.
A bus burning and massacre of its passengers occurred in one of the neighborhoods I worked in on a daily basis.
This is a brief and highly abridged list of some of my experiences with violence in El Salvador, from just five years of living there. People who have lived in El Salvador their entire lives have obviously had far more encounters with violence, and they have a much more intimate understanding of the daily lived reality of it in the country. But whether one has lived in El Salvador for a year or their entire life, it is clear to all that the violence is just that: a daily lived reality. El Salvadors violence invades nearly every space of society and is exerted in nearly all forms from the invisible domestic abuse that happens in the home, to the violent manner in which people drive in the streets, to the systematic exclusion of the poor majority by the government and the wealthy few in the country. In fact, the violence in El Salvador is so pervasive that it can now be considered cultural, as through the years it has become a pattern of behaviors and cognitive constructs amongst Salvadoran society that has been learned, shared and reproduced from generation to generation2 (Damen, 1987). Different actors in Salvadoran society have made efforts to thwart the violence in its many forms for decades now. The governments approach has generally been to repress those involved in the violence. In the past 15 years or so, the government has singled-out and placed the blame for societys violence on the gangs, and they have focused most of their efforts in wiping out the gangs
I would like to emphasize that this statement does not imply I believe Salvadoran people are violent. I am speaking in generalities about patterns which are learned, shared and reproduced by a group over time as a response to their social/political/economic context. Just within the time I lived in El Salvador, I found that I even developed a mild paranoia about safety, picked up vocabulary subtly tinted with violence and machismo, etc. all as a natural adaptive response to the context I was in over an extended period of time. This adaptation is a natural human response.
2
through a series of repressive laws and policies. Some of the visible manifestations of these policies include legitimized police brutality, prolific arrests of young people regardless of their culpability, and the deployment of thousands of military officers in the streets and prisons. The invisible aspects of this repressive approach include a systematic marginalization and exclusion of young people (and the poor communities they come) from all areas of society (Pedraza Faria, Miller, & Cavallaro, 2010). These approaches to reducing the violence in the country have been wholly unsuccessful. Studies have unequivocally shown that the repression has only served to increase violence in the country (Pedraza Faria et al., 2010, pp. 107-154). In fact, a report released in 2011 named El Salvador the most violent country in the world, affirming that things are truly getting worse (PNUD: El Salvador, 2011). On the other hand, I have witnessed many efforts on behalf of civil society that have made clear impacts on the levels of violence in their communities. Several non-governmental organizations, community groups and activists working from all angles to reduce violence and create peace in their country have had great success on much smaller levels. However, because of lack of support from the government and lack of economic resources, most have been unable to make a more widespread impact on society as a whole. Because the government has taken minimal interest in these alternative approaches to peacebuilding in the country, there is an expansive disconnect between the people with power and resources and the people doing effective work on the ground. The governments lack of genuine interest in civil societys experiences and wisdom is at once a manifestation of their historic systematic political exclusion of the poor majority, and also of the fact that the wealthy and powerful few have other political and economic interests invested in the violence that in the eyes of the decision-makers trump Salvadoran societys desperate need for peace.
Motivation for Research I have observed (and personally felt) a great urgency for peace in El Salvador. And I have seen a clear and significant disconnect between the government and the effective, innovative work that is being done in communities to reduce violence at local levels. I have also observed throughout my years that without fail, people are the experts on their own realities. The people in the communities here most intimately know and understand the dynamics of the violence, yet they are not being consulted by those in power. A wealth of knowledge and experience exists within civil society that is not being exploited nor empowered in the countrys pursuit of peace. Having made all of these observations and sharing in the sense of urgency for peace in El Salvador, I deeply desire to help close the glaring gap in communication and collaboration between the government and civil society, to help promote the sharing of best practices in peacebuilding. In doing so, I also hope to give voice and witness to the historically marginalized majority of Salvadoran society and to the richness of their life experiences.
Research Topic With that said, I will dedicate this body of research to giving a voice to members of civil society who are doing their own work for peace, asking them about their personal vision for cultural transformation in the country: If you had the power, the resources, and the presidents ear, how would you create a culture of peace in El Salvador? More specifically, I will focus this investigation on (1) Salvadoran civil societys perceptions and personal experiences of the culture of violence that is lived today in El Salvador, (2) their brief evaluations of various measures that have been taken throughout the years to thwart the violence in El Salvador, and (3) their proposals on how to construct a true culture of peace in their country. I will include background academic research, as well as information gathered from 59 people from
different sectors of Salvadoran civil society who are working for peace in the country in some form or another.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Chapter Two: Background & Context Violence in El Salvador El Salvador is a tiny, beautiful country located in Central America. Unfortunately, this
picturesque country is plagued with a pervasive culture of violence, which is manifested in every level of society in a multitude of forms. This culture of violence can partly be attributed to its long history of violence. This includes the conquista, decades of rule under military dictatorship and a twelve-year civil war fueled by the two polar forces of the Cold War in which over 75,000 people were killed and thousands more tortured and disappeared. The normalization of violence throughout the course of several centuries planted deep seeds which facilitated the germination of a widespread culture of violence in Salvadoran society. In time, violence became the standard approach to conflict resolution, and generations of young people were raised in the context of war. Fear and death became the norm (Alvarenga Venutolo, 1996; Pedraza Faria et al., 2010, p. 5). The 1992 Peace Accords drew an official end to the civil war and promised hope for reconciliation and societal transformation in El Salvador. However, few of the agreed-upon steps for post-war reconstruction were put into effect in their entirety. In particular, the weak judicial system from before the war remained weak and susceptible to manipulation. This only perpetuated the prevalence of impunity in the country, preventing the acquisition of justice for so many thousands of Salvadoran victims of violence; and thus, giving the silent nod of approval to the pervasiveness of structural violence, corruption, and injustice in the country to those who have the means to manipulate the system (Pedraza Faria et al., 2010, pp. 12-17; United States Institute of Peace). Several other sources of conflict that had led to the civil war remained unaddressed, as well. One of the greatest of these problems was the gaping socioeconomic disparity that existed in the country. Unfortunately, this issue was not adequately addressed in the Peace Accords negotiation process, and the few provisions that were intended to address these socioeconomic inequities were
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace insufficiently implemented due to a lack of resources and lack of importance placed on the subject (Arson, 2003). To this day, a miniscule percentage of the population still possesses the majority of the countrys wealth and resources, while the majority of the population can be considered victims of a historical and systematic economic violence an economic exclusion that has been perpetuated by the wealthy few in the country for centuries (Alvarenga Venutolo, 1996). People born into poverty have very few opportunities and face endless obstacles in order to overcome their situation. Public education is supposed to be free and accessible to all, but many people cannot afford the additional fees that are charged for uniforms, tests and graduation. And at times, children are even pulled out of school to help support their families economically. Unemployment and informal employment rates are extremely high. There are few opportunities for employment, even for people who are
fortunate enough to have obtained a quality education (Instituto de Derechos Humanos de la UCA, 2006). To further complicate the situation of violence in the country, soon after the signing of the Peace Accords, the United States government began deporting Salvadorans who had sought refuge in the US during the war. Many of these people had been living in Los Angeles and had formed or joined local street gangs, namely the 18th Street gang and the Mara Salvatrucha (i.e. MS-13). These gangs were far more sophisticated and violent than the common street gangs El Salvador had known in the past. When these new gangs hit Salvadoran soil with the first rounds of deportation from the States, they found the country a fertile place to take root and flourish for several reasons: many youth were seeking identity and family after having lost theirs to violence and emigration during the war; people were still frustrated by the great lack of employment opportunities; the country was flooded with weapons from having recently emerged from a violent civil war; the gangs were a direct product of the sexy American culture, and the civil war (as well as the previous years of conquista
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace and military dictatorship) had left a culture of violence as its legacy. The gangs took root in the country and spread like wildfire. Today, nearly every inch of El Salvador is claimed as territory by one gang or the other. There are estimated to be 62 thousand active gang members in the country (and over 200,000, if we are to include their family members and the informal affiliate networks of youth aspiring to be
jumped into the gangs) (Valencia R., 2012). Todays gang violence is principally limited to extortion and to turf-battles and inter-gang retaliation in revenge for past lives taken. However, in a recent evolution, they have also initiated violent acts in defiance of the governments public policy towards the gangs (Jimenez, 2010). It appears that what once began as a war between two gangs is now simultaneously transforming into a violent resistance movement against the oppressive structures in existence hailing a forceful message of justice and structural transformation for El Salvador. In the past ten years or so, the gangs have become a great source of notoriety for El Salvador. In fact, they have become the principal scapegoat for the high levels of violence in Salvadoran society. And while a certain percentage of the visible physical violence in El Salvador can be attributed to the gangs, much of it can also be attributed to phenomena such as gender violence, non-gang-initiated extortions, narcotrafficking, organized crime, extra-judicial killings on behalf of death squads and other disgruntled groups, hate crimes, and other generalized delinquency and robbery (Violencia, un problema de exclusin, 2010). Although the Peace Accords were signed in 1992 to formally end El Salvadors civil war, the country remains at war. The homicide rate in El Salvador climbed to 71 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants in 2009, raising it to number one amongst all countries in terms of per capita homicide rates (Miroff & Booth, 2010). In addition, in September of 2011, the United Nations Development Program named El Salvador as the most violent country in the world based on its proportional rates of armed violence (PNUD: El Salvador, 2011). Many people claim that living conditions today are
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace
10
worse than they were before the war (Instituto de Derechos Humanos de la UCA, 2006). This culture of violence is pervasive throughout all aspects of Salvadoran society, and at this point there is no sight of significant change in the near future. Interests in Maintaining this Culture of Violence. One clear social symptom of the violence that plagues the country and its peoples lack of hope in change is the mass emigration of Salvadorans from their motherland typically without papers, knowingly risking facing any number of perils that exist along the path north. Today, over 1.4 million Salvadorans live abroad (Centro de Estudios Monetarios Latinoamericanos, 2012), compared to a mere 6.2 million who remain living in El Salvador (World Bank, 2012). Hundreds of people flee the country daily. People joke that El Salvadors greatest export today is people, and its greatest import is remittances sent back to El Salvador from Salvadorans living abroad. Unfortunately, this is not an exaggeration. El Salvador is within the top ten countries in the world in terms of receiving remittances from abroad in proportion to the countrys GDP (The World Bank, 2011). These days, remittances to El Salvador total approximately $3.6 billion per year, which equates to roughly 15.7% of the countrys GDP (Organization of American States, 2011, p. 21). This amounts to about 86% of the government budget (Ministerio de Haciendo: Direccin General del Presupuesto, 2011). Remittances are keeping El Salvador economically afloat. It has been quite convenient for the Salvadoran government throughout the years to sustain this culture of violence and keep a steady flow of people fleeing the country. Fewer people in the country implies fewer mouths to feed and a greater influx of money from abroad, which lightens the governments economic burden. If we take a closer look at these deeply interrelated phenomena of the culture of violence and emigration from El Salvador, we discover yet another linchpin holding these complex social patterns in place. Today, citizen insecurity is a profiting business in El Salvador (when few other industries are able to truly thrive in the current economy). In recent years, El Salvador has been
11
spending an average of two billion dollars per year on security (Pastrn, 2010). Upon investigation, it has been discovered that several of the people behind the arms trade in El Salvador (who are actively serving to fuel violence in the country) are also the owners of the five major private security companies in the country (Anonymous, 2010). There are a select and powerful few who are directly benefitting from this pervasive culture of violence they both fuel the widespread panic and fear that has taken hold of El Salvador by ensuring that weapons are available like candy, and also provide people with the immediate go-to solution of private security and barricading-in their homes to help ease peoples paranoia. It is also understood among many analysts and local activists that the Salvadoran governments insistence that the youth gangs are the main perpetrators of violence in the country (including the most recent claim by several government officials that the gangs are to blame for 90% of the countrys homicides in 2011) is, in fact, an intentional act to divert the publics attention away from the reality of the situation. Other experts, including the Salvadoran governments forensics institute, several civil society organizations, and former police officials, report statistics reflecting that only 10-20% of the murders in the country can be attributed to the gangs. They assert that the majority of the violence in El Salvador is instead instigated by international organized criminal networks involved in trafficking arms, drugs and people, money laundering, and other unlawful activities (Voices on the Border, 2010). In making the gangs the scapegoat for the countrys problems of violence and keeping them in the daily headlines, the people who hold prestigious positions in the government and in the private sector and who are also leaders in this illicit criminal activity (Arauz, Martnez, & Lemus, 2011) are able to conduct business behind a smoke curtain without threat to their dealings. Clearly, there are very high-up economic interests involved in ensuring that the current culture of violence is maintained as is.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Similarly, as has been the case in El Salvador for decades, the wealthy few in the country do whatever is necessary to maintain their riches and quench their thirst for comfort and power (Alvarenga Venutolo, 1996; Foley, 1996). Their status and wealth will not be threatened as long as they ensure that the masses remain uneducated and in chaos. Creating equal opportunity for education, jobs and resources is not a priority for those in power, nor is resolving the problem of violence in the country. This claim holds true until the day that those in power make a true commitment to work to eradicate the extreme inequity that has been so meticulously preserved throughout the ages in El Salvador. Quite clearly, powerful economic interests are working to perpetuate El Salvadors culture of violence. State Responses. As demonstrated above, the Salvadoran government is not wholeheartedly committed to working to reduce the violence and foment a culture of peace. This is
12
further confirmed as we examine how the government has responded to violence over time. We see that, in fact, this culture of violence extends into Salvadoran public policy, as well particularly in response to the problem of societal violence. The administrations of the past neglected to implement public policy to provide youth with opportunities for positive growth and development, and their active response to the gang phenomenon was one of systematic repression and violence towards the greater youth population. Beginning in 2003, the government began implementing anti-gang laws (including the infamous Mano Dura or Iron Fist policies), which have given the police nearly free reign to arbitrarily arrest youth regardless of whether or not they have actually committed a true crime. Police brutality towards youth became the norm in the streets. When officers detain youth, they also frequently beat them, threaten them and their families, and steal their money and phones. In addition, prison conditions are exaggeratedly inhumane; prisons are currently at 300% capacity, and the pervasive impunity in the country has ensured that about 30% of those prisoners have never even been tried
13
or convicted (Archibold, 2012). Also, there was a time in which it became a practice in the prisons to mix a smaller population of youth from one gang with a large population of youth from the opposing gang guaranteeing massacre (Faria et al., p. 149). In the past three years under the current administration, military officers have also been deployed in the prisons and in the streets to accompany police officers as they patrol communities (El Ejrcito salvadoreo, 2011). In June of 2011, President Mauricio Funes announced a new measure to prevent the growth of the gangs, which involves mandatory military service for the 5,000 youth most at risk of joining a gang (Valencia, Labrador, & Caras, 2011). And most recently, President Funes removed the incumbent civilian leaders from the highest positions of leadership in the area of security in the country both the Director of the National Civilian Police (PNC) and the Minister of Justice and Public Security , and replaced them with two army generals, essentially militarizing security in El Salvador (Salvadoran President Funes, 2012). Despite the fact that the current administration is now led by a leftist party for the first time since the end of the civil war, there appears to be very little change in how the government approaches the situation of violence in the country. When President Funes was elected, people had hope that true change would finally come, yet he has only proven to maintain the same reactionary, short-term approach, continuing to respond to the violence with repression and more violence. Again, this reflects the governments systematic disinterest and lack of commitment to addressing the root causes of the violence. Civil Societys Responses to the Violence. Despite civil societys desperation for peace in El Salvador (as they are commonly the people most directly affected by the violence), organized efforts on behalf of this sector to address the situation of violence in the country have been minimal in proportion to the enormity of the phenomenon. Numerous organizations and communities have chosen to dedicate themselves to implementing initiatives involving violence prevention and
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace reduction, community organizing, education, activism, and inclusion and active support of marginalized populations (youth, women, the community of sexual diversity, indigenous
14
communities, etc.), among others. Many of these organizations are working effectively, bravely and tirelessly for peace in their communities, but most of their efforts have struggled to make a widespread impact due to several serious obstacles in their path. One problem is that amongst all of these organizations, there is generally a great lack of coordination, sharing of best practices and communication. This means that the work being done, in the end, is frequently disjointed and isolated3. In addition, international funding is scarce in the current struggling global economy, and also because there are still few quantitatively-proven methods for reducing the violence. And in the end, one of the most significant obstacles that these civil society organizations face is that despite their successful peacebuilding experiences in their communities, the government has shown overwhelming disinterest in supporting these grassroots initiatives. Understandably, the majority of people are afraid to get involved in the work because of the personal risk involved in challenging the structures behind the violence. An Opportunity for Peace. Gang violence in El Salvador hit a high between the months of June and September of 2010. On June 20, 2010, a small bus full of passengers was stopped in an urban district of San Salvador, doused in gasoline, set on fire and gun-blasted. Seventeen people were killed, and many others were critically injured. Among many theories, it was believed that this act could have been attributed to gang violence. In response to this event, President Funes introduced an anti-gang bill in September, making it illegal to belong to a gang in El Salvador and punishable with up to ten years in prison (Associated Press, 2010). In reaction to the proposal of this new policy (which mirrors the same repressive policy of the past administrations that the current
3
In the past few years, there have been several initiatives that have attempted to unite and coordinate networks of organizations working in similar fields; however, great long-term fruits are yet to be borne, as many are still in their initial phases of organization.
15
government had so ardently criticized), the two gangs united and imposed a nation-wide curfew and a 72-hour stoppage of the bus routes across the entire country, threatening to kill anyone who defied this mandate. Towards the end of this 72-hour curfew and bus stoppage, the two gangs held press conferences and issued official statements calling for policies of inclusion and opportunities for youth, as well as better living conditions and personal development opportunities in the prisons (Jimenez, 2010). In addition, the gangs proposed to enter into dialogue with the government to together address issues of violence in the country (Llarull, 2010). Nonetheless, the gangs proposal was met with flat rejection on behalf of Salvadoran officials. Vowing not to concede to blackmail, President Funes signed the proposed anti-gang bill into law the very same week (Salvadoran signs, 2010). Youth gang members one of the social groups centrally involved in and affected by the violence on a variety of levels were open and willing to dialogue because they saw that the country had arrived at a critical moment; yet President Funes firmly rejected moving forward into dialogue. He imprudently shut the door on a rare opportunity to begin an essential conversation with key participants in the process of creating a true peace in El Salvador.
Significance of Study Considering the current pervasiveness of violence in El Salvador and President Funess position, it is clear that the country is facing a crucial moment in which it is essential to give a voice to the youth and other traditionally marginalized sectors of civil society regarding their proposals on how to bring about peaceful change. El Salvador can no longer afford to continue ignoring its peoples experiences, needs and visions for peace. If the country is to one day find true long-term sustainable solutions, they must originate from the people who know the problem most intimately. It must be dreamed and designed based
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace on the vision of a collective voice a voice that includes perspectives that have historically been
16
silenced or left in the margins and those who have had the most intimate experiences with violence in the country. And if President Funes is not willing to enter directly into dialogue with the youth (nor is he creating genuine opportunities for other sectors of civil society to impact public policy), it is important to find ways to get these peoples voices heard through alternative means. Taking this current reality into account, through this investigation, I hope to give voice to people from a diversity of sectors of Salvadoran civil society regarding their vision of how to create a cultural transformation in society from the currently-lived culture of violence to a new culture of peace. Ideally, this body of research will serve to spur dialogue and motivate people to action at all levels of society and government in the furthering of an endogenous peacebuilding process in El Salvador.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Chapter Three: Theoretical Framework & Literature Review
17
To clarify and contextualize the key terms and concepts examined in this investigation, I will first define the terms that are most central and relevant to the research question. I will continue by discussing various bodies of research that touch on the key concepts involved in this study.
Definitions of Key Terms Civil Society. Civil society is a term that is widely used and diversely defined. However, considering that this paper emphasizes civil societys role as a change agent I will use a version proposed by the United Nations. It states: Civil society is a vital component of governance and decentralization, the one component that is supposed to vigilantly hold those in power accountable and to promote democracy. Simply put, civil society is that sphere of action independent of the State, within the realm of private sector and civil organizations, capable of stimulating resistance to and change in undemocratic regimes (United Nations Committee of Experts on Public Administration, 2006). I also prefer this definition because it includes all non-State actors, including the family and individuals. As this is how Salvadoran civil society frequently defines itself, this is the definition we will be using in this paper. Government/State. In this paper, government and state are interchangeable terms. They both refer to the institutions, systems and processes by which state policy is developed and enforced in a society (Duhaime, 2012). The government consists of the legislators, administrators and arbitrators in the administrative bureaucracy who control a state at a given time (Bealey, 1999). At times, the government is also referred to as the system.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Violence. There are many different interpretations of the concept of violence, but this
18
paper will use the World Health Organizations definition from its World Report on Violence and Health. It states that violence is the the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation" (Krug, Dahlberg, Mercy, Zwi, & Lozano, 2002, p. 5). This particular definition emphasizes that the intention of committing the act itself makes it violence, regardless of the outcome. Peace. Peace is another concept whose definition has evolved throughout time. For this study, I have decided to adopt the Earth Charters definition of peace, which I feel is the most integral and exhaustive definition. It states, Peace is the wholeness created by right relationships with oneself, other persons, other cultures, other life, Earth, and the larger whole of which all are a part (Earth Charter Commission, 2000). This contemplates the elements of both negative peace (the absence of violence and war) and positive peace (the integration of human society) (Galtung, An Editorial, 1964), and it also alludes that justice, reconciliation and truth in right relationships go hand in hand with true peace. Culture. Culture is another concept that has been defined and re-defined through the ages. Each definition has its own nuances based on the field of study or framework within which the term is being referenced. In this paper, we will understand culture as the common values, beliefs, customs, cognitive constructs, and affective understanding of a community of interacting human beings, which are created, learned, shared and reproduced through a process of socialization. Culture is humanitys principal adaptive mechanism, and it serves groups as a roadmap regarding how to perceive, interpret, express and respond to the social realities around them (Damen, 1987; Lederach, 1995; Steenkamp, 2005; Useem & Useem, 1963; What is Culture?, 2012).
19
Culture of Violence. Across various studies done on the concept of a culture of violence, the term is commonly understood as a system of attitudes, values or norms which permit, facilitate or even encourage the use of violence as the accepted form of conflict resolution with another human being (Cruz, cited in Steenkamp, 2005, p. 254). It is emphasized that in cultures such as these, the use of violence becomes deeply rooted in a communitys shared norms and values. In this way, violence loses its exclusivity to the political sphere, and it becomes the standard method of managing everyday problems. Violence becomes trivial and routine, and it becomes a sociallyacceptable approach to attaining wealth, power and status in society (Shachter & Seinfeld, 1994; Steenkamp, 2005). Culture of Peace. The idea of a culture of peace has also undergone much evolution since its conception at the end of the Cold War. Today, the United Nations definition of the term is a set of values, attitudes, modes of behavior and ways of life that reject violence and prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through dialogue and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations (UNESCO, 2002). The concept of a culture of peace, according to the United Nations, is further broken down into eight Action Areas for Peace. They include the following: Fostering a culture of peace through education Promoting sustainable economic and social development Promoting respect for all human rights Ensuring equality between women and men Fostering democratic participation Advancing understanding, tolerance and solidarity Supporting participatory communication and the free flow of information and knowledge
20
Promoting international peace/security (Adams, Toward a Global Movement, 2000, p. 261)
Finally, the following table summarizes a few of the main contrasts between a culture of violence and a culture of peace: CULTURE OF VIOLENCE CULTURE OF PEACE
Violence Division Rules, orders Male-dominated Hierarchical, vertical Exploitative of people Demonizing other or enemy Secretive, information is controlled Responding to conflict with violent repression Nonviolence Unity, cooperation Dialogue, communication Power-sharing amongst all genders. Democratic, participative authority Respect for human rights, dignity and the natural environment. Sustainable development. Tolerance and respect for differences in all people Transparency, open sharing of information Negotiation, mediation, search for nonviolent solutions to root causes of conflict
Figure 1: Contrasts between a culture of violence and a culture of peace (Adams & True, 1997)
Peacebuilding. Peacebuilding is another highly-debated concept. Most of the conventional definitions are not quite complete for the purpose of this paper, as they maintain a heavy focus on peacebuilding being principally executed and managed by external international actors, and their hard security discourse focuses on state-building and conflict management. In this paper, and in more emancipatory understandings of the concept, civil society is seen as the central target and actor in any peacebuilding process that hopes to create lasting peace (Andrieu, 2010). And as the thesis of this investigation focuses on the crucial and undervalued role of civil society in peacebuilding, we will instead use John-Paul Lederachs definition. He posits that peacebuilding is everything that comprehends, generates, and sustains the wide variety of necessary stages and approaches in order to transform conflict situations into pacific and durable relations (Building Peace, 1997, p. 29). Within this framework, peace becomes principally a matter of relationships between people and amongst communities, which necessitates the empowerment and active participation of civil society.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Development of Cultures of Violence
21
Much has been written on theories regarding the causes of violence and the ensuing factors that serve to elevate violence to a cultural level. Shachter and Seinfeld (Personal Violence, 1994) refer to a series of contextual factors that they believe to have contributed to the generating and sustaining of a culture of violence in the United States. They begin by mentioning Jean-Paul Sartres theory of scarcity of needed supplies, which posits that within a certain field of scarcity (where there is a shortage of essential resources for each person) people begin to see each other as surplus people and competition for resources. In time, people begin realizing that they are also being seen as one too many, and in turn societys tone becomes one of paranoia, envy, mutual competitiveness and hatred creating significant potential for violence. Furthermore, this tension is amplified when there is an inequity of resources or power amongst the groups within that social sphere. Shachter and Seinfeld continue on to discuss at length the implications of the emergence of capitalism, in which the concepts of greed and insatiable need were highly valued and encouraged. At the time, they were seen as positive things because they drove demand in the market, in turn increasing production. In time, however, it has been observed that the combination of this insatiable greed within the context of extreme scarcity (such as in the United States in the 1980s) have shown to create exaggerated wealth disparity, as well as spikes in the relative rates of violence. When these values of greed, paranoia and survival mentality are combined and then reproduced in nuclear families on a widespread level (so that their children are fit to participate in their contemporary society), the attitudes and behaviors that lead to violence are perpetuated and condoned elevating the violence to a cultural level. These behaviors and attitudes are further reinforced and reproduced when a societys leaders model and idealize violent responses to conflict or threat. This analysis provides a solid framework to begin to understand a few of the key concepts that may contribute to the generation of violence in a society.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Steenkamp (The Legacy of War, 2005) conducts a systematic analysis as to why extended periods of armed conflict ending with peace accords so frequently end up giving rise to cultures of violence within their societies. Her question varies a bit from Shachter and Seinfeld in that she examines the direct causes of cultures of violence, asking not why are people violent, but rather,
22
how are the norms and values that underpin the sustained use of violence created and entrenched in society? (2005, p. 255). She very adeptly notes that these factors are not independent from one another; rather, they work together and complement each other in creating the conditions necessary to allow for a general tolerance of the use of violence in a society. She methodically categorizes the different factors contributing to the development of a culture of violence into four principal levels: personal, collective, state and international. She further divides each level into location and manifestation, giving specific examples of each type of factor. The international level is divided into formal links and informal links. Its manifestations include international conflict resolution practices, transnational organized crime and international arms smuggling. The state levels locations are the state security apparatus, political government, economic, and judiciary, law and order. The manifestations she mentions in her examples include the official use of violence, extrajudicial actions, devolved use of violence, an inefficient criminal justice system, weak state control, impunity for past violence/atrocities, deficient and exclusionary post-war reconstruction policies, the glorification of violence and post-war economic policies that only further the growth of inequities. She lists family, peers, community/ethnic groups and religion as the four locations of the collective level. The examples of manifestations that she names within this level include the disruption of families, revenge (for the deaths of family members), marginalization of young people, social rewards (for violent behavior), limited sanctioning of violence, target construction (creation of
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace the other or the enemy), the glorification of violence, breakdown of social capital and divine sanctioning of violence. And at the individual level, within its two locations listed as personal and psychological,
23
she lists exposure to violence, the lack of trauma support, and isolation, fear and insecurity as factors that contribute to the development of a culture of violence in post-war societies. Steenkamps analysis provides us with a more in-depth analysis and breakdown of factors that could work to perpetuate, sanction and encourage the normalized use of violence in a society, particularly within post-war contexts. The perspective of her research ties in very closely with this study, as it relates directly to El Salvadors experience as a society that has developed a culture of violence after the signing of its peace accords. Hume (The Myths of Violence, 2008) adds to the discourse, noting that in the specific case of El Salvador, state-sponsored violence became commonplace beginning in the years immediately after gaining independence from Spain. The state employed tactics of terror as a mechanism with which to maintain the hegemonic power of a small group of wealthy elite in the country. This small and exclusive society, commonly referred to as the 14 families and known as one of the smallest, most omnipotent, pugnacious and reactionary in the world, manipulated the system so that they were able to maintain maximum control over the resources in the country; all this, while the majority suffered. In fact, many of these wealthy elite families retain their position of power today, having shifted their assets into real estate and international investments. It is clear, then, that economic oppression and violence have been deeply interconnected throughout El Salvadors history and into the present day. In addition, notes Hume, Salvadoran societys collective memory of terror and repression has been central to the development of the culture of violence in the country. In particular, 1932s La Matanza one of the most brutal examples of mass violence in which 30,000 indigenous people
24
were slain by military forces as an act of counterinsurgency left a permanent mark on the peoples collective conscious. It demonstrated to the people that the state was capable of employing genocidal tactics to maintain total hegemonic power, and it served as a reminder of what could happen should dissent arise. This experience laid solid groundwork for the creation and perpetuation of fear and silence among civil society, the people having internalized their impotence and vulnerability in front of the states forces. Continued military rule and repression through the years only served to ingrain this message deeper in societys collective psyche. Through these military dictatorships and then the civil war, people learned that silence and complicity were oftentimes the best options in a continuous context of violence and uncertainty. As previously mentioned, post-war El Salvador maintains high levels of crime and violence to this day. In this context, continued generalized fear makes the survival tactics learned throughout the military dictatorships and civil war practical in this day and age as well. Enduring silences and the fragmentation of everyday life, clear symptoms of El Salvadors culture of violence are indicative not only of the indelible mark on social attitudes and behavior left by exposure to longterm political violence but also of continued exposure to terror (Hume, 2008, p. 72). Humes reflections lead us to conclude that El Salvadors culture of violence has historical roots, as well, which trace back much farther than its civil war. Furthermore, one of the key elements that has worked to perpetuate this culture throughout the years is a continued generalized fear amongst the population that time after time prevents the majority from critically questioning the existing social mores and breaking these cycles of violence. While ample analysis has been done on the development of cultures of violence, what remains clear is that each culture has its own unique history, characteristics, course of development and factors that work to perpetuate it through time. Academic studies give insight regarding the formation of cultures of violence on a systematic and intellectual level but to understand the
25
essence of a societys dynamics, it is crucial to listen to the stories of the people who have lived these experiences to understand the violence through their eyes. And it is essential to have insight into these local, indigenous experiences of the violence in order to generate an appropriate, effective and sustainable construction of peace in a society.
Culture of Peace and Peacebuilding in El Salvador The concept of building of a culture of peace is nothing new in El Salvador. In fact, when this conceptual framework was first being conceived and developed by UNESCO, El Salvador was just emerging from over twelve years of civil war. Viewing this as opportune timing in which to test out and put this new model into action, UNESCO offered to establish the Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador. Together with the leadership of the Ministry of Education (MINED) and the collaboration of hundreds of governmental and non-governmental organizations, UNESCO formally launched its pilot program for a culture for peace in November of 1993 with the purpose of contributing to the reconstruction of Salvadoran society in El Salvadors post-war period (Parajon, Lourenco, & Adams, 1996). Based on work done by UNESCO and consultation with the worlds leading peace researchers and social scientists, the final version of the project proposed a process of crossconflict participation in projects of human development. In other words, reconciliation would occur amongst people who had recently been enemies in the war, through joint collaborative processes to design and implement projects that would benefit the entire society in areas such as culture, communication, science and education. The program, in its essence, was intended to be fundamentally innovative, participatory, inter-sectoral and inter-institutional and to revolve around the processes of learning the values, knowledge and practices of a Culture of Peace (Ministry of Education of El Salvador, 1993, p. 2). The programs stated priority action areas seen as both
26
interrelated and interdependent included (1) democratic citizenship and human development, (2) recovery and promotion of national identity, and (3) the learning and living of a culture of peace. In addition, it placed a heavy emphasis on integrating the cross-cutting themes of information, communication, women and youth into all aspects of the programs work. The programs stated objectives included the following: 1. To contribute to the consolidation of the fulfillment of the peace process. 2. To contribute to social renovation in El Salvador, through the diffusion and individual and collective internalization of values, attitudes and behaviors which are fundamental for peace. 3. To promote the process of learning and living of a Culture of Peace which will not only transcend the simple transmission of knowledge but also become the Salvadoran Societys form of day-to-day living. 4. To contribute to the international community an innovative experience in the construction of a Culture of Peace (MINED, 1993, p. 4).
With these objectives in mind, the three action areas were further divided into specific project areas as follows:

Area 1: Democratic Citizenship and Human Development 1.1 Strengthening of Democratic Citizenship 1.2 Support to the Processes and Mechanisms of Organization and Local Participation for Human Development 1.3 Support for the Improvement of the Environment 1.4 Support for Scientific and Technological Development 1.5 Support for the Integral Development of Salvadoran Youth Area 2: Recovery and Development of the National Identity in a Culture of Peace 2.1 Recovery and Promotion of Popular Culture 2.2 Support for Houses of Culture 2.3 Production and Diffusion of Books for a Culture of Peace 2.4 Promotion of Cultural Creativity 2.5 Community Museums in El Salvador in the Framework of a Culture of Peace 2.6 Center of Cultural Learning 2.7 Vehicles for the Construction of the Culture of Peace 2.8 Strengthening of the Library Services in El Salvador 2.9 Support to the Salvadoran Indigenous Communities Area 3: Learning and Living of a Culture of Peace
27
3.1 Literacy for a Culture of Peace 3.2 Education for the Daily Practice of Democracy in El Salvador 3.3 Community Alternatives of Prevention and Care for Disabled Children 3.4 Alternatives of Education Psychosocial Care for Children Affected by the Armed Conflict 3.5 Support for Educational and Cultural Communication in El Salvador 3.6 Support to Radio Services for Non-Formal Education, Training and Information for Salvadoran Women
Figure 2: Delineation of UNESCOs Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador (MINED, 1993)
At the time, there was great excitement and movement around this innovative initiative in El Salvador. The initial processes of organization and implementation involved actors from all sectors of society. Through an Executive Decree, a National Coordination Council was created to ensure follow-through and that the fundamental principles of dialogue, participation and collaboration were abided to throughout the process. The was the first council of its kind in Central America, and it consisted of representatives from the Ombudsmans Office for Human Rights, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Education, the National Council for Culture, the Salvadoran Institute for Municipal Development, six of the 110 NGOs participating in the program, and three other NGOs and national foundations. There was widespread support and energy around this
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace program, and people from both sides of the armed conflict were deeply invested in the process (Parajon et al., 1996).
28
To a certain extent, the Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador was successful in uniting and mobilizing leaders from nearly all sectors of society (including those that had recently been enemies in war), as the program promoted a vision of peace and development that was shared by many people regardless of political persuasion. In the end, however, the program showed very few tangible fruits in regard to its list of established goals and objectives. The agreement had been that once UNESCO obtained the resources to cover the estimated budget of US$32,782,000 (MINED, 1993), the Salvadoran government and civil society organizations would implement the projects detailed in the ambitious Culture of Peace plan. By 1997, however, Francisco Lacayo Parajon, the UNESCO official at the head of El Salvadors culture of peace program, had only been able to secure funding to execute two of the multitude of small community-based projects contemplated in the master plan. At that point, Parajon made the executive decision to suspend fundraising efforts for the culture of peace proposal and shelve the project, seeing that he was not going to be able to acquire sufficient funding. As UNESCO did not fulfill their commitment to secure funding to implement the Culture of Peace Programme, the project was never carried out to fruition (DeLugan, 2005). Despite the fact that UNESCOs Culture of Peace in El Salvador Programme was never implemented, the experiences gained through the preparation and planning phase of the project had created enthusiasm, innovative ideas and projects, and a greater sense of unity in the work for peace amongst the different sectors of society. This was perhaps the greatest legacy that the program left in the country. Although funding was never delivered for the myriad of specific UNESCO culture of peace projects, other groups took many of the concepts contemplated in the plan and developed them in their own style through different funding sources. And while the United Nations approach
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace to peacebuilding had been criticized for a number of important oversights and their lack of grassroots perspective, many local initiatives based on indigenous values and customs had relative success in promoting a culture of peace in their communities (DeLugan, 2005; Holiday & Stanley, 1993; Paris, 2002). One example of these successful local initiatives is the creation of Casas de la Cultura, or
29
Houses of Culture. By 1995, 101 Casas de la Cultura had been established in nearly 40 percent of the municipal districts. These Casas served as community centers that aimed both to foment local culture and establish local libraries. While all of the Casas varied slightly, generally people of all ages could come to these centers for homework help, to take classes in the local traditional art forms, to learn Salvadoran folk dance, to hold or attend poetry readings, for local artisans to sell their creations, to conduct cultural events or community meetings, amongst many other things. While this initiative was originally launched and facilitated by CONCULTURA (the National Council for Culture and Art) with ten Casas, it was due to the commitment and energy of each local community that the number of functioning and active Casas increased over tenfold within the first year of the program. These community cultural centers were regarded as highly important elements in the postwar healing process. Speaking of the significance of these centers, Claudia de Mata, the former president of CONCULTURA notes: Contributing to the development and promotion of our national patrimony, as well as to individual and collective creativity and disseminating our own cultural manifestations became our mission. The men and women who are dedicating themselves to the preservation of our culture and its values deserve everyone's admiration. The work of our artists, artisans, librarians, the support committees and the staffs of the Casas de la Cultura all are making an important contribution to the healing process in El Salvador (Darsie, 1995).
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace This model is closely linked to the original UNESCO Culture of Peace program, as the establishment of CONCULTURA was one of the projects that the program did manage to complete. And the focus on the preservation and creation of local identity and culture resonated with many people and became a common undertaking in the communities, proving to unite and heal. Scholars have also noted that the work being done by some churches and religious
30
communities in the country have proven to contribute greatly to the building of a culture of peace. Gomez (Religious and Social Participation, 1999) notes that the churches programs such as prison outreach, job creation, spiritual outreach and support, community service, political advocacy, literacy work and education on issues of gender and human rights infused with messages of inclusion, solidarity, mutual encouragement, nonviolent conflict resolution and love have facilitated the reconstruction of community bonds. They have served as an example in inviting previously disenfranchised individuals and groups of people back into participation in community life. These religious groups have been catalysts of compassion towards traditionally excluded groups, and they have provided the space necessary to begin reconstructing the social fabric that has been so ravaged throughout the countrys history. Their steadfast promotion of civil participation and this new model of community interaction based on solidarity and inclusion are essential elements in the shift of cultural patterns. And one of the most academically-lauded examples of post-war peacebuilding in El Salvador is a grassroots movement initiated in 1996, known as La Coordinadora.4 This group was initially formed when seven small communities united in an effort to prevent the flooding of their land in the face of an imminent release of a government-run dam. The organization was run and directed
The organizations complete name in Spanish is La Coordinadora de Comunidades de Bajo Lempa y la Bahia de Jiquilisco. Literally translated, this means The Coordinator of Communities of the Lower Lempa River and Jiquilisco Bay. They prefer to be referred to as La Coordinadora both in Spanish and in English.
4
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace purely by the humble people from these poor, rural communities. Initially, La Coordinadoras
31
purpose was to prevent natural disasters and foster the self-sustainability of communities in the face of governmental apathy and economic exclusion. This cause drew the attention and support of several other communities in the region, and soon their numbers reached into the dozens. And by 1999, La Coordinadoras member base amounted to 86 communities, representing 30,000 people. In time, their mission also expanded to explicitly include working to promote peace and democracy (Chupp, 2003). Concerned with the quickly rising violence in the country and the region in 1998 and inspired by a concept of the United Nations, La Coordinadora decided to declare their communitys space a Local Zone of Peace. This undertaking reflected their commitment to reconstruct the identity and culture of the region. In time, to back this declaration with action, they developed their own Culture of Peace Program, which was formulated based on an extended process of community-based reflection and dreaming of hopes for their future. Based on the three components of (1) restoring human rights and responsibilities, (2) promoting peace and indigenous methods of conflict resolution, and (3) fostering the transformation of organizational life to reflect peace and democracy, this program reflected the local peoples real lived experiences and their dreams for their people and region. Through dialogue and reflection circles, La Coordinadora has worked to foster and instill these concepts throughout its communities (Chupp, 2003). And this work, based on the strengths of their indigenous wisdom and culture, has proven to create sustained changes in these communities shared culture towards one of peace. Yet another example of work for a culture of peace in El Salvador that was influenced by the original efforts by UNESCO include MINEDs Program of Human, Ethic and Civic Values. This was one of the project ideas that had been contemplated within the Culture of Peace Programme under the action area of Democratic Citizenship and Human Development. In 1998, MINED officially
32
integrated such a program into the national curriculum, implementing UNESCOs plans to promote the ideals of democracy in the country (DeLugan, 2005). This program was implemented by adding a new unit to the countrys educational curriculum entitled Cultural Identity, through which this Values Program would be executed. Daily classroom instruction was to integrate selected ethic and civic social values, such as respect for human dignity, the right to freedom, democratic participation, the protection of children, social coexistence, cooperation, solidarity and peace. In addition to the mandated teaching of these values in the classroom, the principal local periodicals also worked to generate support for this Values Program. They both published regular collectible supplements that included lessons on the values accompanied by cartoons, puzzles and mazes to reinforce the concepts presented. One newspaper also printed a supplement intended for parents to help guide them in the positive socialization of their children under these select values. Indirectly, this also helped to reinforce these values amongst the adult population as well (DeLugan, 2005). While this program was effective in reaching a large portion of Salvadoran society, as of the publication of DeLugans study 2005, studies were unable to prove that this Values Program had impacted Salvadoran culture and identity towards more peaceful and open-minded tendencies. In addition, this program faced much criticism. Some academics and government officials claimed that the Values Program focused too heavily on universal values and the promotion of democratic culture, while neglecting the unique local values that truly unite Salvadoran society. These critics held that this focus reflected an unfortunate historical pattern of the countrys elites of valuing, imitating and promoting foreign models and permitting external interests to manipulate the countrys internal dynamics. These critiques mirror the same critiques that the UNESCOs Culture of Peace Programme received in its phases of conception and implementation (DeLugan, 2005).
33
These examples of work for a culture of peace in post-war El Salvador each demonstrate the fundamental role of civil society and their indigenous experiences and wisdom in this work. Projects that stray from the peoples history, reality and dreams have limited chances of making profound, lasting cultural shifts towards peace. These top-down approaches to peace that impose external models are not likely to be embraced by the people, and they will not be sustainable. Applying these frameworks to contemporary El Salvador, we see that the repressive measures governments have taken to quell elevated rates of violence were not formulated based on consultation with civil society and they have all proven to only increase the countrys levels of violence. On the other hand, similar to the civil-society-based efforts previously mentioned, there are small efforts scattered throughout the country that have had significant success in their work for peace. These present-day initiatives are also run by civil society organizations and community groups. And these groups experiences of successful cultural transformation and their understanding of the violence warrant serious consideration when strategizing further approaches to peace.
Civil Participation in Peacebuilding Extensive research supports the notion that successful peacebuilding is necessarily facilitated through active participation by civil society and the extraction and diffusion of their endogenous knowledge to be used as the foundation for models of societal transformation. Much of the literature that has been reviewed in this paper thus far has brought us to the same conclusion (Adams, 2000; Andrieu, 2010; Chupp; Darsie, 1995; DeLugan, 2005; Galtung, 1996; Gomez et al., 1999; Holiday & Stanley, 1993; Hume, 2008; Lederach, 1997). Many other scholars in the field of peacebuilding add to this sentiment as well, that an integral inclusion of civil society is crucial in the planning and execution of a long-term sustainable construction of peace:
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Speaking from the context of civil participation in the Northern Ireland ethno-political conflict, Byrne & Irvin comment, A comprehensive peacebuilding approach createsa critical space or landscape that builds upon people in their own setting. Natural networks and the indigenous cultures approach to handling conflict become the foundation upon which to build a transformational framework (A Shared Common Sense, 2002, p. 58).
34
Richmond, in proposing an alternative emancipatory approach to the construction of peace and human security in place of the liberal state-building model, asserts that it is vital that peacebuilding approaches do not allow themselves to be co-opted into a neoliberal framework inherently destabilizing in postconflict transitions and that they remain true to their original focus on grassroots, individuals, everyday life and bottom-up processes (Emancipatory Forms of Human Security, 2007, p. 475).
Andrieu also proposes a shift of focus in the traditional liberal peacebuilding paradigm to one based more on civil societys experiences, arguing that peacebuildings emphasis on global- and macro-level factors shouldbe changed, as it persistently ignores the interconnectedness of community experiences. A more local focus would entail, among other things, a fine-grained analysis of both the dynamics of war and the prospects for peace at the community level (Civilizing Peacebuilding, 2010, p. 548).
Regarding the improvement of post-war reconstruction processes, Talentino echoes, peacebuilding could be made more effective [] by focusing on individuals rather than states (Perceptions of Peacebuilding, 2007, p. 168).
And in reflecting on the role of civil society in the process of reconciliation (one of the key yet commonly undervalued elements of reconstruction in post-violent conflict societies), the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) adeptly notes that
35
lasting reconciliation must be home-grown because in the end it is the survivors who assign meaning to the term and the process (Bloomfield, Barnes, & Huyse, 2003, p. 23). Other academics emphasize the weight that civil societys perception can carry in a post-war reconstruction period and beyond into its extended peacebuilding process. Talentino, in her research regarding perceptions of imposition and power dynamics in post-war societies, comments that the civil societys support is such a crucial and delicate element in determining the success of peacebuilding efforts that it is vital to contemplate these factors when doing conflict analysis. As the [original] causes of violence are often found in structural and socio-psychological factors that create exclusion, discrimination, and insecurity amongst domestic groups (Perceptions of Peacebuilding, 2007, p. 152), it is important to be closely in touch with how civil society commonly the sector that received the most exclusion and harm through the violent conflict are perceiving and responding to the reconstruction work being done locally. Oftentimes, if processes of true healing and reconciliation have not been previously undertaken in a society, historical resentments can impede the advancement and sustainability of peacebuilding projects by tainting actors perspectives on the work being done. Lessons from the past suggest that actors resist change, even when they might objectively agree that it is positive, if it seems forced upon them. Even the most well-constructed [] reform effort will be a failure if citizens do not perceive it as legitimate. [] Grassroots commitment to new institutions and procedures is necessary to translate structures of reform into substance (Talentino, 2007, p. 153). Proactively inviting participation on behalf of civil society in important post- violent conflict peace processes, on the other hand, serves many purposes and creates conditions conducive to promoting societal reconstruction. Being taken into account and valued by state authorities (who oftentimes were formerly adversaries) in the wake of violent conflict can serve as an initial step
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace towards healing and reconciliation amongst previously opposing factions. Dialogue can have a powerful civilizing effect, in that drawing close and hearing each others stories encourages new understandings, attitudes and values; it promotes reconciliation and enhances our coexistence.
36
Consulting with civil society and taking a genuine interest in their realities and perspectives validates their experiences of pain and suffering, their current daily struggles and their visions for the future. This gesture also works to empower civil society to become active participants and conscious stakeholders in the nations work for peace. As previously mentioned, taking a genuine interest in civil society also serves the state in that it opens the potential to gain their support and loyalty, which could lead to the legitimization of the state in the eyes of the people all consequential factors in creating a sustained peace (Andrieu, 2010, p. 547). Furthermore, Call explains that the local perception of a reform process can vary immensely from the international communitys positive conception of the same. A clear example of this situation in El Salvador is how the police reform from the peace accords was lauded as a model on the international stage while at home, it failed over time to gain the full confidence of civil society because of its incapacity to effectively tackle the issue of continuously rising criminal violence, or to truly terminate its historical internal corruption and criminal activity. In addition to the national civilian polices generally poor performance in several of its key duties, the lack of support shown on behalf of civil society has also proven to considerably weaken the institution over time (Democratisation, War and State-Building, 2003, p. 861). Considering the potential impact that civil societys perceptions can have in peace processes and the fact that assumptions about these views cannot be made from the outside, this provides even more justification to intimately integrate civil society into the heart of these processes. Speaking again specifically to the context of El Salvador, Foley continues on to remind us that sustainable peacebuilding in the country through the construction of a true participatory
37
democracy is only possible through the commitment and active involvement of every level of society including civil society (Laying the Groundwork, 1996, p. 93). He asserts that much work still needs to be done before achieving an ideal participatory democracy in the country. In the current day reality, the state works with minimum enthusiasm to foster and activate participation on behalf of all sectors of society, taking into account principally the perspectives that help further their own political and economic interests. And as a gentle reminder to civil society, Foley suggests that in order to get their own interests represented, individuals also have the responsibility to mobilize, organize themselves, advocate for their needs and make their own voices heard. In this struggle for inclusion and equity in Salvadoran society, it may well be that what they have to say will be stifled or suffer distortion at every level, but only through organization will it be possible for individual sentiments to be multiplied, reinforced and strategically launched (Laying the Groundwork, 1996, p. 89). In summary, there is ample support for the proactive inclusion of civil society in peacebuilding efforts. This study will seek to shed light on Salvadoran civil societys current day experiences, perceptions and dreams, in the hopes of strengthening the continued work for peace in the country.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Chapter Four: Methodology Conceptual Framework This study was executed utilizing a combination of feminist, indigenous, radical, and
38
advocacy/participatory theories as these theories all work to transform for social change. There is a strong emphasis on and importance given to each interviewees personal experiences and perspectives regarding the phenomenon of violence in their country and their vision for peace. The research aims to provide an outlet of expression and representation to people who have very little voice in their own country. This can also be considered action research, in that the interview process utilized in this investigation invites a diversity of people to use their life experiences and wisdom to make transformative change in their own society (Reinharz & Davidman, 1992). Ideally, the end product will work to influence policy change in El Salvador, as well as to motivate individuals and communities to mobilize to work for peace in their country.
Participants The data presented in this study was gathered through a series of interviews conducted with a wide variety of people from different sectors of Salvadoran civil society. These people were selected from amongst personal acquaintances of mine and the acquaintances of my broad network of friends and colleagues who work in the field of peacebuilding in El Salvador. The people who participated in this study were chosen because they met the following minimum criteria: They are members of Salvadoran civil society (and it automatically follows, then, that these people are members of a historically marginalized and repressed group in the country) (Foley, 1996, pp. 67-68). They are known to have a strong commitment to building peace in El Salvador.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace They had time to participate. They were willing to participate.
39
In addition, the highest effort was made to choose a representative group of research participants, taking into account the limitations at hand. In the end, 34 interviews were conducted with a total of 59 people. Of that total, 52% of the people interviewed with were male and 48% were female. The youngest person interviewed was 15, and the oldest person was 78 years old. The people interviewed originated from all geographical regions of El Salvador including the Western, Central, Eastern and Northern Regions, as well as the capitol city of San Salvador. Also, people of all political persuasions were invited to participate in the study. Socio-economic background was not a factor contemplated in selecting research participants, since oftentimes there is correlation between social marginalization and standard of living. However, by random chance, people from a range of socio-economic backgrounds were represented in this study. In the end, the following social groups/identities were represented in this study: environmentalists women youth (both gang-involved and not) senior citizens urban laborers rural laborers indigenous groups artists ex-combatants (from both the military and guerrilla forces) spiritual leaders from base communities
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace workers from non-governmental organizations the community of sexual diversity educators people working for gender equity (men, women and transgender) health workers While it would be helpful to quantify how many research participants represented each of these identity groups, most participants actually fit into more than just one of these categories. Because identity is complex and peace work is multi-dimensional, it will have to suffice to say that there was ample representation of each of these groups.
40
Data Collection After identifying a list of people who fit the aforementioned criteria, I contacted each person and extended the invitation to participate in the study. Then, upon their agreement to participate in the investigation, I sent them a one-page summary of the study [see Annex A] as well as the interview questions [see Annex B] to familiarize them with the nature of the interview ahead of time. On the agreed-upon date, I arrived at whichever location the interviewee deemed most convenient for them to conduct the interview (oftentimes in communities far outside of the city).5 This was done to honor the fact that each interviewee was doing a great favor by agreeing to participate in the study, as well as recognizing that most of these people do not have excessive income nor excessive time to be able to mobilize themselves to meet me elsewhere. At the beginning of each interview, I reviewed the summary of the study one more time as well as the information presented on the Informed Consent form [see Annex C], to discuss any lingering questions that the participant might have. I also asked permission to take written notes as
5
Because of time limitations, two of the interviews were conducted via Skype.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace well as to record the audio of each interview. The interviewee then signed the Informed Consent form,6 agreeing to participate in the study and understanding that their identity would remain
41
anonymous at all times. This clause of anonymity is a crucial element to the study, as it encouraged people to speak more freely about their experiences and perspectives regarding violence and peacebuilding in El Salvador. In other circumstances, speaking openly and freely about these issues could potentially put these people at personal risk. Six of the interviews were conducted in group form, and 28 of them were conducted bilaterally.7 The interviews were conducted in a semi-structured manner. I had a series of questions to follow, but the interviews were conducted more like relaxed conversations. I allowed the dialogue to flow organically, according to what the interviewee most identified with and most wanted to talk about within the structure of the interview guide. The interview was very intentionally constructed and conducted in a manner that promoted learning through reflection and consciousness-raising processes for both the interviewee and me. The interview contained three different thematic phases. The first set of questions had to do with the participants perception of the situation of violence in El Salvador. To begin, each interviewee was presented with the World Health Organizations 2002 definition of violence [the intentional use of power or physical force, threatened or real, against oneself, another person, a group or a community, resulting in or having a high probability of causing injuries, death, psychological harm, poor development or deprivation (Krug et al., 2002, p. 5).]. Based on this definition of violence, they were then asked to describe the current situation of violence in El Salvador, based on their own personal experiences and perceptions. They were encouraged to think about all of the forms in which violence is manifested in El Salvador, thinking beyond the idea that
In the case of the Skype interviews, they verbally agreed to the terms stated in the Informed Consent form. Furthermore, three additional people who had heard about this study and were also motivated to contribute their ideas and opinions submitted their responses to the interview questions in written form.
6 7
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace gangs are the principal perpetrators of El Salvadors violence (which is the idea that is commonly portrayed in mainstream Salvadoran media). In addition, they were asked to reflect on who is
42
involved in instigating the violence, as well as the root causes of the violence that is lived today in El Salvador. The second phase of questions focused on evaluating various efforts that have been made to create peace in El Salvador. The interviewees were first presented with the Earth Charters definition of peace written in 2000 [the wholeness created by right relationships with oneself, other persons, other cultures, other life, Earth, and the larger whole of which all are a part. (Earth Charter Commission, 2000)]. Then they were asked to identify a few different efforts that have been made throughout the years to create peace in El Salvador whichever measures occurred to them first at the level of government and at the community level. They were then asked to subjectively evaluate these measures based on their effectiveness in reducing violence and creating peace. And to conclude this part of the reflection, they were then asked to contemplate and discuss which elements of these various measures contributed to their effectiveness or the lack thereof. The third phase of questions asked the interviewee to dream without limits and propose actions that would be necessary to create a true culture of peace in El Salvador. They were asked to imagine that they were the president of the country and that if there were no limits on their power or resources, what would they do to create pervasive peace in their country? They were asked to discuss what would need to happen on behalf of the government, and they were asked to reflect on what civil societys role should be in creating this peace. The final question of the interview asked the participant to name the greatest strengths that El Salvador possesses as a nation to help effectively confront the situation of violence in the country and cultivate a true peace. This question was included at the end to refocus our energy on the true potential that exists within society to make change, with the intention of leaving the interviewee with
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace a sense of hope and a renewed confidence in their own true capacity to contribute to the countrys peacebuilding project. At the conclusion of the interview, I genuinely thanked the interviewee for their time and their sincerity. They were reminded that this interview was being done in partial fulfillment of my
43
Masters Degree at the University for Peace, but that the real importance of this study is to hopefully motivate change in behavior and attitudes in El Salvador based on the information gathered. I reminded each interviewee that they would receive a copy of the final study and that the study would be circulated as widely as possible in El Salvador upon completion and translation of the study into Spanish. In addition, I invited them to remain in contact and to share any other reflections that they might have in the future regarding the topics that we discussed throughout the interview.
Data Analysis At the end of the interview process, I revisited, transcribed and read through each interview thoroughly. I paid close attention to extract the core thematic content and pertinent quotes from each interview, which were then compiled, systematized and analyzed. This information was analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Once the data was compiled, coded and systematized, I identified common themes amongst all of the interviews, as well as identified innovative suggestions that arose throughout the course of the interviews. Peoples responses were compared side by side, according to any thematic correlations that arose.
Limitations to the Study Many limitations existed throughout the process of constructing this research project. The first practical limitations to this study were my personal limits of time and economic resources as I conducted the field research. I only had a period of three weeks within which to conduct the
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace interviews, and the participants had limited time to meet with me and discuss my topic of study.
44
Therefore, I was not able to speak with as many people as I had hoped, which would have served to make the study even more representative. In addition, because of my time limitations within which I was required to complete this research project, I had to limit the number of people I spoke with so that the study would not become too large to finish on time. I also had to restrict the size and expanse of the research project due to economic constraints. Another important element to consider is that all of the interviews were conducted in Spanish. While I am fluent in Spanish, it is not my first language. And even though I lived in El Salvador for some years, there are sure to be a few nuances that were lost in translation.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Chapter Five: Findings Preface: A Note on Reading this Data
45
Before presenting the findings of this study, I would first like to invite the reader to adopt a framework a lens, if you will through which it may be most appropriate to read the data presented here. Considering both the spirit of this research (emancipatory, shifting focus to the individual, valuing each persons voice and story, inclusion for justice) and the methodology employed in collecting the data (loosely structured open-ended interviews, diversity of participants, more emphasis on the qualitative than the quantitative), I encourage the reader to view the information presented in this study with an open frame of mind. I invite you to approach the findings presented here in a way that values each and every experience and opinion expressed, regardless of how common or unique the response may be. Practically, I advise placing emphasis and focus on the range of experiences and opinions represented here, as well as the responses that were most commonly mentioned (indicating concepts that are at the core of peoples collective consciousness). Conversely, I suggest not placing too much value on the low quantity of votes received by less popular responses rather on the fact that they were mentioned. This is a useful approach to the data, on one hand, based on the nature of the projects research design. I know that if I were to present this studys participants with the final composite lists of responses generated throughout all of the interviews, most people would agree with many responses on the list that they personally had not mentioned. Most likely, these ideas simply had not occurred to them during their interviews, or perhaps they left these elements out of their discourse due to limitations of time. The nature of the methodology logically begs, therefore, that the observer of the data not place so much value on what was not mentioned, rather on the range of
46
responses that were mentioned (as well as the most recurrent responses). Necessarily, the qualitative aspects of this study generally carry more weight than most of its quantitative elements. Furthermore, as this study approaches the research question wholeheartedly maintaining that each individuals experiences, perspectives and visions are valid and significant, lets read the data in the same way: valuing and being witness to each distinct voice and reality, rather than placing such heavy significance on how few times each may have been expressed. And finally, please keep in mind that the responses in these interviews represent a snapshot in time. The interviews were all conducted in June of 2011, and they reflect each participants perceptions of their real lived experiences at that point in history. As any political, social or economic context is in continuous dynamic flux, El Salvadors context and peoples perceptions have inevitably changed in one way or another since then. Nonetheless, each response holds its own validity and importance in this study and can reveal to us a wealth of information if we choose to simply listen to these peoples stories with open minds.
Introduction This chapter is organized into four sub-sections, corresponding sequentially to the four different thematic phases included in the interview: (1) Perceptions of Violence in El Salvador, (2) Recollection & Evaluation of Efforts to Reduce Violence/Build Peace, (3) Proposals on how to Build a Culture of Peace in El Salvador and (4) the Principal Strengths of El Salvador that will contribute to Successful Peacebuilding. Each sub-section is further divided up according to the handful of interview questions that were asked within each thematic area. In addition, each thematic area will then be organized according to the different frameworks of analysis that were deemed most appropriate according to the questions content and the nature of responses to each question.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Perceptions of Violence in El Salvador Forms of Violence. The WHOs World Report on Violence and Health contains a wealth of respected concepts on violence. Their definition of violence is one that is commonly referenced amongst scholars and practitioners in the field of peace and conflict work, and it was used as the model definition in this study as well. The report also offers a helpful analytical framework regarding the typology of violence. This framework is useful in understanding the scale, location and nature of the different forms of violence that may be manifested in any variety of contexts.
47
This model divides violence into three general categories: self-directed violence (violence against oneself), interpersonal violence (committed by individuals in public or private spaces) and collective violence (committed by states or larger groups of individuals). Self-directed violence is further subdivided into the categories of self-abuse (mutilation, deprivation, etc.) and suicidal behavior (which also includes suicidal thoughts and attempted suicide). The category of interpersonal violence is further divided into the two areas of family and intimate partner violence (between people with a close familiar or emotional connection, generally taking place inside the home) as well as community violence (generally between people who are unrelated and do not know each other, typically occurring outside of the home). And the category of collective violence is broken down into social violence (to further a particular social agenda including mob violence, acts of terrorism, hate crimes, etc. instigated by organized groups), political violence (war, state violence and other related acts, executed by governments or large groups) and economic violence (acts of violence driven by a desire for economic gain, including denying access to essential resources and basic services, disturbing economic activity, systematic economic exclusion, creating economic rifts, etc.). The report also notes that within each subcategory, acts of violence can further be typified according to their nature. The four different categories they propose include physical acts, sexual acts (not applicable in the category of self-directed violence, however), psychological acts and acts of violence that involve neglect or deprivation. The diagram
48
below (borrowed directly from the WHO report) provides a clear visual demonstration of how these categories break down and interrelate.
Figure 3: A Typology of Violence, from the WHOs World Report on Violence and Health (Krug et al., 2002, p. 7)
It is important to note, as well, that while this model clearly delineates and categorizes forms and levels of violence, the complex nature of conflict implies that most of the forms of violence mentioned are actually interrelated and overlapping in a multitude of ways. The model simply provides an organized framework to help dissect and analyze its complexity. This typology for different acts of violence, then, is the one I will use here to categorize and discuss violence in Salvadoran society according to the reflections of the participants of this study. Now examining the raw data, the following chart shows peoples responses (the # symbol indication the number of interviews within which the act of violence was mentioned) when asked to describe the situation of violence in El Salvador and to mention the forms in which it is manifested:

Category Self-Directed Subcategory Behavior Family & Partner Act of Violence Suicide Domestic violence (of partners, children) Abuse of the elderly Child neglect Physical attacks in public spaces (homicide, assault) Delinquency Violent everyday interactions Youth violence In schools Sexual harassment/rape Labor abuses Visual/Auditory Hate crimes Exclusion/marginalization/discrimination - social exclusion & discrimination - machismo, gender violence, hetero-normativity - dehumanize youth/blame them for all violence Gang violence Police brutality Extermination groups killing delinquent youth Prison abuses Violate the right to culture Political repression - government repression - violate rights to organize and freedom of expression Manipulation/abuse of power Political corruption Impunity Systematic economic exclusion - capitalist structural economic exclusion (manifested in growing widespread poverty) - unjust distribution of resources (manifested in growing wealth disparity) - exclusion from the labor force (seen in high unemployment and under-employment rates) Criminal acquisition of funds - extortion - economic corruption - white collar crimes - organized crime Denial of access to essential resources and basic services - deny the right to education - deny the right to health Exploitation/abuse of the environment Patrimonial Labor exploitation
49
# 2 23 1 1 22 16 15 12 12 8 6 2 1 33 (33) (26) (16) 23 12 7 3 3 18 (17) (3) 16 16 14 24 (21) (11) (8) 21 (16) (16) (8) (7) 20 (13) (12) 6 5 2
Interpersonal Community
Social FORMS OF VIOLENCE
Political
Collective
Economic
Figure 4: Forms of current-lived violence in El Salvador
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace In the category of Self-Directed Violence, people mentioned that suicide is a form of violence seen in the country. In the category of Interpersonal Violence and under the subcategory of Family and Partners, domestic abuse of partners and children was amongst the most frequently-mentioned forms of
50
violence. Abuse of the elderly and child neglect were also mentioned as important forms of violence seen in the country. Within the same category of Interpersonal Violence but under the subcategory of Community, the most frequently mentioned responses included physical attacks in public spaces (such as homicides and assaults), delinquency, and violent everyday interactions (the way people speak to each other, aggressive driving, etc.). Other important forms of violence mentioned under this subcategory include youth violence, violence in schools, sexual harassment and rape, abuse of employees in the work environment, visual and auditory bombardment in public spaces, and hate crimes. In the area of Collective Violence and within the subcategory of Social Violence, the most frequently-mentioned response was that of exclusion, marginalization and discrimination. In fact, this was the most common response across all of the interview participants when asked to describe the situation of violence in El Salvador. This category was further broken down into social exclusion and discrimination, machismo/gender violence/hetero-normativity, and the dehumanization and scapegoating of the countrys youth. Other forms of social violence on the collective level include gang violence, police brutality and corruption, exterminations groups killing delinquent youth, prison abuse, and violation of societys right to culture. In the same category of Collective Violence but under the subcategory of Political Violence, the most frequent response was that of political repression. This was further broken down into headings of repressive government policy (such as the Mano Dura and anti-gang laws), as well as the
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace violation of peoples rights to organize and to the freedom of expression. Other commonlymentioned forms of political violence include manipulation and the abuse of power, political corruption, and impunity. All of these forms of violence were mentioned on a regular basis throughout the interviews.
51
Finally, under Collective Violence and within the subcategory of Economic Violence, the most common response was that of systematic economic exclusion. Under this heading, people morespecifically mentioned that this comes in the forms of capitalist structural economic exclusion (manifested in a historic poverty that is widespread and steadily growing), the unjust distribution of resources (manifested in the countrys historic dramatic wealth disparity that continues to increase), and exclusion from the labor force (manifested in the countrys exaggerated unemployment and under-employment rates). Many people also mentioned economic violence that exists in the criminal acquisition of funds including extortion, governmental economic corruption, white collar crimes and organized crime (trafficking, etc.). Another frequently-noted form was the denial of access to essential resources and basic services including the right to education and the right to health. In addition, people mentioned exploitation and abuse of the natural environment for economic gain, patrimonial violence, and systematic labor exploitation. As mentioned earlier, the categories within the WHOs model of violence typology (selfdirected, interpersonal, and collective) indicate who is affected by the violence. These acts of violence can further be typified according to their nature (physical, sexual, psychological, neglect/deprivation), indicating how people are affected (Krug et al., 2002, p. 6). From this perspective, it is most significant to note that 25 of the interviews emphasized the deep psychological and emotional impacts that the violence (in all its forms) has on society. Personal Experiences with Violence. Some interview participants felt compelled to respond to the question regarding their personal experiences with violence, and others skipped over
52
it. The people who did respond to this query mentioned the experiences presented in the following table: Personal Experiences with Violence Category Subcategory
Family/Partner Victim physical abuse Victim psychological abuse Victim/witness abuse & neglect of children Victim/witness general delinquency (robbery) Victim assault & attempted rape Witness gang attack Victim violence/aggression in traffic Victim sexual harassment in the workplace Victim visual/auditory violence Victim/witness exclusion/discrimination/marginalization Victim/witness police abuse Participant organized gang violence Witness massacres, torture, disappearances, other atrocities committed during the civil war Victim death threats by extermination groups Victim/witness impunity Victim/witness manipulation/abuse of power Victim/witness government political repression Victim economic exclusion (poverty) Witness organized crime Victim/witness extortion Victim denial of access to basic rights & services Witness environmental exploitation
Interpersonal Community
Social
Collective Political
Economic
Figure 5: Participants personal experiences with violence
Under the category of Interpersonal Violence and the subcategory of Family and Partner Violence, participants mentioned that they had been victims of physical abuse and psychological abuse, as well as victims and witnesses of abuse and neglect of children. In the same category but under the sub-grouping of Community Violence, people mentioned that they had been victims and witnesses of general delinquency, victim of assault and attempted rape, witness to gang attacks, victims of violence and aggression in traffic, victims of sexual harassment in their workplace, as well as auditory and visual violence in public spaces.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Within the category of Collective Violence and the sub-heading of Social Violence, our participants had been victim and witness to police abuse, participants in organized gang violence,
53
witnesses to the brutal violence exerted during the civil war (massacres, torture, disappearances, etc.), recipient of death threats from active extermination groups, as well as victims and witnesses of social exclusion, discrimination and marginalization. Also under the category of Collective Violence but in the grouping of Political Violence, people frequently mentioned that they had been both victim and witness to impunity, manipulation and abuse of power on behalf of politicians and political parties, and government-legitimized repression. And lastly, within the same principal category of Collective Violence but the sub-heading of Economic Violence, many people had been victim and witness to extortion, victims of systematic economic exclusion and consequently caught in insurmountable poverty, witness to organized crime, witness to environmental exploitation, and victims of institutionalized exclusion from access to basic rights and services. Protagonists of the Violence. Participants who answered the question, Who is instigating the violence? began by listing various sectors of society as the principal protagonists of El Salvadors violence including adults (toward youth), parents (towards their children), men (towards women), people with traumas and psychological problems, people with erroneous ideologies, people intolerant of minorities, youth, the police, the media, the government/the system, death squads, women (in reproducing machismo in their children), children and adolescents (recruited and used as pawns by delinquent groups), groups of organized crime, and gangs. However, by the end of peoples reflections on this question, most people arrived at the conclusion that we all contribute to the violence in one way or another; we are all responsible for its perpetuation.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Root Causes of the Violence. In examining the data within this section of the investigation, I have chosen to use the Ecological Model as my analytical framework. This is a
54
model first developed in the 1970s as a tool to study child abuse and other forms of violence (Kaba, Mathew, & Haines, 2010, pp. 45-47). It is helpful in this studys context as well, as it helps break down root causes of violence into different levels, yet still acknowledges that these factors are also dynamic and complex, intersecting and interacting with each other on multiple levels. Just as in ecological systems theory distinguishable forms of environments and systems exist within the natural world, but they are all intrinsically interrelated and dynamic as well. This model breaks the causes of violence down to four different levels: individual, relationship, community and society. The factors that would fall under the Individual category include personal history and biological factors that may impact ones behavior or how different experiences affect them. These could include dynamics such as demographic factors, addiction, attitudes, or a history of being the victim of violence. In the Relationship category fall issues relating to people who hold close bonds between family members, romantic partners, close friends or peers, for example and helps think about how these relationships may affect ones behavior and attitudes. The Community category looks at dynamics that occur within the public sphere in places such as churches, work environments, schools and neighborhoods. And factors that fall into the Society category include broader societal influences that either promote or hinder different dynamics or situations. Elements that would be placed in this group include factors such as the availability of weapons or illegal drugs, different underlying cultural rules or expectations within a group, or a governments social, economic, education or health policies.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace I employ this Ecological Model as the analytical framework through which I explain and
55
discuss the data. However, due to the breadth and diversity of responses the participants provided on this topic, I have further broken down each category into thematic areas (where relevant and possible) so that the data is more navigable and clear. The following table displays the participants responses to the question, Why is this happening? What are the root causes of this violence?
Category
Subcategory
Individual
N/A
Relationship
N/A
Community
N/A
Societal
Government Modus Operandi
Factor Contributing to Violence Desperation/life crisis Paranoia/fear Lack of education - ignorance - people dont know their basic human rights Internalized inferiority/submissiveness/timidity/fear Addiction (alcohol, drugs) Psychological trauma Resentment/hatred These days, some people dont want to work Education/formation children receive at home Family disintegration Domestic abuse Poverty/need for survival/lack of opportunities to be able to overcome ones lot in life Weakening of social ties/loss of solidarity Societys youth are largely unsupported - lack of support in their search for identity and direction - no escape valve/tools of expression - few green/recreational spaces exist - kids have a lot of free time Unemployment/low salaries Continuous emigration Delinquent groups Gang politics Pressure from peers and gangs Overcrowding/overpopulation Lack of collaboration amongst organizations working for peace Apathy/no political will Political interests Acts as a sovereign state (democracy is a myth) Repression of the people High-level officials deeply involved in corruption/organized crime/gangs/narcotrafficking Minimal support for initiatives/projects of civil society
ROOT CAUSES OF THE VIOLENCE
# 21 19 17 (14) (5) 14 8 7 6 6 24 19 11 22 20 20 (20) (3) (3) (1) 14 12 11 6 6 3 2 21 21 19 18 16 14

Category Subcategory
56
# 13 9 9 7 6 6 5 3 3 2 16 14 12 6 22 15 14 16 5 4 4 3 3 1 26 22 18 16 14 8 3 2 20 18 19 15 13 11 11 11 9 9 8 6
Government Modus Operandi (contd.)
Judicial System Legislative System, Policy/Laws ROOT CAUSES OF THE VIOLENCE
Executive Branch Societal (contd.)
Economic Factors/ Structural Economic Exclusion Structural Social Exclusion
Factor Contributing to Violence Poor allocation/investment of funds No openness/interest in consulting/dialoguing with the people Little transparency/communication with the people Authorities are doing poor analysis Poorly-executed process of post-war reconstruction Promotes asistencialismo (creating dependency on external aid) Lack of creativity in politics The government is pretentious Nature is not appreciated/valued Culture is not appreciated/valued Impunity/no rule of law Human rights are not respected Judicial organs do not fulfill their duties, little follow-through Retributive justice system (no restorative justice practices) Social/economic/educational policies Mano Dura and anti-gang laws Current laws repress the youth Deficient national education system Defective prison system The peace accords were never fully implemented Promised postwar reinsertion programs and psychological attention for ex-combatants were never delivered There is no guarantee of protection (for witnesses, free expression) The president has bad advisors (they are wealthy, far from the reality of the people) Does not guarantee security Economic exclusion/marginalization Economic interests Insecurity = business Vast socioeconomic disparity/concentration of power & resources Capitalist system Industrialization/loss of interest in agriculture Dollarization The economy is sustained through remittances Social exclusion/discrimination Gender inequality/machismo/patriarchy Fear/paranoia Apathy/disinterest Individualism/greed Loss of values We have become desensitized Collective amnesia/loss of historical memory & identity People have lost belief in & hope for the youth Impatience/short vision/lack of concern for future generations Rejection/prejudice (against certain people with tattoos, who live in the street, etc.) People live without meaning/purpose/hope
Social & Cultural Norms, Attitudes and World View

57
# 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 26 20 19 11 6 4 3 3 14 11 2 8 8 4 4 3 1
ROOT CAUSES OF THE VIOLENCE
Social & Cultural Norms, Attitudes and World View (contd.)
Societal (contd.)
Historic Normalization of Violence
Internal Influences that Support Violence on Macro Level
Factor Contributing to Violence Resentment/hatred Fundamentalism/fanaticism Conformity/submission Lack of cultural emphasis on the importance of study Ashamed of identity (for being Salvadoran, coming from a poor family, having indigenous roots, etc.) Distrust of the state institutions Little culture of civic participation Anti-communist sentiments Armament/easy access to weapons Blaming the victim Environmentalism does not hold high cultural value Little value placed on having good nutrition Historic normalization of violence - violence itself breeds more violence - the Civil War - violence is cultural: its taught - the Conquista - the denigration of the indigenous culture - anthropology says that we are a historically violent people - the military dictatorship Mainstream media sensationalizes violence causing fear, obsession with violence, attitudes of vengeance Churches/religious beliefs Violent music/movies/cartoons Transculturization of American culture & consumerism Economic relationships (ES-US, ES-other countries) US immigration policy (superfluous deportation) The economic crisis Hegemonic power of the United States The US is involved in repression in ES
Exterior Influences
Figure 6: Root causes of El Salvadors violence
According to the interview participants, the root causes of El Salvadors violence that have to do with individuals personal histories or biology and therefore fall under the Individual category include desperation from life crisis, paranoia or fear, lack of education (contributing to an individuals general lack of knowledge, including unfamiliarity with ones own human rights), internalized inferiority/submissiveness/timidity, addiction, psychological trauma, resentment or hatred from past conflicts, and lack of motivation to work.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace In the Relationship category, participants mentioned family disintegration, domestic abuse,
58
and the education and formation that children receive in their homes as important factors at the root of El Salvadors violence. At the Community level, people commonly noted that a key factor contributing to the violence is poverty, combined with the need for survival and the lack of opportunities that exist that would allow people to overcome their poverty and live with dignity. Another frequently-mentioned factor contributing to the violence is the weakening of communities social ties and the loss of solidarity. And another large concern is the lack of support that exists for El Salvadors youth. Within this area of concern, people more-specifically mentioned different ways that this deficiency of support is manifested in society, such as the lack of escape valves or tools for self-expression, minimal guidance for youth in their searches for identity and direction in life, the lack of green spaces for healthy recreation, and that kids these days have a lot of free time. Other important factors contributing to the violence that fall within this category include high unemployment rates and unjustly low salaries, the constant flow of migrants from the country, delinquent groups, gang politics, negative pressure from peers and the gangs, overcrowding, and the individualism and lack of cooperation that exists amongst the organizations that are working for peace in the country. Next, the responses that fell within the category of Societal causes were so extensive that it was necessary to further categorize these responses into sub-groupings according to the general themes that were presented. The first subcategory was Government Modus Operandi. Within this thematic area, some of the most frequent responses regarding root causes of the violence included the governments apathy and lack of political will, political interests motivating priorities and decision-making, the government acting as a sovereign state (i.e. democracy is a myth and the government does not act on behalf of the people), repressive policy and laws, the government minimally supports the projects and initiatives of civil society, government funds are used and
59
invested poorly, and the fact that many top government officials are deeply involved in corruption, organized crime, gangs and narcotrafficking. Other important responses in this section included the governments disinterest in dialoguing and consulting with the people, the lack of communication and transparency with civil society, poor analysis on behalf of the authorities, the poor management and execution of post- civil war reconstruction, a great lack of creativity in policy-formation, the government is pretentious, the fostering of nature and culture is not valued nor prioritized, and the governments approach to development through asistencialismo or charity, which tends to create relationships of dependency. Within the same category of societal-level causes but under the sub-grouping relating to the Judicial System, participants mentioned that the unchecked impunity and lack of true rule of law in the country plays a huge role in contributing to the countrys violence. In addition, there is little respect for human rights, the judicial organs do not fulfill their duties, and the justice system is retributive and punitive. In the Societal category and under the sub-grouping of Legislative Branch, Laws and Policy, the participants widely mentioned that the governments social, economic and educational policies in general are across the board a concern, as they generally seem to be contributing to the violence rather than lessening it. More specifically, people mentioned that many of the current laws repress the countrys youth in particular the Mano Dura and anti-gang laws. In the following sub-grouping concerning the Salvadoran governments Executive Branch, one of the most widely-mentioned responses was that the countrys educational system is deficient and in a myriad of ways fomenting the violence. In addition, people noted that the prison system is defective, the peace accords were never fully implemented, the government does not guarantee citizen security nor protection, the president has poor advisors, and many of the postwar reinsertion
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace programs intended to benefit the countrys ex-combatants from the civil war were never truly implemented (in particular the promise of mental health attention).
60
The following sub-group regarding Economic Factors and Structural Economic Exclusion was one of the most frequently-mentioned topics amongst the participants. Within this category, the most common causes of violence named included economic exclusion and marginalization, economic interests that drive this exclusion, citizen insecurity is a profiting business, and the vast socioeconomic disparity and extreme concentration of power and resources amongst the oligarchy. Other important answers under this heading include dollarization, the capitalist system, the industrialization of the country and growing loss of interest in agriculture, and the fact that El Salvadors economy is sustained by remittances sent from Salvadorans living abroad. The following subcategory is entitled Structural Social Exclusion. And while it includes only the two themes of social exclusion and discrimination, and gender inequality/machismo/patriarchy, these were topics mentioned in one form or another by nearly all of the participants. The next sub-group, which encompasses Social and Cultural Norms, Attitudes and World View, housed a wide variety of responses. Among the most popular answers were fear and paranoia, apathy and disinterest, individualism and greed, the loss of values, a general desensitization of Salvadoran society, and a collective amnesia and loss of historical memory and identity. Other important responses included the fact that people have lost their belief and sense of hope in the countrys youth, rejection and prejudice towards certain types of people (homeless people, individuals with tattoos, etc.), and impatience, short-term vision, and lack of concern for future generations. People also noted issues of resentment and hatred, fundamentalism and fanaticism, conformity and submission, a lack of cultural emphasis on the importance of education, shame regarding ones identity (for being Salvadoran, for coming from modest means, having indigenous roots or facial features, etc.), and that it seems that people these days seem to be living without
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace purpose, meaning, or hope for the future. In addition, participants mentioned themes such as
61
societys general distrust of state institutions, the minimal culture of civic participation, residual anticommunist sentiments from the time of the Cold War, the countrys excess of and accessibility to weapons, the attitude that blames victims for creating their own problems, a lack of cultural value placed on environmentalism, and low consciousness and value for maintaining good nutrition. The next subcategory is that of the Historic Normalization of Violence. As an overarching theme, this was another one of the most frequently-mentioned responses regarding the root causes of todays violence in El Salvador. This heading was further broken down into more specific ideas, including the idea that violence only breeds more violence, that violence is cultural and taught over time, and anthropology indicates that we are historically violent. Other themes under this heading include events and acts such as the Civil War, the Conquista, the denigration of the native indigenous culture, and the countrys long history of military dictatorship. The following sub-grouping is that of Internal Influences that Support the Violence on a Macro Level. The most common response within this category was that the mainstream media sensationalizes the violence, worsening the situation by causing widespread fear, mistrust of others, obsession with violence, attitudes of vengeance and desensitization to acts of horror. Other important causes of the violence that fall into this category include the influence of churches and religious beliefs, as well as the influence of violent music, television and movies. And the final subcategory at the Societal level is Exterior Influences. The root causes of the violence from this grouping include the transculturization of American culture (particularly its promotion of consumerism), El Salvadors economic relationships with the United States and other countries, US immigration policy (and specifically its enthusiastic deportation of Salvadorans), the global economic crisis that began in 2008, the hegemonic power of the United States, and the USs involvement in imposing repressive tactics to fight violence in El Salvador.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Recollection & Evaluation of Efforts to Reduce Violence and Build Peace
62
In the second thematic area of the interview, I asked people to name any efforts or measures that they could recall off the top of their heads either by the government, civil society or others that were implemented with the purpose of reducing the countrys violence and/or building peace. Upon naming different efforts, I also asked them to evaluate each ones relative effectiveness or success, as well as which elements of these efforts contribute to its success or downfall. While the answers recorded here are not exhaustive of all violence reduction and peacebuilding work done or currently being implemented, the results are telling in that the participants immediate responses indicate which measures are closest to the surface of peoples consciousness and spheres of knowledge and experience. Government Efforts. The research participants mentioned a myriad of efforts that have been taken over time to reduce violence and construct peace in the country. The following table illustrates their responses, which are grouped according to thematic commonalities:

GOVERNMENT EFFORTS TO REDUCE VIOLENCE & BUILD PEACE Laws, Policies & Agreements Mano Dura/anti-gang laws Proposal: mandatory military service for top at-risk youth Peace Agreements Law: prohibition of smoking in parks Institutionalized gender policy Law: patrimonial equity Process: formation of the youth law Law: against domestic violence Law: gender equity/against the discrimination of women Decree 56: sexual diversity Law of amnesty 15 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 Strategies Palliative/superficial/reactionary measures Repression Promote gender equity Open spaces through which society can access the government Education Creation of salaried jobs for teachers in their home communities Militarization Sports/recreation programs for youth Community-based health promotion Violence prevention committees Cultural/music/dance projects Program: family agriculture PATI (Program for Temporary Income Support) Community health centers Social dialogue roundtables Programs offering economic support so that children can study Programs: land ownership Schools placed in rural communities Removal of mandatory minimum fee for medical attention Proposals: employ restorative justice practices Roundtables for dialogue about land grabbing Projects: debt forgiveness for environmental protection efforts Program: Jvenes Talento (Young Talent) Support of small businesses/microenterprises Multi-family housing projects
63
11 8 3 3 2 1 1 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Social Initiatives & Programs
Structures PNC (National Civilian Police) Ministry of Health Prison System Ciudad Mujer PDDH (Ombudsman for the Protection of Human Rights) PROJOVENES (Project for Social Prevention of Violence and Youth Delinquency in El Salvador) Youth Directorate Secretariat of Social Inclusion ISDEMU (Salvadoran Institute for Womens Development) Armed Forces Legislative Assembly MSM (Salvadoran Womens Movement) ISNA (Salvadoran Institute for the Integral Development of Children and Adolescents) Justice System Ministry of Education
Figure 7: Government efforts to reduce violence and build peace
In the group pertaining to government Laws, Policy and Agreements, the Mano Dura and anti-gang laws were by and far the most notorious efforts on behalf of the government to attempt to
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace thwart the countrys violence. Every person who mentioned this approach to violence reduction
64
also resolutely stated that these policies are unequivocally ineffective, and have, in fact, only served to produce more violence. Other measures that fall under this category include the proposal to impose mandatory military service for the youth at most risk of joining a gang, the civil wars Peace Agreements of 1992, the law of amnesty implemented after the war, and a recent law prohibiting smoking in parks. In the realm of gender issues, people mentioned the states policy incorporating gender equity into government institutions, the new gender equity law that was just approved in March of 2011, a fairly new law guaranteeing patrimonial equity to women, Decree 56 that ensures respect of sexual and gender diversity, and the law against domestic violence. It was also noted that the process through which the new national youth law8 was formulated was more inclusive, consultative and innovative than most other law formation processes. The next category is that of Structures, including those which were created or function to a certain extent with the purpose of contributing to peace in the country. The most commonly-noted structure was the National Civilian Police (PNC). Peoples evaluations of the PNC were mixed, as they have made efforts to improve their practices through the years, yet they continue to be generally corrupt, violent and untrustworthy. Also notable was the mention of the Ministry of Health, similarly receiving mixed reviews. People acknowledged that certain programs and policies within the health system have improved in recent years, yet there continues to be a drastic shortage of medicine and supplies, many people are still excluded from receiving medical attention, and there are still corrupt people on the inside of the system that are preventing real change from happening within this institution. Other structures mentioned include the prison system (generally noted to be broken and dysfunctional), Ciudad Mujer (a new project of the current administration that offers numerous services to women in rural areas), the Ombudsman for the Protection of Human Rights,
This law was not approved until November of 2011, after these interviews were conducted.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace and PROJOVENES (the Project for Social Prevention of Violence and Youth Delinquency in El
65
Salvador). Other structures named include the MSM (Salvadoran Womens Movement), ISDEMU (the Salvadoran Institute for Womens Development), ISNA (the Salvadoran Institute for the Integral Development of Children and Adolescents), and the new Secretariat of Social Inclusion. People also named previously-existing structures that are integral to the governments core structure including the Legislative Assembly, Justice System, Armed Forces and Ministry of Education. The next category of responses is that of Strategies. The most commonly-mentioned strategies that the government has employed to confront the countrys violence include repression and other measures that are reactionary, palliative or superficial. These approaches were harshly criticized each time they were mentioned. Other strategies undertaken by the government generally judged to be positive yet still insufficient in their execution include the promotion of gender equity, the creation of spaces through which society can access government and have a voice in decision-making processes, education, and the establishment of permanent salaried jobs for teachers in the communities from which they originate. It was also noted that there has been an increasing militarization of public spaces and the security sector, seen to have both its pros and cons. The final category looks at Social Initiatives and Programs initiated by the government in an effort to prevent violence and build positive peace. These efforts include the creation and promotion of sports and recreational programs for youth, health promotion initiatives, violence prevention committees, cultural and artistic projects, a family agriculture program, PATI (Program for Temporary Income Support), community health centers, and roundtables for the purpose of conducting dialogue with civil society about different issues that plague their communities. In addition, the government has implemented programs that provide school supplies and shoes to children so that they can study, programs facilitating land ownership, projects that qualify the country for debt forgiveness in exchange for environmental conservation and preservation,
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace programs that support small businesses and micro-enterprises, as well as multi-family housing projects. The government has also placed schools in rural communities to make education more accessible, implemented the youth educational empowerment program called Jvenes Talento
66
(Youth Talent), removed the minimum mandatory fee for medical attention, created roundtables to facilitate dialogue about the situation of land grabbing, as well as presented proposals that recommend the utilization of restorative justice practices in the Salvadoran justice system. According to the interview participants, all of these community-focused initiatives have the potential to be positive, and many have actually made a bit of positive change. However, nearly everyone agreed that the majority of these efforts have not been implemented in full nor been dedicated sufficiently thorough follow-through. Efforts on behalf of Civil Society. The interview participants also mentioned a multitude of efforts initiated and carried-out on behalf of civil society that have held the purpose of creating peace in their country. Their responses are illustrated in the following table:
CIVIL SOCIETY EFFORTS TO REDUCE VIOLENCE & BUILD PEACE Non-Governmental Organizations, Groups Change in Perspective & Movements 2 Overcome fear Feminist NGOs Seek personal peace through religious NGO: ASPS (Salvadoran Association 1 faith for Health Promotion) Grassroots/Community-Based Work NGO: ACUDESBAL (Association of Youth centers/youth groups 8 United Communities for the Economic and Social Development of Outreach programs for youth at risk 8 the Lower Lempa) violence Cultural/music/dance projects Program: PLANJES (National Youth 6 6 Platform of El Salvador) Sports/recreation 5 NGO: F y Alegra (Faith and Joy) Health promotion 3 Agricultural projects The youth movement Bici-Crtica (like Critical Mass, NGO: Hombres Contra la Violencia promoting bicycling, healthy lifestyle, 2 (Men Against Violence) environmentalism and reclaiming of NGO: Equipo Maz (Team Corn) the streets) NGO: FUNDASAL (Salvadoran Creating green spaces for recreation 2 Foundation for Development and 1 Youth festivals Housing) creation of housing 1 Womens centers cooperatives
3 3
3 2 2 2 2 1 1

Policy Change Efforts Political incidence Activism Revolution Disarmament Strategies Work in prevention (of violence, health, etc.) Inclusion of youth Educate within the communities Empowerment of marginalized groups Community organization Literacy campaigns/education Coordination between civil society organizations and the state Work for gender equity Generate solidarity (closeness and mutual responsibility) Socio-emotional/therapy groups Form/support micro-enterprises & small businesses Dialogue Process: Peacebuilding/peace education Work for the respect of all human rights Offer spiritual support Facilitate truces between the gangs Restorative justice work Challenge stereotypes Generate employment opportunities Do community assessments/analysis Get to know each other 12 10 10 9 8 7 7 6 6 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 Non-Governmental Organizations, Groups & Movements (contd.) Community group in Puerto de Triunfo doing outreach with their local gang youth NGO: CEIBA (Constructing Integral Spaces for Environmental Wellbeing) NGO: MOJE (program for youth at risk of violence and exclusion) PEACEARTE (art festival to promote peace) Community council: Crculo de Reconciliacin (Reconciliation Circle) NGO: Equipo Nahual (Team Nahual) Central American Coalition for Violence Prevention NGO: Crculo Solidario (Circle of Solidarity) Christian base communities NGO: UCRES-CRIPDES (Union of Rural Communities of Northern San Salvador and La Libertad-Association for the Development of El Salvador) NGO: ASISTEDCOS (Foundation of Technical Assistance for Salvadoran Communal Development) Organizations promoting awareness and inclusion of the community of sexual diversity NGO: Servicio Social Pasionista (Passionist Social Services) Religious conferences NGOs that work for access to housing
67
3 2 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
Figure 8: Efforts on behalf of civil society to reduce violence and build peace
The first thematic group within civil societys efforts for peace in El Salvador is that of creating a Change in Perspective. Interviewees mentioned that peoples decisions to overcome fear as well as to seek out personal peace through religious faith both focusing on first creating internal peace have genuinely contributed to a greater sense of peace in society.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace The second category contemplates civil societys efforts in the area of Grassroots Community-Based Work. The initiatives mentioned in this area include the creation of youth
68
centers and youth groups, outreach programs for youth at risk of violence and gang-involved youth, cultural and artistic projects, sports and recreational projects, and health promotion programs. Also mentioned were the creation of agricultural projects, green spaces for recreation, youth festivals and womens centers. In addition, a couple people mentioned an initiative called Bici-Crtica, (inspired by Critical Mass cycling event) which promotes healthy lifestyle, environmentalism and the reclaiming of city streets through the organization of large monthly biking events. All of these initiatives were generally valued to be positive and important to the countrys greater peacebuilding effort, particularly if they maintain a focus on addressing root causes of violence, as well as on the long-term sustainability of each project. On the contrary, projects mentioned here that have not been effective in contributing to the greater movement for peace have typically fallen short due to lack of funding and/or support from the government. The following category includes activities that fall under the heading of Policy Change Efforts. These efforts include having political incidence (making an impact on policy change), activism, revolution (referring to the countrys Civil War), and disarmament. These were all discussed as areas where much exertion and perseverance are necessary to make true change from the position of civil society, and have therefore been areas of success only through arduous struggle. The people who discussed these topics feel that this monitoring and social control of government is a perpetual responsibility of civil society. The fourth category concerning civil societys efforts for peace in El Salvador is that of Strategies. The most frequently-mentioned responses in this area include working with a perspective of prevention (of violence, health, disaster, etc.), the inclusion and integration of youth into society, and educating from within communities rather than forcing people to travel long distances in order
69
to study. Other common responses include the empowerment of marginalized groups, community organization, literacy campaigns and education, coordination with state institutions in executing peacebuilding efforts, promotion of gender equity, the generation of solidarity (including closeness and a sense of mutual responsibility amongst people) and the use of dialogue as a peacebuilding tool. In addition, people mentioned the importance of providing socio-emotional support and spaces for group therapy, supporting the formation and growth of micro-enterprises and small businesses, facilitating community processes based on peacebuilding and peace education, working for a true respect of all human rights, and offering each other spiritual support. Furthermore, people mentioned the facilitation of gang truces, restorative justice work, the challenging of stereotypes in an effort to end discrimination and prejudice, generating opportunities for employment, and doing thorough community assessments to accurately evaluate each communitys needs and strengths. One person also very adeptly noted that making an effort to get to know one another very much contributes to any peace process because it strengthens a peoples social fabric. The interview participants judged all of these strategies to be very positive. The last thematic category regarding civil societys work for peace includes a list of NonGovernmental Organizations, Groups and Movements that are working for peace in one way or another in El Salvador. General movements of NGOs and other civil society groups and individuals named here include the NGOs in the feminist movement, the youth movement, NGOs that work for housing rights and equity, and organizations that promote awareness and inclusion of people belonging to the community of sexual diversity, Christian base communities and religious conferences. Three community-based groups working for peace were mentioned, including a group of people in Puerto de Triunfo that have initiated and carried out their own outreach programs with the gang-involved youth in their town, a group of friends and artists that join together and host art festivals (PeaceArte) in the name of peace, and a community council in Tonacatepeque called the
70
Crculo de Reconciliacin (Reconciliation Circle) that works on community integration, organizing and advocacy for their basic rights and services, and non-violent conflict resolution. The NGOs named were many. They include ASPS (the Salvadoran Association for Health Promotion), ACUDESBAL (the Association of United Communities for the Economic and Social Development of the Lower Lempa), F y Alegra (Faith and Joy community-based educational centers), Hombres Contra la Violencia (Men Against Violence), Equipo Maiz (Team Corn an NGO that works in popular education), FUNDASAL (the Salvadoran Foundation for Development and Housing) and their creation of housing cooperatives, CEIBA (Constructing Integral Spaces for Environmental Wellbeing), MOJE (a training program for youth at risk of violence), Equipo Nahual (Team Nahual who work for violence reduction through rehabilitation work with ganginvolved youth), Crculo Solidario (Circle of Solidarity who work in human and community development), UCRES-CRIPDES (the Union of Rural Communities of Northern San Salvador and La Libertad Association for the Development of El Salvador), ASISTEDCOS (Foundation of Technical Assistance for Salvadoran Communal Development), and the Servicio Social Pasionista (Passionist Social Services who work in gender equity, youth development and violence prevention, culture of peace and health services). And finally, two coalitions of NGOs and community groups were named, including the Central American Coalition for Violence Prevention and PLANJES (the National Youth Platform of El Salvador). All of these groups were recognized for having very good intentions, yet each has had varying levels of success in their work for peace. Several obstacles to these organizations success include the lack of resources and funding, a drifting towards working with models that create dependency, distance and isolation amongst organizations working in similar thematic areas, and lack of genuine support from the government. Factors that Contribute to the Success of Peacebuilding Efforts. Reflecting on the different efforts made both by the government and civil society for peace in El Salvador, interview
71
participants then identified which elements of each effort contributed to its successes and shortfalls. In addition to the results of this reflection, each person also further identified other characteristics that both help and hurt peace work. The following table shows the compiled list of factors that, according to the interviewees, contribute to the success of different peacebuilding efforts:
Factors that Contribute to the Success of Peacebuilding Efforts Category General Strategies & Approaches Creativity Enthusiasm Focus on the common good Synergy Honesty/sincerity Humility Sense of belonging and mutual responsibility Be friends Inclusion (of youth and all people) Be well-defined Work from the base (bottom-up, grassroots, with the people) Unity/solidarity Using ones skills and training to benefit their own community Seek and reproduce best practices/success stories Work in prevention Restorative justice Dialogue/chat Help those in need Support value-formation In-depth analysis/identify & work from the roots of problems Forgiveness/reconciliation Value and maximize each persons strengths Break traditional paradigms Work for a culture of peace Promotion of the arts Health/recreation programs Designate spaces as local zones of peace Technical/vocational training programs Create roundtables for dialogue/ consultation/conflict resolution Volunteer programs Community housing projects Courage (to be community) Equality Dignity Harmony Respect Long-term vision Willingness to sacrifice/serve/make a true commitment Empowerment (vs. creating dependency) Get to know the reality, be close to the communities Collaboration/teamwork Seek sustainability of projects, communities, people Popular ed./consciousness-raising Create community, make friends Organization Love Good communication Transparency Be the change you wish to see in the world Offer spiritual support Support people expressing their emotions, value mental health Work with a focus on respect of human rights for all Work for an equitable society Health centers Educational/literacy projects Programs to promote gender equity Reinsertion/rehabilitation programs Local health committees Socio-emotional/identity development work, therapeutic groups Recuperation of historical town centers
Values, Attitudes, Perspectives
Programs & Projects
Figure 9: Elements that contribute to success in peacebuilding
72
For purposes of organization and clarity, I grouped the participants responses according to thematic commonalities. The first category is that of Values, Attitudes and Perspectives. According to the people, creativity, enthusiasm, a focus on the common good, synergy amongst participants, honesty and sincerity, humility, and sense of belonging and mutual responsibility are amongst the factors that contribute to a peacebuilding efforts success. Added to that list are courage, the value and practice of equality, dignity, harmony, respect, working with a long-term vision, and a willingness to sacrifice, serve and make a true commitment to the cause. The second category houses responses related to General Strategies and Approaches to peacebuilding work. A multitude of elements fit into this category. People said that in peace work it is important to be friends, to work for the inclusion of youth and all marginalized people, be welldefined in your works vision and purpose, work from the base (bottom-up, grassroots, with the people and based on their experiences and needs), unity and solidarity, and using ones own skills and abilities to directly benefit their home communities. It is also key, they said, to seek out and reproduce best practices and success stories, to work with a perspective of prevention, to employ restorative justice practices, and to use dialogue and conversation as tools for peacebuilding. Furthermore, it is key to reach out and help those in need, to support value-formation, to do indepth analysis to understand the root causes of problems, to value and foster forgiveness and reconciliation, to appreciate and maximize each persons strengths, to work for a culture of peace as the ultimate goal, and to break traditional paradigms. In addition, peacebuilding is more successful when people work for the empowerment of individuals and communities (rather than creating patterns of dependency), being close to the communities and coming to understand their realities, valuing collaboration and teamwork, and seeking the sustainability of projects, communities and people. Other important elements to successful peace work are education and consciousnessraising, organization, love, clear and open communication, transparency, and creating community
73
and closeness by getting to know each other. And finally, they suggested that it is important to be the change you wish to see in the world,9 offer spiritual support, work with an emphasis on the respect of human rights for all people, work to create a more equitable society, and support peoples expression of emotions and place great value on mental health. The third and final category of factors that contribute to successful peacebuilding efforts is that of Programs and Projects. This list refers to activities that generally have success when done well, and that make important contributions to creating integral positive peace. Efforts mentioned in this category include the promotion of art and culture, creation of health and recreation programs, designation of certain spaces as local zones of peace, creating technical and vocational training programs, and creating dialogue roundtables to serve as spaces of consultation and conflict resolution. Interview participants also mentioned the importance of creating and fostering volunteer programs, community housing projects, health centers, educational and literacy projects, and programs that promote gender equity and inclusion. And lastly, it was noted that reinsertion and rehabilitation programs for people who have been in prison or active in gangs, the creation of active local health committees, recuperation of historical town centers, and socio-emotional group therapy and identity development work can all be important initiatives that contribute to a lasting peace. Dynamics Detrimental to Peacebuilding Efforts. The participants also mentioned several factors on the other end of the spectrum that frequently contribute to failure of different initiatives that seek to create peace. This appeared to be an easy task for people, as they report to have seen their share of unsuccessful violence prevention and peacebuilding efforts. The following table shows their responses:
This phrase is commonly attributed to Mahatma Gandhi.
74
Dynamics Detrimental to Peacebuilding Efforts Category Palliative/Superficial/Partial Efforts Individualism/Division Violence/repression Laws of punishment and retribution More heavily-arming the PNC (National Civilian Police) Taking out gang-involved youth (extrajudicial killings) Reject opportunities for dialogue Cultural/music/dance/sports projects Health centers Asistencialista/palliative work that creates dependence and is incapable of causing true transformation Short-term/unsustainable work Large, lavish forums Empty promises Impose solutions Lock yourself in, enclose your world in iron gates and barbed wire Paranoia Take advantage of the violence for personal benefit (scraping money off the top of projects, not really working to solve problems to ensure your own job security, etc.) NGOs/social movements/groups working on the same topics, yet isolated from each other Loss of solidarity
Repression
Fear Exploit the Situation
Figure 10: Dynamics that are detrimental to peacebuilding efforts
Again, I grouped their responses according to thematic commonalities. The first category is that of Repression. People said that in the search for peace, it is entirely counterproductive to use violence and repression, implement laws of punishment and retribution, continue to more-heavily arm the National Civilian Police, take out gang-involved or delinquent youth via extrajudicial killings, or reject opportunities for dialogue. The following category refers to Palliative, Superficial and Partial Efforts. Under this heading, interviewees mentioned the potential negative effects of cultural and recreational projects, health centers, asistencialista and palliative measures that serve to create relationships of dependence and obstruct true transformation of a situation, and short-term and unsustainable work. They also denounced the making of empty promises, imposing solutions (rather than looking to the people for endogenous responses), and the practice of holding large, lavish forums that fail to result in any action or change. This is an interesting category, as it contains a couple of responses that were also
75
named as elements that can contribute to successful peacebuilding; but it is important to note that, according to the participants, these efforts can also be counterproductive if they are done in a way that fails to address the root causes of the violence and instead just serves as a temporary distraction from reality. They can also be negative and detrimental to the work for peace if they are done merely in show to make an institution or group appear to be doing good work, while there is no substance or follow-through (such as in health centers that are left unattended or without supplies, or the sponsoring of a one-time cultural event that lasts long enough for leaders to get their pictures taken with at-risk youth but then never return to the community). The third category contains elements that pertain to Fear. Participants noted that while fear is natural, overcoming the violence and creating peace in the country will not be possible as long as we maintain a paranoia and generalized distrust in people, as well as the practice of enclosing ones life inside iron gates and barbed wire. The next category touches on the unfortunate tendency of many NGOs and government institutions to Exploit the Situation of violence in the country and utilize it to their personal benefit. People scrape the money off the top of projects coming in from foreign aid. And at times they even prefer to create relationships of dependency with the people they serve (rather than striving to empower them to overcome their situation), as this guarantees job security and can also serve to stroke peoples egos and make them feel important and needed. The last category refers to themes of Individualism and Division. People reported that one of the big obstacles to advancement in El Salvadors struggle for peace is that the majority of NGOs, social movements and groups work isolated from one another, even when they are working in the same thematic areas. This division amongst organizations, together with the generalized loss of solidarity in society, are elements that can very much contribute to the downfall of peacebuilding efforts.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Proposals on how to Build a Culture of Peace in El Salvador In this last section regarding peoples proposals for how to build a lasting peace in El Salvador, I received such a wide range of responses that I chose to organize them into categories based on their relevant thematic commonalities. Proposals for the State. The following table presents responses to the question asking, Dreaming without limits, what would you propose in order to create a true culture of peace in El Salvador? What needs to be done on behalf of the State to create a true peace in El Salvador?
Category Subcategory Change in Attitude/ Perspective
76
Overarching Topics to Make Priorities Paradigm Shift
New Approaches to Peacebuilding
Proposal Respect/tolerance for all people Be an inclusive government Adopt a willingness and commitment to real change Stop making up excuses/assume due responsibility Be willing to sacrifice Be willing to work in alliance/cooperate Generate equal access to opportunities Work to diminish societys inequities Strive for an endogenous development of the country/communities Prioritize the wellbeing of children/youth Work for the common good Eradicate discrimination (of youth and other marginalized groups) Work towards the self-sustainability of communities Promote values formation Work for gender equality/eradicate patriarchy Reclamation of the indigenous culture Commitment to establishing Rule of Law Commitment to human rights Promote health and recreation Environmental conservation Get to know the peoples reality learn how the majority live Work in integral manner (multi-stakeholder, comprehensive approaches) Work from a standpoint of prevention (of violence, health, etc.) Set political parties aside and work together for the people Do comprehensive analysis to address root causes of the violence Work with long-term vision Be creative Decentralize the work, serve all regions of the country Seek out and reproduce best practices Listen and pay heed to the people Offer viable alternative modes of survival if you want people to change
PROPOSALS FOR THE STATE
# 21 21 11 8 8 3 18 16 16 13 13 13 9 8 7 6 6 6 4 2 22 15 14 12 11 10 9 9 9 8 1

77
# 10 9 5 4 3 3 1 6 5 24 19 15 16 13 11 10 5 3 22 11 11 9 9 6 5 2 14 11 5 5 1 1 24 11 5 1 11 9 9 5 3 3 2 2 2 1 1
Economic & Labor Initiatives
Promoting Healthy Living Initiatives to Benefit the Communities & Improve States Relationship with the Public PROPOSALS FOR THE STATES Communication with the People Strengthening & Enriching of the Communities Security
Education/ Identity
Program Creation Programs
Program Reform
Laws/Policy
N/A
Proposal Create jobs/opportunities for employment Support/promote technical degrees/training Redistribution of resources Guarantee just salaries and pensions Support the start-up of small businesses Offer professionals jobs in their home communities Reduce/control prices of basic goods Create spaces for self-expression/mental health/life-processing Create more open green spaces Communication/dialogue/closeness with the people Open more spaces to facilitate better access to the government Establish permanent roundtables for consultation with civil society Support/facilitate community processes Create spaces/opportunities to promote the inclusion of youth Support organization in the communities Reconstruct/strengthen the social fabric Harm reduction work Improve security in the schools Educational projects - Implement national educational program on a culture of peace - revival of the countrys historical memory - work on identity development with children/youth - cultural promotion - promote a culture of education - educate about sexual and reproductive health rights - Human rights education programs Mental health programs Program to facilitate true process of reconciliation/healing Reinsertion/reintegration programs for youth Tattoo removal Promote tourism in combination with conservation Program: debt forgiveness for environmental protection National education system PNC (national civil police) Prison system Ministry of Health Policies to support youth/help them obtain gainful employment Laws to help improve citizen security Laws to guarantee equity in salaries and loans Laws to support/strengthen the family Policies promoting gender equity Prohibit the bearing of arms Policies regulating buying/selling/ownership of land Policies that guarantee respect of human rights Law requiring youth to volunteer/do community service Legalization of drugs Reverse the amnesty law

78
# 21 16 15 8 7 5 4 7 7 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 1
Changes in Government Functioning
N/A
Infrastructure
N/A
Proposal Make good investments/prioritize better with national budget Eradicate corruption Enact justice, ensure legal accountability and respect for human rights Judicial organs fulfill their functions Transparency/accountability Put new people in central government posts Follow through on promises Change in social and political system That El Salvador be a true democracy (participatory, inclusive) True separation of church and state Change the capitalist system Institutional strengthening Shut down weapons stores Construct housing Shut down the cantinas (low-end bars) Improve and expand public transportation system Make cities more compact
Figure 11: The Salvadoran governments role in the countrys peace process
The first major category regarding the states necessary role in El Salvadors peace process is that of a Paradigm Shift. The first subcategory within this group is that of Change in Attitude and Perspective. The most common recommendations that fall within this category include having respect and tolerance for all people, becoming a government based on inclusion, and adopting a true willingness and commitment to creating real change in the country. Other important proposals in this group are to stop making excuses and assume due responsibility for its actions and omissions, to be willing to make sacrifices for the wellbeing of the general population, and to be willing to work in alliance and cooperate with other actors. The following sub-heading in the category of Paradigm Shift is entitled Overarching Topics to make Priorities. The most commonly-mentioned suggestions include the creation of the conditions necessary to ensure equal access to opportunities, working to diminish the countrys exaggerated inequities, striving to conduct endogenous development in the country that is based on the voices of its people, prioritizing the wellbeing of children and youth, working for the common good, and eradicating discrimination in society (in particular of youth and other marginalized groups). Other
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace important proposals in this grouping include working for the self-sustainability of communities, promoting values formation, working for gender equity and eradicating the patriarchal system, and reclaiming the indigenous culture of previous generations. In addition, people noted the great importance of prioritizing a commitment to establishing true Rule of Law and respect of human rights in the country, promoting health and recreation, and emphasizing the importance of environmental conservation and preservation.
79
The third and final sub-grouping in the category of Paradigm Shift is that of New Approaches to Peacebuilding. The most frequently emphasized recommendations in this group include getting to know the peoples reality and learning how the majority of people in the country live, ensuring that actions for peace are done in an integral manner that includes many actors and employs comprehensive methodology, valuing and working with a perspective of prevention (of violence, health, disaster, etc.), and leaving politics out of peace work to simply work for the common good of the people. Other strongly emphasized suggestions were that the government should conduct comprehensive analysis to identify and then work to address the root causes of the violence, seek out and reproduce proven best practices in peacebuilding, and work with a long-term vision. Many interviewees noted that it is also of utmost importance that the government be creative and innovative in their approaches to the work, that it is necessary to decentralize the work and serve all regions of the country, and that it is extremely important to intently listen to and pay heed to the people. One person also mentioned the importance of offering viable alternative modes of survival and livelihood if the government expects people to make drastic change in their lifestyle (in reference to people who earn their money through illicit means). The second category is that of Initiatives to Benefit the Communities and Improve the States Relationship with the Public. The first subcategory under this heading refers to Economic and Labor Initiatives. The principal proposals that fall into this grouping are to create jobs and
80
opportunities for employment, as well as to support and promote the obtaining of technical training and degrees. Other proposals from this subcategory include the redistribution of resources, guarantee of just salaries and pensions, support of small business creation, offering professionals jobs in their home communities, and reduction and control of prices of basic goods. The second sub-heading under Initiatives to Benefit the Communities is that of Promoting Healthy Living. The two proposals from this group were the creation of more open green spaces for recreational purposes, as well as the creation of safe spaces for healthy self-expression, mental health attention and processing of life experiences. The following sub-grouping within the same main category is Communication with the People. Nearly all of the participants commented in one form or another that this is one of the most important changes the government needs to make. The specific proposals include the establishment of permanent roundtables for consultations with civil society, the creation of more mechanisms and opportunities for civil society to easily access the government for dialogue, advocacy and other communication, and a general increased communication, dialogue and closeness with the people. The next subcategory within Initiatives to Benefit the Communities involves the Strengthening and Enriching of the Communities. The proposals in this grouping are that the government support and facilitate community initiatives and processes, create spaces and opportunities to promote the inclusion of youth, support organizational processes in the communities, and work to reconstruct and strengthen El Salvadors social fabric. The next area within this category relates to Security, and the proposals mentioned here include doing harm reduction work and improving security in schools. And the last sub-heading under Initiatives to Benefit the Community is that of Education and Identity. The far majority of participants emphasized the great importance of the role of education in building peace. Many people mentioned different educational projects that they believed should be
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace undertaken by the government. These include the revival of the countrys historic memory, implementation of a national education program on a culture of peace, identity formation work
81
with children and youth, cultural promotion, the promotion of a culture of education, human rights education programs, and education about sexual and reproductive health rights. The following main category is that of Programs, and it is further divided up into the subcategories of Program Creation and Program Reform. In the group of Program Creation, many people noted the importance of focusing on different forms of healing in society. The top program proposals were for the creation of widespread and easily-accessible mental health programs, as well as programs to facilitate true processes of reconciliation and healing (as it was noted that this was not truly done after the end of the civil war, much less at any other time in history). Others noting the great obstacles that currently exist in society for gang-involved youth who would like to make positive changes in their lives suggested the creation of reinsertion and reintegration programs for youth, as well as the creation of tattoo removal programs. Other proposals include the formation of programs to promote tourism in combination with conservation and programs that grant debt forgiveness in exchange for environmental protection efforts. Under the other subcategory of Program Reform, the far majority of interview participants emphatically noted that the national education system is in dire need of reform. People also commonly mentioned the need for serious reform of the National Civilian Police. Other programs in need of reform include the prison system and the Ministry of Health. The next category relates to Laws and Policy. Within this grouping, the most commonlymentioned proposals were to create policy to support youth and to help them obtain gainful employment, implement laws to improve citizen security, and enact laws that guarantee equity in salaries and loans. Other proposals from this category include the creation of laws to support and strengthen the family, implementation of policies that promote gender equity, prohibition of the
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace bearing of arms, and formation of policies to regulate the buying, selling and ownership of land in
82
the country. In addition, people urged the government to apply policies that guarantee the respect of all peoples human rights and to create laws requiring youth to community service. Two outlying and bold proposals were to legalize drugs in the country and to reverse the civil wars law of amnesty to be able to bring justice to all of the crimes committed during the war. The subsequent category relates to Changes in Government Functioning. The majority of interview participants mentioned the importance of the government making better investments and doing better prioritization regarding the use of state funds. Two other frequently-mentioned proposals were to eradicate corruption and to enact justice, ensure accountability in front of the law, and enforce respect for all human rights. Other important recommendations from this category included the government maintaining true transparency and accountability, that the judicial organs fulfill their functions, that new people be placed in key government posts, that the government follow through on its promises to the people, and that they work on strengthening the governments institutional capacities. Other people mentioned the need for a general change in the social and political system, that El Salvador act as a true participatory and inclusive democracy, that there be true separation of church and state, and that the countrys capitalist system be changed. The last category of proposals regarding the states role in fostering cultural transformation in El Salvador is that of Infrastructure. In this category, participants mentioned on a couple occasions that the government needs to shut down weapons stores and construct more housing. In addition, lone interviewees suggested closing the cantinas (low-end bars), improving and expanding the public transportation system, and making cities more compact so that they are more pedestrianfriendly. Proposals for Civil Society. The second part of the question regarding proposals for how to build a culture of peace in El Salvador pertained to civil societys role in the work. The following
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace table illustrates the participants opinions regarding the work that civil society must do to bring about peace in the country:
83
Category
Subcategory Change in Attitudes, Perspectives, World Views
Proposal Tolerance/respect/inclusion Change our attitudes towards other people Overcome fear Respect ourselves Live in harmony with our surroundings Take initiative/break the apathy Assume the culture in the streets Love Seek out and maximize each persons strengths Make sure your initiative are integral (collaborative, comprehensive) Commitment and willingness to make change Prioritize the common good Work with long-term vision Work with nonviolence Commitment to prevention and harm reduction (violence, health, etc.) Seek/value/foster the positive spaces that do exist Support marginalized groups/people Work with hope Act with prudence (dont be fanatic) Do deep analysis, work from the root causes of the violence Be the change you wish to see in the world (model peace in yourself) Decentralize the work, serve all regions of the country Creativity Be willing to sacrifice Seek out the correct political moments to ask for support Make your initiatives self-sustainable Seek strength and direction in Christian values/spirituality Work in alliance/unite/form networks Regenerate sense of solidarity and mutual support Organize the community Dialogue Citizen participation/mobilization Get to know each other, be friends Education/concientizacin/wake up Empower/train/enable the communities Learn about and empower ourselves through the constitution and human rights Learn about the way others live, their reality Revive our historical memory Educate widely about processes of building peace Promote/spread culture and arts Learn to question/think critically
PPROPOSALS FOR CIVIL SOCIETY
Paradigm Shift
Change in Attitudes and Approaches to the Work
Unite
Strategies Education & Empowerment
# 20 18 13 9 4 18 18 13 12 12 11 11 9 9 9 8 7 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 3 2 22 21 20 17 15 11 25 17 13 13 11 11 7 4

Category Subcategory Proposal Break cultural patterns of violence Promote a culture of education Re-claim our values Generate an appreciation for artistic culture Revival of our indigenous culture Deconstruct and reconstruct our cultural paradigms around gender Adopt inclusive/peaceful language Change in family conducts/behaviors Take individual actions starting in our homes Work on identity development with children/youth Create opportunities for youth (school, training, activities, jobs) Focus much work on youth/children, as they are the future generations and where change can be made Empower the youth in politics and advocacy Dialogue/advocate/connect the communities voices and government Activism/political advocacy Encourage, promote, demand respect for human rights Social audit/mobilize to monitor and hold the government accountable for its actions and omissions Demand Rule of law (courageously denounce all acts of corruption) Mental health programs Facilitate processes of reconciliation/healing Create safe spaces for self-expression/release of emotions Offer spiritual support Environmental preservation/conservation
84
# 13 8 8 7 6 5 2 9 7 11 11 10 2 17 11 11 10 6 10 8 5 5 3 9
Cultural Changes
Within the Home In Relation to the Youth
In Relation to the Government
To Promote Healing In Relation to Environment Community Development
Develop innovative social projects/ programs to benefit and meet the real needs of our communities
Figure 12: Salvadoran civil societys ideal role in the countrys peace process
Once again, I grouped the interview participants responses according to their thematic commonalities. The first of two main categories is that of Paradigm Shift. The first sub-heading under this category relates to Change in Attitudes, Perspectives and World Views. The three most commonly-emphasized proposals were to overcome fear, to change our attitudes towards other people, and more specifically to adopt attitudes of tolerance, respect and inclusion. The two other responses from this group were that we need to respect ourselves, and we need to live in harmony with our surroundings. The last sub-grouping within the category of Paradigm Shift addresses Changes in Attitudes and Approaches to the Work for peace. Many people emphasized that civil society needs to assume responsibility for the culture in the streets, take initiative and break the apathy that plagues much of
85
society today, seek out and maximize peoples strengths, ensure that love is at the heart of the work, and make sure that projects are integral in nature (involving collaboration amongst several stakeholders and being comprehensive in their approach). Other commonly-mentioned proposals include civil society taking on a true commitment and willingness to make change, prioritizing the common good, working with a long-term vision, employing nonviolence as an essential approach to the work, and making a commitment to prevention and harm reduction (of violence, health, disaster, etc.). In addition, people mentioned the importance of seeking out and fostering the positive spaces and programs that already exist, supporting marginalized groups and individuals in society, working with hope, acting with prudence (and setting aside fanaticism and fundamentalism), doing in-depth analysis to address root causes of the violence, and being the change you wish to see in the world (i.e. modeling peace in yourself). And still others mentioned the necessity of working with creativity, being willing to make sacrifices for the common good, seeking out opportune political moments in which to seek political support, making initiatives self-sustainable, seeking strength and direction in Christian values and spirituality, and the decentralizing the work for peace to ensure that all regions of the country are served. The second and last of the two major categories is that of Strategies. The first sub-grouping under this heading addresses Unity. This is the proposal area that far and wide received the most attention by the interviewees. Everyone mentioned the need for unity amongst civil society in one form or another. The most common proposals were to regenerate a lost sense of solidarity and mutual support, organize within communities, and work in alliance, unite and form networks. Other responses, also frequently-mentioned, were the importance of employing dialogue as a tool for peace, the mobilization and participation of civil society in local and national affairs, and getting to know each other and becoming friends.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace The next sub-heading in this category speaks of Education and Empowerment. This section received nearly as much attention as the previous one. And it also corresponds to peoples earlier
86
insistence on the importance of education amongst their proposals for the state. The top response, which was mentioned by nearly all participants, was that civil society needs to work to promote education, political and social consciousness-raising and the waking-up of society. Other proposals from this important subject area include the empowerment and training of communities, learning about other peoples realities and ways of life, the revival of El Salvadors historical memory, educating widely about processes of building peace, promoting the spread of culture and arts, learning to question and think critically, and the empowerment of civil society through learning about the constitution and human rights. The next sub-grouping under Strategies looks at Cultural Changes. Here, people noted the importance of breaking cultural patterns of violence, promoting a culture of education, re-claiming values, and generating an appreciation for artistic culture. In addition, participants emphasized the need to revive El Salvadors indigenous culture, deconstruct and reconstruct cultural paradigms around gender, and adopt more inclusive and peaceful language into everyday speech. The following sub-heading addresses proposals related to the space Within the Home. The two proposals in this group are that people work to change their own family conduct and attitudes, as well as to begin the work for peace through individual actions from the home. The next section addresses proposals for strategies In Relation to the Youth. Many people noted the importance of doing work with children and youth in identity development and creating opportunities for youth (for study, vocational training, activities, jobs, etc.). People also recommended empowering youth through education about politics and advocacy work, as well as focusing much of societys work on youth and children, as they are the future of El Salvador and will
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace dictate how the countrys the legacy of violence is either perpetuated or transformed to one of peace. Participants proposals regarding civil societys role In Relation to the Government included much emphasis on the importance of insisting on having open dialogue with the government and connecting the communities voices with the ears and hearts of the government. They also mentioned the importance of activism and doing political advocacy for the needs of the
87
communities, demanding a true Rule of Law in the country (and courageously denouncing all acts of corruption), and encouraging, promoting and demanding respect for the human rights of all people. Several interviewees also mentioned the urgency of civil societys mobilizing to sustain a constant social audit in order to monitor and hold the government accountable for its actions and omissions. Again, people frequently spoke to the fact that no true process of healing was ever conducted in the country following the war (nor in any other moment in El Salvadors history). So regarding civil societys role related to strategies To Promote Healing, interview participants emphasized the importance of the creation of mental health programs, the facilitation of processes of reconciliation and healing, the creation of safe spaces for self-expression and the release of emotions, and offering spiritual support to those who may be seeking it out. In regards to proposals for civil societys strategies In Relation to the Environment, a handful of people mentioned the importance of environment preservation and conservation. And in the final sub-heading under the category of Strategies, many people noted that civil societys role in Community Development is to develop innovative social and economic projects and programs to meet the real needs of the communities. Proposals for Other Key Actors. Despite the fact that I did not ask the interview participants about the roles of other sectors in El Salvador besides civil society and the state, a few
88
people mentioned that other key actors also have responsibilities within the countrys peace process. The subsequent table illustrates these responses:
PROPOSALS
Actor Churches Private Sector Proposals Commitment to working for gender equity Cooperation amongst the churches, the state and civil society Create more jobs Ensure just treatment and salaries for workers Commitment to cooperation and positive change # 3 2 1 1 1
Figure 13: Roles of other key actors in El Salvadors work for peace
Interviewees mentioned that in order to create a cultural transformation in the country to one of peace, the Churches need to do their part in working for gender equity, and they also need to actively cooperate amongst themselves and together with the state and civil society in the work for peace. They also noted the great need for the Private Sector to ensure the provision of just treatment and salaries for their workers, as well as to commit to positive change and cooperation with other sectors of society.
Principal Strengths of El Salvador that will contribute to Successful Peacebuilding The last of four thematic areas within the interview asked the participants to reflect on what strengths El Salvador brings to the table that serve as assets in the countrys work for peaceful cultural transformation. This was the part of the interview that returned the smiles to peoples faces, returning the focus again to the beautiful and inspiring aspects of El Salvadors people, culture, history, land, and great potential as a nation. And it was perhaps the easiest question for people to answer, indicating that El Salvador truly holds the potential to create a change of this magnitude as proposed in this study. The following table illustrates the great list of strengths and assets that El Salvador possesses (again, grouped by thematic commonalities) and could well serve to improve its odds of success in this effort for peace:
89
El Salvadors Assets & Strengths in its Work for Peace Category

Drive for peace Many people have a very strong commitment to society Desire, motivation for peace Salvadoran culture [We are:] Courageous Welcoming, warm Clever A people that fights to rise above in the face of adversity Dynamic Hard-working A diverse people Resourceful A country of young people Strengthened by our faith and Knowledgeable in forgiving beliefs Characterized by the strength of our Rooted in our ancestral history community/connection Resilient Legacy of the civil war We gained experience from the peace process of our civil war Our historical revolutionary project taught us to believe in change Our historical memory teaches us lessons from the past Much potential for change exists amongst us Potential for change that exists within Salvadoran society Potential in the government (and their staff) The media holds much potential in being able to contribute to change Many NGOs have years of accumulated experience working for peace The left won the presidency for the first time change is possible Our current process of social peacebuilding is in process Our country is member of intl organizations that promote peace Pleasant, warm climate Our country is small Our country is beautiful
The Salvadoran People
History
Others
Figure 14: El Salvadors greatest assets in its work for peace
The first category (and also the largest) speaks of The Salvadoran People. Several interviewees mentioned that many Salvadorans have a very strong commitment to society, and that there is a strong motivation and desire for peace in the country. In addition, they formulated a long list of characteristics that embody the Salvadoran people. They noted that Salvadorans are welcoming and warm, a people that fights to rise above and overcome adversity, hard-working, resourceful, strengthened by their faith and beliefs, rooted in ancestral history, resilient, courageous,
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace clever, dynamic, diverse as a people, a country of young people, knowledgeable about forgiveness, and characterized by a strong sense of solidarity and connection in their communities.
90
The next category relates to El Salvadors History in particular, the legacy of the countrys civil war. Despite all of the suffering, loss and destruction that came from the war, there were a few lessons learned. People noted that they gained much valuable experience from living through the civil wars peace process. Others reflected that the historical revolutionary project from the time of the war taught them to believe in change. And yet others spoke of how the historical memory of this process teaches valuable lessons from the past. The third and final category of responses is that of Others a mixture of other miscellaneous concepts. First of all, people emphasized the fact that much potential for change currently exists in the country. This potential to make positive change exists within Salvadoran society, in the Salvadoran government and their staff, in the media, and in the NGOs that have many years of accumulated experience working for peace. Another person noted that the fact that the countrys leftist party won the presidency in 2009 for the first time since the end of the civil war proves that change is possible. Other strengths mentioned are that there is social peacebuilding movement in process, and El Salvador is a member of international organizations that promote peace. And finally, regarding the countrys physical traits, it has a warm and pleasant climate, it is a small country, and it is extremely beautiful.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Chapter Six: Discussion Introduction
91
The previous chapter presented a wealth of data about Salvadoran civil societys perceptions regarding the current situation of violence in El Salvador and what must be done to create peace in the country. Here I will connect concepts and synthesize this information into a concise and coherent proposal that reflects their voices. While very much acknowledging the complexity of the situation at hand, my analysis will at times simplify and categorize themes and phenomena for the sake of clarity and comprehension. In the end, however, I very much recognize that this situation remains infinitely and dynamically complex and impossible to fully capture through a mechanistic framework.
Recalling our Framework of Analysis Again, I would like to reiterate that this data is most appropriately analyzed through a lens that focuses on the responses that were most frequently mentioned, as well as the range of responses mentioned in each thematic area. An idea is not to be invalidated or seen as any less important because it may have only been mentioned once or twice. I invite you to value the voice and testimony of each person interviewed, to focus on the stories that each piece of data tells us, and to use these stories and envision yourself in the position of the participants in their daily lives. And finally, I would like to remind you that the responses presented in this study represent the reality of this small (yet diverse) group of people in one moment of time, and therefore the situation in El Salvador at this very moment has inevitably evolved since the interviews took place. Regardless, each story told in these interviews holds significant value and can give us a wealth of information that is still relevant and useful to this day. This is the approach that I take in my analysis of the stories told here as well.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Perceptions of Violence in El Salvador Forms of Violence. From the responses collected regarding the full range of forms of
92
violence experienced in El Salvador, it is clear that people have endured much suffering and live in constant fear and insecurity. An urban-based community organizer even commented, It seems like the situation of violence gets worse every year reflecting a common sentiment amongst the interviewees. Examining the range of forms of violence seen in the country, it is clear that while the gang violence (the most notorious form of violence in the country) is a serious issue that deserves careful attention, there are many other important forms of violence that are rarely spoken of and are consequently minimally addressed in society. Starting at the most basic level, many interviewees reflected on the violence that exists in peoples everyday interactions in so many different spheres of Salvadoran society. There is violence even in our small daily interactions with or without the intention to hurt others. The manner in which we express ourselves is violent greetings, gestures, words, reflected a high-risk youth outreach worker. Many people specifically called attention to the pervasive sexual harassment that occurs in the streets and in buses. A member of the community of sexual diversity commented on womens near-helplessness in the face of the normalization of this behavior: You walk down the street, and men make endless comments towards you. They start to sexually harass you, and all you can do is cross the street. Or if you see a group of men, you take another route to avoid walking in front of them. And if anybody says anything to you, you just put your head down and keep walking. Also along this vein, people told stories of profiling and discrimination of people based on their appearances, the violent manner in which drivers jockey through the streets of San Salvador, the distrustful way in which people interact, and even in much of the everyday Salvadoran vocabulary
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace that can be sprinkled with sexist or homophobic phrases and is generally not gender-inclusive.10
93
These are all clear signs and symptoms of the gradual deterioration of El Salvadors social fabric and the loss of the solidarity and warmth that has historically characterized the Salvadoran people. Domestic abuse was also amongst the most frequently-mentioned responses, and people noted that it is an essentially invisible violence in El Salvador. The violence that is not seen is family violence. Theres abuse, maltreatment, psychological abuse, verbal abuse, rape abuse of all kinds, noted a female spiritual leader from a marginalized and violence-ridden community. A male activist for gender equity commented that this is a common occurrence in the households of all types of people, saying, The expression of violence is now also hidden in our homes. Politicians, union members, community leaders, etc. [the violence is even committed by people who are] very socially-committed, but in their homes theyre tyrants. This is largely due to the prevalent culture of machismo in the country that gives a silent nod of approval to this behavior, as well as creates a great fear to report abuses because the countrys dysfunctional justice system does not offer people protection nor typically follow through on these cases. Homicide and assault were also mentioned as serious problems in the country. And while it is known and understood that the gangs contribute to a significant percentage of these killings and attacks, public officials have affirmed that another significant percentage of these are committed by other actors. Several people also noted, however, that the existence of the gangs and the occurrence of much of the countrys violent crime are actually social symptoms of greater structural violence.
In the Spanish language, all nouns are dictated either a masculine or feminine gender for grammatical purposes. Adjectives, articles and other words are also modified based on the gender of the noun they accompany. Traditionally, to refer to a group of people, the masculine form is utilized regardless of the actual genders of the people being referenced. In addition, connotations of weakness/strength, inferiority/superiority, etc., are oftentimes implied according to the genders of words. Some activists for gender equity and inclusive language argue that Spanish needs to adopt new language patterns that are all-encompassing. Others even suggest removing gender from Spanish altogether, arguing that the binary system of gender (that assumes that people are either masculine or feminine) excludes people who identify as asexual, transgender, third gender, multi-gender, etc.
10
94
Curiously, the other principal forms of violence mentioned happen at a structural level and are instituted or endorsed by the state. These include government repression (embodied in antigang laws, the silent endorsement of police brutality, the militarization of the security sector and public spaces, the punitive justice system, the abusive prison system, etc.), the pervasive phenomenon of criminal acquisition of funds (i.e. organized crime and corruption, in which many high-ranking government officials are deeply involved), and the systematic economic, political and social exclusion of the greater population. It is important to note that while significant and destructive forms of violence occur at all levels of society, interviewees reported that the far majority of the violence is carried out at the societal or structural level. Furthermore, while gangs and death squads are duly credited for their contributions to the violence at the societal level, the vast majority of forms of violence within this group are perpetrated by the government and the countrys wealthy elite. This phenomenon strongly supports the thesis that the disproportionate scapegoating of the gangs for the countrys violence is an intentional effort to divert the publics attention from the violence and corruption being committed by the state and the oligarchy of El Salvador. [Creating hype around the gang violence] is a mechanism they use to distract from what is really going on in the country, affirmed one human rights worker. While a great proportion of El Salvadors violence is being instigated at the structural level, this does not minimize the fact that the violence is still occurring in a diversity of forms at all levels of society, and it is affecting the entire country in profound ways. Root Causes of the Violence. In order to respond appropriately and responsibly to any conflict situation, it is important to first do an extensive analysis to better understand the situations root causes.
95
As in most conflicts, El Salvadors situation of violence is extremely complex. And what our interview participants analysis suggests is that the violence is originally rooted in the countrys historic systematic exclusion of the poor majority that dates back to the early- to mid-1800s. This exclusion has been relentlessly exerted through time in the social, political and economic spheres of Salvadoran society, and its most notorious byproduct is an ever-growing disparity of wealth and access to resources. The rich continue to get richer, and the number of poor Salvadorans continues to rise while their situations continue to worsen. Interests of power and wealth drive this historic exclusion. Nearly all participants agreed that violence only serves to breed more violence. And as these patterns of violent marginalization have never been broken through the years, these three complex and interconnected forms of exclusion have evolved and created a multitude of compounding problems each which has served to further augment and perpetuate the countrys culture of violence. For example, the oligarchys political exclusion of the greater population has created a significant distance between the government and the people essentially making the government a sovereign body. Following, according to the interviewees, to this day the government has little accountability to the people, and as a result there are minimal consequences to politicians apathy and lack of political will, corruption goes unchecked, impunity is pervasive, and human rights are not respected. In addition, this growing distance between the powerful, wealthy few and the poor majority creates a significant disconnect from the peoples realities and foments a general indifference towards their problems. In regards to social exclusion, the 1932 massacre of over 30,000 indigenous people (dubbed by the government as an act of counterinsurgency) essentially wiped out El Salvadors indigenous culture. After this tragic event, people were so afraid to be identified as indigenous that the vast majority of people quickly abandoned their traditional language, dress and customs. In addition,
96
historical accounts of the occurrence were erased from the record, over time muddling the nations historical memory. Many people partially credit the loss of the countrys historic memory and cultural identity to these events. In addition, this lack of ancestral cultural identity, together with the increasing economic and political relations with the United States and the fact that nearly 1.5 million Salvadorans live in the US, have greatly contributed to the transculturization of El Salvador. Remember that were a very Yankee-ized culture, an artist asserted. We depend too much on the culture from the North. And so thats our departure point. And we dont value whats ours, whats pure and good from our society. Several interview participants also credit this transculturization for the growing sense of individualism, greed and consumerism in Salvadoran society. And this trend has only served to further the previously-mentioned weakening of the Salvadoran social fabric and the growing distrust, fear, and isolation. In addition, historic machismo has always been a root cause of endless forms of social violence, justifying gender inequity, sexism, the perpetuation of traditional gender stereotypes, homophobia and gender violence. Through time, this social construct has been so ingrained in Salvadoran society that people of all genders have internalized it and have reproduced it in following generations. These attitudes only serve to endorse the use of violence as means for conflict resolution, naturally encouraging the incorporation of violent norms into Salvadoran culture. Finally, the economic exclusion through the years has created and perpetuated widespread poverty and landlessness (while a small percentage of the country lives lavishly). This unjust disparity has been the source of many violent conflicts throughout the years, including the 1832 indigenous uprising, the 1932 indigenous massacre and the more recent civil war. Despite the emergence and resolution of these past violent struggles for justice, the countrys great inequities have never been corrected. A human rights worker involved in post-war reparations remarked:
97
Peace has been given little opportunity in this country. The Peace Accords were signed, and it was supposed to be a starting point to establish a process of peacebuilding in El Salvador. But the economic system that was established instead of uniting us, separated us even more into distinct and divided sectors. And the perpetuation of this division and inequity has only served to feed into a spiral of compounding violence. For example, the lack of job opportunities and near impossibility of overcoming ones poverty has continuously led people to desperation through the years. Here, systematic impoverishment leaves the people without opportunities, comments one spiritual leader and community organizer. He continues on to tell the story of a young man he knows, whose story is common throughout El Salvador: [He explained to me,] For me, Ill die of hunger. But my daughter, I dont want her to die from hunger so I go out and steal. And whatever I bring in each day, thats what we survive off of. He robs old women, and thats a crime; but behind that robbery, theres a man without hope and without opportunities. Their hands are tied they dont have the option to involve themselves in honest, respectable activities to develop themselves and raise their families. And that was a man who had graduated from high school, had tried to start up a business, etc. Politics have never been in our favor. As [Oscar] Romero said, Our law is like the snake it only bites the bare foot. The laws have been extremely unjust. [] We have a violent system exaggeratedly violent. [] Its a violence that is impoverishing the majority and making a handful of people very rich. This widespread impoverishment and its ensuing desperation also serve to propel a multitude of people to migrate to other countries in search of better opportunities for survival.
98
The mass migration of Salvadorans to the States (and other countries), in combination with parents having to work long hours to make ends meet, and the high frequency of fathers abandoning their families (a symptom of the culture of machismo), are all phenomena that cause many kids to be without supervision and guidance for much of their youth. A rural community organizer and cultural promoter reflected: Having a nuclear family is really important to orient us in life. [...] Families that are without their mother or father figure oftentimes also lack the role-modeling of values, love and affection towards their children and youth. [...] Freud says that in adolescence, we seek out role models with whom to identify. In this country, many times that role model is the violence not ones mother or father, because they arent there. But the violence is always present. The growing phenomenon of family disintegration weakens childrens odds of being raised by a strong nuclear family, frequently driving kids to the gangs in their search for identity and family support. The poverty, together with weakened family structures, contribute to children receiving less education. Frequently, childrens formal education is largely deficient because kids are left unattended for long periods of time, many families lack the resources to send their children to school, and the national education system provides poor education (that teaches conformity and mediocrity, noted an artist and educator). Other people also noted that there has been systematic exclusion from the formal education system because the more ignorant a people, the easier they are to rob. A rural farmer and organizer reflected, Why is it inconvenient for them [that we be educated]? Because as people study and prepare themselves, they begin to realize that Wait, Im someone important. In addition, a doctor who works in community-based health affirmed that, it has been an interest of those in power for the past 20 years to keep the people asleep [ignorant]
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace so that they dont realize and speak out against the corrupt things that occur in this country. The informal education children receive in their homes is also believed to greatly contribute to the countrys violence. An educator of high-risk youth noted: In the home, they dont teach us to respect others for being different. They dont teach us to love. They dont teach us to forgive. They dont teach us to offer help or service to
99
others. On the contrary, other types of values are taught to be clever and on our toes, to win, to outstrip others, to fend for ourselves, individualism...its the inheritance weve been given. [...] And weve come to see violence as our first recourse to resolve problems. Deficient education contributes to peoples weakness and vulnerability in the face of an exploitative state, reproduces cultural patterns of violence, and decreases peoples opportunities to obtain gainful employment. The minimal guidance, support and formation offered to youth in society, together with the lack of opportunities to obtain gainful employment, and the rigid system of exclusion that maintains the countrys deep inequities (among a plethora of other factors), all serve to push youth to seek alternative means of survival via the gangs and other illicit activities. If a young person involved in gangs were truly offered the tools to escape from both their material physical poverty and their psychological poverty, I believe things would be different, reflected a psychologist who works with high-risk youth. I believe that the root of the violence lies in the inequity the exclusion in all things: education, economic and social. This infamous inequity has greatly contributed to driving people to resort to illicit income-generating activities, as well as the wildfire-like spread of violent gangs in the country. The increased violent activity from gangs and other criminal groups, combined with a sensationalist national media and powerful economic interests propelling the violence, have contributed to the creation of a widespread fear and paranoia. The media instills great fear of
100
different public spaces, people, groups... [They] serve more to exacerbate the violence rather than counteract it, as they only ever present the negative face of society, remarked one artist. This fear and paranoia have contributed to peoples general distrust of one another and the weakening of social ties. A human rights worker noted, Were losing our sense of community. Solidarity is disappearing. Its because of the situation people are afraid. And we isolate ourselves even more out of paranoia. Everyone now only thinks about their own needs, and not about the communitys. Along with the diminishing of El Salvadors characteristic sense of solidarity, the public has also greatly lost hope in its youth. This widespread fear, in combination with the governments failure to counteract the growing violence, have fed into a growing movement to hire private security guards for homes and businesses, to buy and carry weapons, and to fortress homes and schools with razor wire and iron gates. The widespread movement to isolate and arm oneself in response to perceived threats has only fed into the lucrative security industry, further strengthening powerful economic interests that benefit from the current state of violence in El Salvador. The security industry, along with several other active illicit industries that exist in the country, use their powerful sway to perpetuate the violence in order to further their economic interests. One social worker and ex-combatant asserted: Here we have senior officials for the most part from previous administrations who are involved in both gangs and narcotrafficking. And its all interrelated. There are police officers, attorney generals, lawyers... Its such a complex situation that you finally realize for whom is it inconvenient that an end to the violence be negotiated? Who is behind the scenes manipulating everything? And even if peace is urgent for the greater population if the people with great [economic] interests are not in agreement, there will be no negotiation to end the violence. Because they are the ones who determine everything. And they are great groups of power
101
not only from the United States, but from Latin America transnational groups that are manipulating governments throughout Latin America. This was an analysis that most participants expressed in one form or another in their interviews. In the end, everything has to do with the interests of the people with power, summarized a rural health promoter. Clearly, the situation of violence in El Salvador has grown highly complex. Forceful powers are working to perpetuate the phenomenon to feed their many economic and political interests. And the countrys violence is only serving to consistently breed more violence over time. In short, the countrys historic political, economic and social exclusion has over time catalyzed a powerful vortex within which violence is reproduced and perpetuated. And each new social ill generated as a byproduct of this exclusion has repeatedly only served to compound and complexify the countrys situation of violence. Over time, the historic normalization of violence has infiltrated the Salvadoran culture and forced the people to adapt violent mechanisms for survival in response to this sustained social context.
Recollection & Evaluation of Efforts to Reduce Violence and Build Peace Government Efforts to Curb Violence and Create Peace. The participants reflections on the governments various attempts to reduce the countrys violence revealed a few key themes. Far and above, the clearest and most important concept to take from their narratives is that the governments repressive approach to violence reduction is completely counterproductive. As mentioned previously, several of these repressive tactics include the militarization of the security sector and public spaces, the various Mano Dura and anti-gang laws, the states punitive justice system, and its abusive prison system. In addition, the governments implicit support of police brutality and violent neighborhood raids, death squad executions, and the systematic
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace exclusion of El Salvadors youth population from active participation in society (communicated through the failure to condemn such acts) are all manifestations of the governments repressive approach to violence reduction. An educator and psychologist explained:
102
On behalf of the government both this administration and the previous ones there really hasnt been any culture of peace. There has been a culture of repression towards youth or towards anyone who wishes to express or manifest their way of thinking. Even though they say we have freedom of expression, its not true; deep down, theres always fear. A social worker echoed this sentiment, affirming that Even though our government is now run by the leftist party, the state policy to a certain extent is still coercive, repressive and imposed. And these approaches tend to fail. On the other end of the spectrum, people mentioned that the government has put forth a variety of social initiatives through the years that appear to have good intentions and employ more humanistic approaches to peacebuilding. According to the participants, a few of these efforts have made a bit of difference. Some of these initiatives include the Ciudad Mujer integral services centers for women in rural areas, the Secretariat for Social Inclusion, the community-based health promotion program (implemented in 2010 to bring integral teams of health care providers to the communities), the Ministry of Educations program to offset the costs of school supplies and uniforms to enable more children to study, and programs that offer debt forgiveness for environmental protection efforts. Despite these considerations, interviewees asserted that while many of the governments social programs are perhaps initiated with good intentions, they are rarely based on consultations with the people about their realities and needs, nor are they based on the wealth of best practices that exists amongst civil society. The government with such a wealth of successful experiences available to them is pretentious. They have no desire to learn from other peoples experiences,
103
and they have been unable to connect with the collective thought of the people, remarked a rural community organizer. An ex-combatant adds: Who in their right mind would think that a military officer could educate a young person about violence prevention, when here we have many experiences of best practices?...when here we have done prevention? If they really wanted to create good policies...if they were to invest those funds in our work...we would have the capacity here to cover the entire sector of Santa Maria.11 We have the resources, the infrastructure, the experience. We have educated ourselves in Culture of Peace-building. Furthermore, the majority of these efforts receive insufficient follow-through and therefore have minimal impact in the long run. And a significant number of participants noted that many measures put forth by government under the auspices of working for peace are in fact insincere, superficial and palliative, and conducted for media attention and public approval ratings. Referring to the aforementioned underlying motivation of perpetuating the violence to promote economic interests, the leader of a community-based environmental project concluded, The government really in all aspects serves private economic interests rather than the greater population. So the efforts that are made are rarely sufficiently-serious or with the intention to really resolve the problem [of violence]. A rural Salvadoran health worker quite aptly summarizes the participants general sentiment towards the governments work for peace in the country, commenting: [It] is concerning because the measures that the government wants to implement to combat [the violence] are not real solutions. What good does it do to put military officers in the streets or force kids into barracks for military training, if in the end there is no desire to resolve the real problem the economic inequality? Many people blame the gangs, family
11
The name Santa Maria was created to protect the anonymity of the interview participant.
104
disintegration, parents poorly educating their children but that really isnt so relevant; the mother of everything is the lack of decent employment and the great economic disparity. In conclusion, people consider the governments efforts to build peace in the country to be only nominally successful due to their superficial and short-term vision, the lack of true political will to address the countrys glaring inequities, their distance from the peoples reality, and the heavyhanded repressive approach taken to dealing with the violence. Civil Societys Efforts to Curb Violence and Create Peace. While a few participants did criticize actions from groups and individuals in civil society motivated by fear or hatred (such as extrajudicial killings, individuals apprehensive self-isolation and taking-up of arms, and the social exclusion of youth), the majority of civil societys efforts were lauded for their general success and positive contributions to the countrys movement for peace. Among a wide variety of responses, the most frequently-mentioned and highly-praised of these elements include youth outreach and inclusion work (through the creation of youth centers, groups and programs), prevention work (of violence, health, disaster, etc.), community education and empowerment, and community organizing. The general overarching theme of these efforts (and the many other positive efforts mentioned in the interviews) is the importance of working with a humanistic focus to unite, strengthen and empower communities. The many civil society organizations mentioned in the interviews generally seek to intervene and break patterns of violence, transform the social, political and economic contexts that foment it, and prevent its future emergence. The long list of NGOs named by the participants reflects the wide variety of peacebuilding work being done by civil society in El Salvador. While the majority of these organizations received high praises, a few stood out as models of best practices. The Salvadoran Association for Health Promotion (ASPS) was praised for its nation-wide community-based preventive health work in communities. They were also commended for their
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace active political advocacy for the respect of human rights, universal access to basic services, and
105
environmental factors that affect community health. Amongst many other important undertakings, they also actively serve as a watchdog to monitor the Ministry of Health and advocate for the correct and just fulfillment of their functions. ASPS has been so effective in their work that they have gained wide international respect. The work of the Association of United Communities for the Economic and Social Development of the Lower Lempa (ACUDESBAL) was mentioned as an admirable and successful model in its work to support and strengthen the organization of the communities of the Lower Lempa region, to promote gender equity and the empowerment of women, and to protect the regions natural resources from flooding through management of the regions levees. Their methodology is inspiring, as it has helped transform 29 previously-exiled poor rural communities into organized and informed activists who advocate for respect of their human rights and fulfillment of their communities basic needs. The organization Men Against Violence is an anomaly in the midst of El Salvadors machista culture. This group conducts workshops with men across the country on gender, masculinity and sexuality, in an effort to dissect and then construct a new emancipatory and uniting concept of gender in El Salvador. These mens genuine and tireless commitment to the work has earned them much esteem as respected allies in the movement for gender equity in the country. The international faith-based organization F y Alegra (Faith and Joy Movement for Integral Popular Education and Social Development) does groundbreaking work in the area of youth violence prevention. Working in the country to empower children and youth through popular education since 1969, F y Alegra today channels this methodology to address the situation of growing poverty, marginalization and violence in El Salvador. Specifically, they facilitate formal and informal spaces of learning and formation as a mechanism of outreach to youth in marginalized
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace communities, oftentimes at risk of violence or already involved in gangs. These spaces are
106
designated as neutral safe zones, welcome to children and youth from any gang territory. And this neutrality is respected by all because of long-running relationships of trust that the organizations social workers have established with youth and families in the communities. In this way, they work to break deep-rooted patterns of violence based on vengeance. And at the same time, they work to support, empower and train youth based on their individual needs, interests and natural abilities, offering these youth tools to help them construct a more hopeful future. While working in some of the most conflict-ridden and marginalized communities, they have earned the sustained respect of other organizations working in the field and also of the people within the communities they serve. And a fifth and final example of community groups who have seen great success in peacebuilding is that of the Circle of Reconciliation. This is a group of individuals from a rural community who through participation in a process of reflection and analysis have joined together to overcome deeply-rooted historical social divisions to form a community council based on values of inclusion, solidarity, trust, sincerity, cooperation and friendship. The purpose of this circle is to facilitate a permanent space within which the community can together address its shared conflicts and needs, all the while fostering processes of organization, empowerment and unification amongst themselves. The Circle has adopted symbols and rituals from the Mayan tradition to set the tone and dictate the procedural norms of their gatherings. They open their meetings with a moment of silence while focusing on a candle in the middle of the circle, they bless the group with incense in hopes of a productive and loving meeting, and they pass a talking stick to indicate who has the right to speak and who has the right to be actively listening. The Circle members take turns serving as the guardian of the word, facilitating the passing of the talking stick and the respectful sharing of the groups space. And each week, the Circles meetings rotate location so that all sectors of the community are visited equally. This initiative was originally prompted by a local NGO
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace seeking to facilitate the reintegration of the communitys gang-involved youth through this
107
innovative (yet centuries-old) approach to community organizing. But in time, the members of the Circle decided to step away from the NGOs guiding presence, and they have now claimed the space as their own. They have adopted the indigenous methodology, have become a self-sustaining entity, have achieved extraordinary and growing levels of solidarity, were successful in integrating their gang-involved youth into the communitys collective conflict resolution process, and have learned to advocate for their needs and get their voices heard by government institutions. The foundation of this groups success is summarized by one of its members when he reflects, I feel like there is a lot of love amongst the people here. And its not about thinking only of my own needs anymore, rather about what we need as a community. In conclusion, civil society has a wealth of wisdom to share regarding what works in peacebuilding, based on its own diversity of positive experiences in the work through the years. But the state instead chooses to ignore these experiences, asserts one human rights worker, which could very well serve as the foundation for a nation-wide peace process. Yet while civil society remains doing this work alone with negligible budgets on a very centralized local level, it will be very difficult [to create a more widespread peace]. As the participants have plainly noted, the government is so disconnected from civil society and disinterested in tempering the violence that they are not supporting these efforts. Nor are they looking to civil society in search of best practices to use in their own work. Factors that Contribute to the Success of Peacebuilding Efforts. It is fitting, then, to ask peace builders from civil society about what they believe to be the most important elements of a successful peacebuilding effort. Considering that our participant sample consists of precisely this demographic, their opinions carry particular weight in this instance.
108
While always acknowledging the significance of each individual response, the participants principal contributions can more or less be broken down into three thematic groups. The first group addresses the attitude and frame of mind an individual or group takes when engaging peace work. Above all, their motivations must be based on a foundation of respect for all people. Focusing on this basic respect leads to an appreciation of the inherent and equal value of all human beings, inspiring a desire to work for the common good of all people. Understanding that the wellbeing of all people is deeply interconnected inspires a necessary enthusiasm and zeal for the work. In essence, for peace work to be successful, it is crucial that people work based on a foundation of respect and an unswerving pursuit of the common good. Secondly, if we truly seek the common good of a people, it is important to understand the reality of the most vulnerable people in society. It is of the utmost importance to be near the communities, to come to understand how the majority of the people live, and to work from the base. To approach understanding of how other people live we have to summon the courage to draw close to each other, get to know one another, unite, and attempt to form a certain sense of community. And to do this, we must dialogue, ask people about their lives, and sincerely and actively listen. One artist and youth outreach worker spoke enthusiastically about the importance of getting to know one another: We all need to get to know each other! We need to all be friends! That way we can break down our stereotypes and social barriers. And we come to realize that the other has a beautiful, loving heart, too. The problem is that we dont know each other. But when we become friends, we cant hate each other anymore. If we were to dedicate ourselves to meeting people, sharing time together, eating soup together, going to the market, getting rid of our double standards... Imagine, when [politicians] sit down to create a policy that would be harmful to the people, if they were to
109
remember all those shared experiences? They would think, How could I hurt Fulana12 like this?...No way, shes such a good cook! Or Fulano, whose hammock I broke?! We need to become friends. Thats all. I think theres no better secret than that. No one would intentionally hurt a friend. Furthermore, only through asking and listening can we do an accurate and comprehensive analysis and be able to truly address the root causes of our communitys violence. To carry out a good intervention, we have to do a profound analysis of the rituals, myths and traditions that are deeply rooted in the people that they dont want to change, noted a seasoned violence prevention worker. This process begs teamwork and organization, as well, as it can at first be difficult to come together and want to share our stories. But the important part is that we must realize that our society is only as strong as its most vulnerable member. Therefore, we must draw close, share our experiences and learn from each other, and work together based on shared understandings of our common needs as a people. Thirdly, our work must be done with an energy and vision that facilitate the long-term sustainability of our efforts for peace. We must work with inspired creativity, stemming from a true conviction for the cause of peace in our society. One rural youth worker reflects, In this work, it sometimes feels like were swimming against the current, up river. It can be really discouraging. But we have to find a way to keep finding new strength and energy for the work. It is essential to employ a perspective of prevention, interrupting patterns of violence and laying the groundwork for a peaceful future. And we need to work for transformative change that is sustainable through time. This is facilitated through employing a model of empowerment by raising awareness and educating as widely as possible, providing people with tools to support themselves and to incite positive change in the face of violence or injustice, and training them in how to teach others to do the same.
12
Fulana and Fulano are generic names in Spanish, used to refer to any person similar to John Doe or Jane Doe.
110
Simply put, the interview participants assert that successful peacebuilding efforts are those based on an earnest pursuit of the common good of a people, through a process of active sharing and listening amongst all sectors of society (with an emphasis placed on listening to the most vulnerable sectors of the population), and always with the broader vision of making initiatives for peace participatory, collaborative, empowering and sustainable through time. Dynamics detrimental to peacebuilding efforts. As peace workers from civil society have keen insight regarding what contributes to success in peacebuilding, they also have extensive experience regarding factors that contribute to its failure. Citing the majority of the governments efforts to curb violence, extrajudicial killings, and societys exclusion of youth involved in gangs and delinquency, the interview participants reiterated the unequivocal damaging effects of utilizing violence and repression to curb violence. Noting that attitudes of violence at times even infiltrate the thinking of peace workers in the country, one human rights worker commented: How many of our conscious, progressive activist colleagues openly express support of killing off gang-involved youth? These are even people who have lived through the war, have survived torture but they dont understand the connection [between this violent attitude and those of the war]. And a gender activist added, All expressions of liberation here in El Salvador have been violent. Its contradictory that we want to liberate the country of violence through violence. These opinions are further substantiated by endless empirical studies that consistently point to the fact that violence only breeds more violence. Another central concept in peoples evaluations was that efforts to curb violence and build peace are bound to fail if there is only partial motivation and/or analysis behind these initiatives, ensuring the implementation of measures that only contemplate the short-term, are unsustainable, or are palliative and do not address the issues root causes. A community worker with extensive
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace experience in violence prevention supports this idea through a critique of the mandatory military service proposal for high-risk youth: Prevention should be done on a continuous daily basis, for an entire lifetime. It must be done throughout centuries in order to eradicate [...] the entire series of violent cultural
111
conducts that we have developed over the years. In the past 11 years, Ive only just begun to make a significant impact with the families and youth I work with. And theres no way you can achieve the same work in six months through instead employing military officers. That is creating discipline through force, and it doesnt work. In addition, oftentimes poorly thought-out initiatives that lack a focus on empowerment cause more harm than good, in that they end up creating relationships of dependence on charity rather than enabling people to thrive by means of their own inherent capacities. Finally, many people mentioned a serious downfall to peace work that is committed by groups and individuals from all sectors of society. Specifically, motivations fueled by individualism and greed hurt the work for peace. When this individualism is manifested in isolation and estrangement amongst organizations working on similar topics, the countrys movement for peace is impaired; valuable efforts are simply duplicated, and the work becomes competitive rather than collaborative. An educator explains: On behalf of civil society, there are several good efforts being made, but theyre pretty isolated. The organizations work separately, each one seeing what benefits they can reap from the work. But if all the youth organizations here in the country were to truly work hand in hand, their work would have a much broader expanse, and together they would be a living force! But these efforts remain isolated, and they dont advance. The same phenomenon is mirrored in the distance that the government keeps from civil society, limiting communication and exchange about the reality in the communities and how the states work
112
for the people can be improved. Furthermore, self-seeking individualism can corrupt peace efforts when people attempt to profit from a situation of violence by scraping funds off the top of projects, by accepting bribes, or by disingenuously working to end a conflict situation because their job in fact depends upon the violences perpetuation. In simple terms, repression and violence, poor analysis and lack of commitment, as well as individualism and self-seeking behavior all significantly contribute to the downfall of any peacebuilding effort.
Proposals on how to Build a Culture of Peace in El Salvador After reflecting on the previous interview questions, the participants had no loss for words when asked to speak of what must be done in order to create a true peace in El Salvador. To no surprise, their responses reflected much of the ideas expressed in previous sections of the interview. Proposals for the State. Building on their reflections regarding the governments historic and current work to reduce violence in the country, they emphatically reiterated that the governments focus is essentially all wrong: violence and repression are not the answer. The primary foundational message in the participants narratives is that the government must make a fundamental change of heart; to successfully build peace in El Salvador, the state must first set an example of nonviolence in attitude and action, rooted in a genuine respect for all people. It is of the utmost importance that the state values each persons inherent worth as a human being and adopts a heartfelt pursuit of the common good. This paradigm shift precedes all other proposals, and it serves as the foundational principle for the rest of the work that the interviewees propose the government undertake. Following from this essential paradigm shift, the government must make a true commitment to creating real change in the country. And as stated previously and was again reiterated in this
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace section of the interview, a peaceful common good is only achieved by drawing close to the most
113
vulnerable people in society. It is crucial that the people in power go to the communities, walk side by side with people, ask them about their lives, and actively listen and learn from their life experiences. The government must commit to initiating and sustaining open and fluid communication with the people. They must prioritize the formation of relationships, undertake a genuine inquiry into how the majority of people live in the country, and work to develop of an empathetic understanding of their realities. One community social worker added that: [Peace] processes should be continuous. They should be in situ. They should be participatory involving the family, involving all the communities members. They should be facilitated in the community, where the people are. We want the communities themselves to become therapeutic and healing. This process is necessary, reflect the interviewees, as it facilitates endogenous community-focused development in peace work. Only through active listening and thoughtful analysis can El Salvadors culture of violence be addressed from its roots, which is the only way to truly and sustainably transform such a conflict. With that said, the participants offered several of their own concrete proposals regarding different action areas that they view as crucial to building a sustained positive peace in the country. While each individual idea mentioned is valuable and worth exploring, here I will look specifically at a handful of thematic areas that frequently surfaced in the interviews. By and far, the most emphatically-emphasized concept was that the government must tenaciously address the situation of inequity in the country (the direct byproduct of El Salvadors historic generalized exclusion). Again, this is an unrealistic goal unless there is a significant change of heart on behalf of the powerful few in the country. But the inequity is currently serving as the linchpin to the countrys violence, and the effort to create social, political and economic equity in the
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace country is an essential element to El Salvadors continued peace process. Regarding the work for
114
social equity, people mentioned the importance of promoting the respect and inclusion of all people (in particular groups that have been historically marginalized based on gender, sexuality, socioeconomic background, ethnicity, age, etc.) and working to break down existing stigmas and stereotypes that foster discriminatory attitudes and behaviors. Along this vein, Solidarity should be a policy of the state, one human rights activist added. [The government] must work to regenerate this communal sense amongst the people. (How are they going to just sit back and watch our communities disintegrate?!) Regarding economic equity, it is important for the government to focus on narrowing the gaping wealth disparities that exist in the country. To do this, people recommend working to ensure equal access to opportunities (including education, employment, credit, etc.), modifying policies to support a more equitable resource distribution, creating jobs, and ensuring just treatment, salaries and pensions for workers. And regarding political equity, interviewees stressed the need to encourage and facilitate the participation of all people in government processes. It is critical to reduce the sovereignty of the Salvadoran government and work to ensure that El Salvador is a true democracy in practice and not just in word. But while the political and social structure remains the same, the situations that generate poverty, exclusion, marginalization, and social inequality and injustices will never change. That is definitive, concludes an ex-combatant. Many people also highlighted the critical importance of the government taking a firm stance of nonviolence if they wish to truly make transformative change towards peace. Their policies, rhetoric and conduct must clearly reflect this philosophy; they must first be the change they wish to see in the world if they hope to hold any authority or respect in the work they are undertaking. According to the interviewees, a few immediate changes that need to happen in this area include the closing of
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace private weapons stores, the prohibition of the bearing of arms, and the demilitarization of public spaces. A gender activist argues this point, noting:
115
After living through a war, the best thing we could do for our society is to disarm ourselves and do everything possible to ensure that people dont have weapons in their homes. Its so easy to buy guns, see them, use them. People who have them are going to use them; it makes them feel powerful. It is crucial that the government model nonviolence in their words and actions with much integrity, if they wish for the rest of the country to follow suit. Another common theme in the participants narratives was the need to place higher priority on the wellbeing of children and youth, as they will be the foundation of the countrys future. They encourage doing this through the implementation of a multitude of educational projects focusing on topics such as human rights, identity formation, historical memory, cultural promotion, peace education, and sexual and reproductive health. In addition, there was much support for the formation and promotion of vocational training programs as a legitimate and valued form of education. A group of youth from a poor rural community also added that: Instead of spending money on things that arent going to lead kids to do good things (because teaching kids violence is not going to teach them to be peaceful), they should instead open community-based cultural centers, ask kids what they like and what they want to learn, and then teach them the things theyre interested in. There was also widespread general sentiment that the national education system is defunct and needs a thorough overhaul citing critical deficiencies in pedagogy, critical thinking formation, civics instruction, values formation, and the perpetuation of the machista culture, among many others. Supporting these sentiments, one educator stated:
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Our public education system needs to be turned on its head, so that it actually works to
116
develop the humanity, spirit, positivity, and internal growth of a person so that kids learn to help the people around them, how to be tolerant, how to be generous and not expect anything in return, how to respect themselves to then be able to respect others. In addition, many people noted that the government needs to make a resolute effort to implement programs and to project attitudes that support the inclusion and reintegration of gang-involved and incarcerated youth into mainstream society (for example, tattoo removal programs, job insertion initiatives, educational opportunities, mental health attention, and the encouragement of inclusive, non-discriminatory attitudes). Yet another theme that ran throughout the interviews is that of placing a new value on the mental and physical health of individuals and communities. On a macro level, the Ministry of Health needs significant reform through eradicating internal corruption, lowering the prices of medicine, ensuring that its hospitals and clinics are fully equipped with supplies and competent doctors, guaranteeing just salaries for their employees, and ensuring that their services are consistent and accessible to all. The government should also enthusiastically undertake the implementation of extensive educational and preventive health programs in an effort to empower communities and minimize the future occurrence and spread of diseases and illness. In addition, there needs to be a greater promotion of mental health attention through the creation of programs that are accessible to all. An ex-combatant added: And we should do here what should have been initiated at the end of the war a permanent national mental health program. Here, a high percentage of the population with serious psychological deviations because mental health has never truly been addressed in the country. Our entire generation witnessed atrocities. All of our people are hypertensive, diabetic, neurotic, schizophrenic because of all we lived through during the war. And all
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace that trauma is heightened now with todays violence added to the equation. We urgently
117
need a universal mental health program for our people to benefit from the most excluded to the wealthiest of our society. The government should also carry out public awareness campaigns to reduce the stigma of seeking out mental health attention and to help people understand its benefits. Along that vein, people also emphasized that programs to facilitate processes of community and national healing and reconciliation would be of great benefit to the greater population, as injustices that have remained unaddressed through the years have left deep emotional scars in Salvadoran society and continue to fuel hatred and resentment. Along the lines of physical health, the government should work to create more open green spaces to promote wellbeing through recreation. Lastly, environmental protection should also be prioritized, taking into account the long-term health benefits it offers to a people (in addition to the importance of caring for the earth for its own sake). A few of the proposed environmental projects include the promotion of an ecotourism that truly works to protect natural areas, increasing natural disaster prevention efforts, participating in programs granting debt forgiveness for environmental protection efforts, and improving, diversifying and promoting use of the public transportation system. And finally, participants collectively agreed that the Salvadoran government urgently needs to establish true Rule of Law in the country in order to enact justice, eradicate corruption and end impunity. As long as there is negligible accountability to El Salvadors justice system, people will continue committing violent crimes, internal government corruption and high-level organized crime will persist, and the government will continue to receive only minimal respect and authority from the general population. As long as we fail to reverse this historic pattern of injustice, our society will forever be governed by systems of violence, affirmed a young member of the community of sexual
118
diversity. Establishing this universally-applied order and accountability within Salvadoran society is another essential cornerstone in the countrys pursuit of peaceful cultural transformation. Interview participants also placed an overarching emphasis on the importance of working with a long-term vision that contemplates the sustained impacts of the work. To ensure the long-term sustainability of the governments initiatives, interviewees recommend placing much emphasis on infusing their efforts with empowerment and education. Ideally, individuals and communities in time become self-sustainable through this empowerment, equipped with the tools necessary to thrive through their own capacities. Ideally, they also eventually contribute to and strengthen the countrys continuing work for peace. As mentioned previously, working from a standpoint of prevention and education also serves to interrupt patterns of violence and lay the foundation for a peaceful future. An educator elaborates that: The family needs preparation, to be strengthened. We need more and better jobs. We need recreational centers and community organizations to facilitate this recreation. We need schools that have stronger relationships with the community, who keep tabs on the kids and are open seven days a week with complementary programs of art, sports and youth counseling. We need more people to listen to our at-risk youth. (But there is no one! No one is prepared to support these kids.) These are things that can be done with minimal funding; all thats needed is a strong emphasis on violence prevention and an unyielding confidence in the peace process. And we need all sectors of society to unite behind this cause, setting aside our individual interests and focusing on the needs of our country. Finally, in an effort to make the countrys work for peace sustainable in the long-term, it is crucial that the government commit to working in an integral manner, collaborating with multiple stakeholders, supporting community initiatives, and employing calculated and comprehensive approaches to the work.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Several people also emphasized that assuming the assimilation of the concepts and projects listed above the government needs to reflect these new commitments by adjusting the national budget accordingly. Proposals for Civil Society. While the interview participants generally praised the work
119
civil society is currently doing to further the cause of peace in the country, careful examination of the data also reveals that civil society is partly responsible for augmenting many of the root causes of the violence. There are many things within civil societys capacity and function that must be done in order to create cultural change. To begin with, similarly to the government, civil society also needs to adopt some new attitudes and leave others behind. In this case, people must set aside prejudices, fear, hopelessness and apathy and exchange them for a respect for all people, belief in the inherent good and the potential that exists in each person, courage, energy and confidence in their ability to make change, and a sense of responsibility for the state of their family and community. It is time that civil society realizes that they are key players in the countrys work for peace and that their actions (and inactions) help dictate the course of the country either towards continued violence or towards a future of peace. It is time for civil society as a whole to take responsibility for their role in the perpetuation of the violence, as well as to take responsibility for the wellbeing of their communities. A young member of the community of sexual diversity reflects: [Peace is] the responsibility of each one of us. Because its true: there is a culture of violence, but there is also a culture of peace. But the culture of peace must be constructed. Its not a gift youre handed; rather, its created through the dedicated work of each individual who desires change. And as I tell you, this change is personal. And then it becomes contagious as in when you are in the present of a change agent, and their energy and commitment motivates others and spreads. And then this motivation spreads to others,
120
and change starts happening on greater levels. But this peace is the result of much work and each persons acceptance of a life-long responsibility to the well-being of society as a whole. And a spiritual leaders adds, I believe that this countrys transformation towards peace, justice and equity will only come through the people a critical sum of people who decide to live their lives completely based on principles and values. This is what will someday transform our country. With a total of approximately 7.6 million Salvadorans in the world, certainly this large of a group could create great change in the country if they were to unite and mobilize under a common cause. For this reason, civil societys willingness to adopt these new perspectives is quite consequential, as the subsequent proposals and the success of the peace movement are only realistically possible if this foundational outlook is first in place. Building on these principles, the interviewees suggest that the most important first step civil society must take in its process is to unite and counteract the growing tendencies of isolation and the weakening of El Salvadors social fabric. A young artist with indigenous roots asserts: In order to break the paradigms of violence, we have to first see each other. We have to meet each other where were at and talk with one another. And say I want this or I dont want this, I believe this or I dont believe this. And we must do this until we hear each other, see each other and understand if we converge on different topics or not. Without this process, nothing will change. We need a space within which everyones personal struggles fit, and where all of us can see where we fit into the work for peace. And we must unite. Overall, interviewees emphatically support the notion that people draw together, speak to one another, get to know each other, break down existing divisions, strengthen community bonds, and become friends. In coming to care for each other and know each others histories, we in time develop a sense of mutual trust and responsibility, as well as a conviction to create change to better the lives of our
121
fellow community members. A rural manual laborer reflects on his own experiences in developing a sense of responsibility to his community: Once we fall in love with each other, we realize that the physical space of the community in which we live belongs to no one more or less than our very selves. Because the people outside of our community arent going to care how we live, how we develop, what needs we have, what suffering we experience, what we can achieve. And once we discover this and decide to move forward together, we develop a great value for what belongs to us. And for that reason, we come to wholeheartedly adopt caring for it and improving it. [...] Then its all about joining together as one united force to foster our community. Once these community bonds are formed, the following step is to organize and mobilize. As an organized body, people carry more weight and can impact change at a greater level. Organization gives groups significant leverage in advocating for their shared needs and rights, and it fosters healthy community development processes. Communities need to organize, and then they need to mobilize to make change and take on responsibility for the wellbeing of their people. This change can only happen on a widespread level, however, when people set aside their apathy and distrust, unite with their fellow community members, organize themselves, and collectively insist on societal transformation. This movement for peace necessitates everyones active, hopeful and committed participation. The participants suggest that once this unity and organization is formed in communities, there are two general areas of work in which community groups must focus their energy. The first involves working with zeal to further strengthen and foster their community (and even the greater Salvadoran and world communities when possible), and the other is to sustain an ongoing social monitoring of the government to keep them accountable and true to the public.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace A multitude of strategies were listed throughout the participants narratives regarding
122
activities within the strengthening of the communities, but I will focus on a few of the principal themes. First of all, civil society must place top priority on the education, training and empowerment of its communities. Seen as a method of violence prevention, it is recommended that they promote a culture of education, learn and teach others about the constitution and human rights, work to revive El Salvadors historical memory, promote culture and arts, and promote critical thinking. The more education and training that is done in communities, the more enabled these communities are to grow and thrive in a self-sustaining manner. In addition, it is important for communities to focus on breaking down social divisions (whether at the individual, group, community or national level) to foster the strengthening of social bonds. An important part of this process includes working for personal and relational healing and reconciliation. We need to do much healing and damage reduction in the face of all these neoliberal policies, the exclusion and the marginalization. We need to reincorporate all the youth and the families that have been excluded over time, reflects a community social worker. As much as possible, it is to societys great benefit to promote the establishment of mental health programs, to create spaces within which people feel safe and free to practice emotional self-expression, and even to offer spiritual support when appropriate. In essence, as concisely stated by a few interviewees, we simply need to focus on loving each other. Many people also spoke to the importance of civil society reclaiming their communities youth. This begins by overcoming generalized fear of youth, remembering that they came from us, realizing that they also each have their dreams and heartbreaks, and resolutely deciding to seek them out, draw them back into our lives, and care for them deeply. From there, civil society must focus much of their energy on revitalizing this generation that has been so marginalized and abused in the past
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace years. A young member of the community of sexual diversity who has experienced much marginalization in her life adds:
123
We, as youth, make up over 50% of the population. We want to work, but we just need the tools and support to do so. [If we are educated now,] we will come to be conscious adults. These ten years are crucial. Because if we dont manage to educate and create awareness amongst the population (and particularly amongst youth), we are going to have even more problems; in ten years, well have even more people begging in the street, more delinquency, and more homeless people. Well eventually disappear. With this said, it is crucial to work on identity development with children and youth, helping them dream and set goals for their futures. An ex-gang member reflected on the importance of this identity formation, saying: Someone once said to me that we have a lost generation one which if you ask them What do you want to be when you grow up? they have no response. But its not because they are lazy or drunks, but because nobody ever told them that they could think and dream. If a young person knows who they are, where they come from, and what that all means they can come to see reality in another light. With this in mind, we must do everything within our power to create opportunities for them to study, work, receive vocational trainings, participate in community activities, and have positive and healthy socialization experiences with other youth. And we must also work to train them in organizing and advocacy so that they learn to become agents of positive change as well. And finally, we must work to interrupt cultural patterns of violence and replace them with ones of peace. In order to do this, we must begin by individually working to change the way we think about and act towards other people paying close attention to our thoughts and actions, noticing when we are projecting or behaving negatively towards others, and then working to modify and prevent those
124
patterns from occurring again. One peace worker adds, I believe that the people, civil society, are the people who can create a true culture of peace here. And we, Salvadorans, have to do it like it happened in India Gandhi style. In changing our own patterns, we will then be able to influence the tone and culture of our families or those we live with. And then we can scale this effort up to the community level. But, as participants have mentioned several times before, we must first and foremost be the change we wish to see in the world. As stated earlier, the collective sense amongst most interview participants is that community groups second main responsibility is to sustain a permanent social monitoring of government functioning. As described within this papers working definition of civil society and echoed by all participants in one form or another, one of civil societys principal functions is to keep the government accountable to the public, ensuring that they maintain transparency, integrity, honor, and faithfulness to the peoples shared vision for the country. Another benefit of community organizing (and ideally eventually uniting with other communities to form large organized networks) is that in this process, groups voices are generally heard more loudly than those of individuals, and they have more power to capture the publics attention when they do encounter problems with the manner in which the government is fulfilling its duties (or not). Remember: its a lie that the highest-up has all the power. We can also create peace in our own ways, on our own terms, added a humble rural farmer. In this role as watchdog, interviewees call on civil society to advocate for active continuous communication between the government and the greater population regarding the reality and needs on the ground, as well as transparency on behalf of the government. If the government doesnt promote dialogue with civil society, we are responsible to make sure it happens, affirms a youth activist. It is also crucial that civil society organize to demand the application of Rule of Law in the country, as well as the practice of true respect of human rights. Lastly, civil society must overcome any fear of retribution, unite, and courageously denounce all acts of corruption.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Proposals for Other Key Actors. A few unforeseen proposals emerged throughout the
125
course of the interviews as well, citing the crucial roles of the churches and of the private sector in the work for peace in El Salvador. The driving points from these proposals serve to emphasize the great need for a heartfelt commitment and collaboration on behalf of absolutely all sectors of society, as well as the central importance of the adoption and promotion of attitudes of inclusion, respect, and justice at all levels of society. It is very important that we unite amongst all sectors of society that we all set our individual interests to the side in exchange for a common interest for the wellbeing of the country as a whole, concludes an environmentalist.
Principal Strengths of El Salvador that will contribute to Successful Peacebuilding Bringing the interview to a close with hope by reflecting on El Salvadors assets, participants principally emphasized the great variety of strengths that Salvadorans possess as a people. People recounted that both despite of and because of the years that El Salvador has spent in conflict throughout its history, Salvadorans are known to be warm, community-oriented, clever and resourceful, hard-working, resilient and strong of spirit. They have a great commitment to their families and communities, and they have extensive familiarity with organizing for change and working for peace. Reflecting on the strength Salvadorans often draw from this unity, an educator in an urban neighborhood renowned for its violence, commented: We are deeply grounded in our communities. Compared to other cultures, we feel strongest when we join together amongst ourselves. And we have to take advantage of that in our work for peace. [...] This countrys best moments have been when we have united our efforts for change. Upon review of this extensive list generated by the interviewees, despite the great task at hand, it is quite clear that Salvadorans have more than enough capacity to create peace in their country. All
126
thats needed to redirect the course of El Salvadors history is a critical mass of people, deciding that now is the time for change.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Chapter Seven: Conclusions This study was originally propelled by my own intimate encounters with violence in El Salvador and my personal motivations to seeing peace in the country. These experiences spurred
127
further inquiry and observation of a widespread culture of violence in El Salvador. I sensed a deep connection between the countrys violence and its infamous historic economic, social and political exclusion by the hands of the powerful elite. And I posited that the violence was only continuing to worsen because of this same original practice of exclusion that still exists at every level of society. So I decided to ask the people who have been excluded the people who live face-to-face with the violence every day why they think the situation of violence has only worsened over time and what they think needs to be done. I spoke specifically with people from civil society who work for peace in the country in one form or another. They very generously shared their time, experiences, sorrows, wisdom and dreams with me. Their testimonies and their conviction for peace are to thank for the story that is told here. What they revealed to me is that violence does truly occur at all levels of society, and everyone is touched by multiple forms of violence on a daily basis. They also affirmed that, yes, gang violence is a significant problem but in truth, most of the violence happens at the societal level and is exerted in one way or another by the government and the powerful elite. Several people even went so far as to directly point out the medias deliberate scapegoating of the gangs to serve as a smoke screen for the illicit activity being conducted by high-level politicians and businesspeople. Listening to their stories and analysis, it is clear that the countrys historic exclusion is indeed at the heart of the countrys violence. This widespread exclusion has over time created a vortex within which violence is reproduced and perpetuated. And each new social ill that arises as a side effect of this exclusion has only served to compound and complexify the countrys violence. In
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace time, the historic normalization of violence has come to permeate the Salvadoran culture and has
128
forced people to adopt violent mechanisms for survival in response to this enduring social context. In examining the work that has been done in the country to reduce violence and build peace, it was clearly revealed that, in essence, the government has done a poor job of dealing with the violence oftentimes in fact exacerbating the situation through their violent and repressive tactics. On the other hand, civil society was generally praised for doing great work for peace in the country, but they have few resources and minimal-to-no support from the government in their work. There is an enormous disconnect between the government and civil society groups involved in peacebuilding, which is due to a blatant disinterest on behalf of the government to consult on best practices, collaborate, or support their efforts. Therefore, the cause for peace does not advance in El Salvador. Since few others seek their invaluable wisdom, I asked these seasoned peace workers what they believe to be the most important elements of successful peacebuilding work. Their responses revealed that, in essence, the foundation of good work is that it must be motivated by a respect for all people and a genuine pursuit of the common good. From there, it is of the utmost importance that people draw close, listen to each other, communicate, strive to understand each others realities, and collaborate in the work, based on a shared understanding of the violences root causes. And finally, the work must be done with a vision that seeks to ensure its long-term sustainability, particularly through efforts of prevention and empowerment. Furthermore, the people I spoke with were also quite explicit in naming certain factors that significantly detract from any work for peace. These include the use of repression and violence, working with a mindset of individualism and greed, and implementing superficial or palliative projects that create dependence and are unsustainable in the long-term.
129
And then I asked them what they think needs to happen in El Salvador in order to advance in our cause and create a true cultural transformation towards peace. They all agreed that both the state and civil society have much work to do if we are to one day achieve this peace. And both groups must begin their work by making a significant shift in paradigm and worldview. The state must first adopt a new motivation to their work based on respect for all people and the pursuit of the common good. From there, they must go to the communities, engage people, intently listen to them as they speak of their daily realities, and do thorough and continuous analysis of the violence based on these stories to ensure that the work addresses the situations true root causes. A few of the main focus areas that the peace workers listed as top priorities include working to reverse the grave inequities that exist in society, adopting a stance of nonviolence, fostering the integral wellbeing of children and youth, promoting mental and physical health, and enacting a true Rule of Law. They also added that all of these topics should be addressed with the goal of long-term sustainability through practices of prevention and empowerment. And very importantly the national budget should be duly adjusted to reflect these new priorities. Civil societys crucial change of heart involves overcoming fear, adopting a genuine respect for all people, having confidence in their ability to make change in society, and assuming a sense of responsibility for the wellbeing of their families and communities. From there, their main tasks are to unite (in an effort to reconstruct El Salvadors deteriorating social fabric), as well as to organize and mobilize as communities. In organizing, the community groups should focus on strengthening and nurturing their communities (through education and empowerment, healing social divisions, reclaiming their youth, and breaking violent cultural patterns) as well as keeping government transparent, honest and accountable to the public (by insisting on clear and continuous communication, advocating for their communities needs, demanding Rule of Law, and courageously denouncing acts of corruption).
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Through the course of the interviews, people also mentioned the important roles that the
130
churches and the private sector play in the countrys peace process. These comments, in particular, drove home the idea that for peace to be achieved, it is crucial that all sectors of society adopt a true commitment to change, be open and willing to work in collaboration, and be motivated by attitudes of respect and inclusion. As we closed our conversations, the peace workers shared with me what most admire about El Salvador and what they believe to be its greatest strengths in its work for peace. Their long list essentially communicates that El Salvadors principal assets stem from the Salvadorans great strength of spirit, their connection and commitment to community, and their strong desire to see peace in their country. I initiated this project motivated by a great aching for peace. The majority of this interview process was heavy and sobering for us all. And the violence in El Salvador still plagues society at a widespread level as I type these words. But now at the end of this long process of analysis and reflection, it is quite clear that all of the resources needed to create peace in El Salvador already exist, and Salvadorans have excess capacity to create peace in their country. The hope, conviction, knowledge, wisdom, talent, resilience, compassion, creativity, strength of spirit, commitment to family and community, and history of mobilization and struggle all currently reside within and amongst the Salvadoran people. There is great and realistic potential for cultural transformation in El Salvador. All that is needed now is a catalyst to set things into action a changing of the winds embodied in a genuine desire for peace by a critical mass of concerned citizens.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Post Scriptum: Gang Truce of March 2012
131
After conducting and processing the research for this study, significant contextual changes occurred in El Salvador. In March of 2012, the leaders of El Salvadors principal gangs the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) and the two factions of the 18th Street gang declared a truce. In the three months since the truce was announced, the government has reported a 60% decrease in the murder rate (from a previous average of 14 homicides a day, to an average of 6 homicides daily since the truce). Days before the announcement of the truce was leaked, 30 top gang leaders were transferred from the maximum security prison to lower-security facilities. They were also granted other basic privileges and improvements in prison conditions. And in May, President Funes announced an agreement with certain members of the private sector, sealing a commitment to hiring gang-involved youth in an effort to support their social and economic reintegration into society. That same day, gangs announced that they would end gang recruitment in schools and consider soon thereafter ending extortions (Valencia R., 2012). Catholic bishop Monsignor Fabio Colindres and Raul Mijango (former guerrilla commander, member off the Peoples Revolutionary Army, and former member of the parliament) are credited with mediating and negotiating an end to the violence. And while the government initially maintained that it at no time negotiated with the gangs, the freshly-instated Minister of Justice and Public Security David Mungua Pays eventually acknowledged that the truce was part of his strategy (Sanz & Martnez, El trabajo de monseor Colindres, 2012). The gangs top leaders have united, composed, and released press statements twice since the truce, in which they ask society for forgiveness for the pain and suffering they have caused throughout the years. They also publicly appeal to society for help in reintegrating back into mainstream society through creating jobs and opportunities for study. We accept our errors, comments one gang leader in an interview, but we ask that people give us another opportunity to
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace convert ourselves into tax-paying citizens who go to the park, the movies or the beach with our
132
kids. The biggest obstacles they see to their reintegration are the deeply-seeded prejudice and bias that people in society hold against tattooed gang youth, despite public rejection their past lives of violence and crime (Valencia R., 2012). People are generally grateful for the decrease in violence, yet they are skeptical about the truces long-term sustainability. Some question whether the gangs words and intentions are sincere. Others wonder how much control the incarcerated gang leaders actually have over the extensive network of cliques and other personalities that make up the gangs today. And yet others worry that even if the truce can be maintained over time, this approach to peacebuilding still fails to genuinely address the social, political and economic exclusion at the root of much of the countrys violence13 (including the many other forms of violence that are commonly overlooked). Other people simply are not interested in giving another chance to these groups who have caused so much death, destruction and suffering in the country for the past 20 years (Valencia R., 2012). Several people who are intimately familiar with the situation of the gangs in El Salvador are highly optimistic about the gangs intentions but skeptical of peoples capacity to embrace them, offer them viable alternatives for employment, and truly integrate them back into society. Mario Vega, head pastor at Elim Christian Mission, affirms, I do believe that the leaders of the gangs are earnestly involved in this process, because giving ones word implies the highest code of respect, and they dont speak just to speak; however, they could change a commitment an any moment if they feel they are not being listened to or respected. This could be an area of potential ruin for the truce, as civil society as a whole is clearly not convinced by the sudden turn of events, nor are they yet willing to make any significant sacrifices for the gangs. Furthermore, while President Funess
13
This is a clear priority for the gangs, however, as some of their top leaders have explained that many of their public actions in recent years have been to call societys attention to the historic systematic exclusion that has consistently worsened the living conditions of the poor majority (Los Voceros Nacionales de la Mara Salvatrucha MSX3 y Pandilla 18, 2012).
133
discourse has gradually become more open and liberal around the idea of reinsertion, his words have yet to receive any follow-through, already three months past the truces inception (Valencia R., 2012). The gangs are a product of Salvadoran society, reflects Rodrigo Bolaos (general manager of the Salvadoran factory League Central America that employs former gang youth), and they are therefore the responsibility of Salvadoran society. The kids in the gangs werent born in Korea, he remarks. Theyre from here. This is a problem of our own. They are our Salvadoran brothers. Society has to understand why this all began, and theres got to be some capacity to forgive. Ral Mijango, truce facilitator, agrees with Bolaoss sentiment and adds, Weve got to be frank the gangs are waiting for a response from Salvadoran society and the state, but the most difficult part will be for society to stop looking to the past, accumulating hatred and resentment. One of the biggest challenges will be to see whether Salvadoran society can assimilate the idea of the gangs transforming overnight from being a top enemy of the state to just another social group (Valencia R., 2012). The gangs appear to be ready and willing to make a sincere attempt to reintegrate into society. The government and the people, however, seem to be the groups who are least prepared to accept their incorporation back into everyday life. Once again, we see here that even with innovative and bold approaches to reducing violence and creating peace, their relative success is endangered if we do not first work to change the fundamental attitudes, stereotypes and worldviews that perpetuate closed-mindedness, fear and resentment. The recent developments around this gang truce further reiterate the importance of asking a series of questions to evaluate a plans long-term chances of success and sustainability. First, is this process guided by respect for all and a pursuit of the common good? Based on the information currently available to the public, it appears to be. According to an interview with Ral Mijango, the conversation in the internal mediation process was centered on the power of
134
using actions based in nonviolence to earn societys listening ear in their effort to gain respect and inclusion in society. Their decision to participate and invest in the process was inspired by the model of Gandhis nonviolent revolution and the idea that the truce is a win-win situation for all involved (Sanz, Las pandillas estn mandando un gesto, 2012). Secondly, are everyones experiences and testimonies being solicited and earnestly listenedto? Is there open communication and transparency? This is an area of focus that seems to have been overlooked, and in my opinion, will serve as the greatest obstacle to the success of the truce. Since the truce, the gangs have been afforded the national spotlight. While they have not sat down to dialogue directly with government leaders, they have been offered much space to freely express their sentiments and visions. The government has no lack of opportunity to express their positions, yet their role and intentions have not been entirely clear throughout the process. But the biggest downfall to this process is that civil society who has endured overwhelming suffering and loss at the hands of the gangs has not had an opportunity to express their pain and grievances. Following tenets of restorative justice, true forgiveness and reconciliation cannot occur until people have had the chance to externalize their hurt and loss, with the listening ears of the gangs as their witnesses. This idea was also expressed by one youth outreach worker who participated in this study long before this truce came to be when she reflects: How can all the deaths from throughout these past years be reconciled? Its not a quick process. They could say, Okay, lets have a truce. But at the end of the day its still, That *$%& killed my father! or, That *#% killed my son! or... (Even from the time of the war, victims are still demanding justice from the people who committed war crimes.) There has to be some kind of reconciliation amongst victims and perpetrators the victims have to be recognized, and the perpetrators too. But a reconciliation process such as this has never
135
been carried out in this country, and we continue to experience deep pain from these tragedies of years past. Clearly, healing will be critical, if civil society is to in time forgive past offenses and wholeheartedly welcome the gangs back into mainstream society. Is there collaboration and integrity on behalf of all of the actors in the situation? Up until now, it appears that the gangs have done the majority of the work in this deal, halting gang-initiated homicides, designating all schools as zones of peace, expressing remorse for their crimes against society, and asking for their forgiveness. The government has followed through in transferring the top 30 gang leaders from maximum- to lower-security prisons, and supposedly President Funes has secured a small number of guaranteed jobs in the private sector for gang-involved youth. Apart from these efforts, there is little visible action on behalf of the government to back its prolific discourse. The private sector has offered no proposals regarding their role in the youths reinsertion into the labor market. And civil society has yet to respond in any form to the gangs gestures of good will and appeal for forgiveness. There is no knowing just how patient the gangs will be in waiting for correspondence from the rest of society. And how sustainable is this process in the long-term? Does it empower and prevent future violence, or is it merely a superficial act that creates dependency or unequal balance of power? Parts of the proposal appear sustainable, assuming that all actors buy into the plan. Providing jobs and education for gang members could certainly keep them off the street, give them training and technical skills, and improve the lives of their families. However, what is being done to address the broader issues of poverty, the many obstacles to obtaining employment and education, and the lack of support for the youth of the country (amongst many other factors) that led many of these youth to the gangs in the first place? Another interesting factor in this dynamic is that minimal checks and balances of power exist within this equation; while I maintain hope that this will not occur, the gangs
136
essentially hold the power in this situation and could inflict violent havoc on the country if they are not eventually taken into account and respected as they wish. This analysis reminds us again of the importance of adopting the foundational attitudes of respect for all people (regardless of their histories or body art preferences), courage, openness, forgiveness, inclusion, and a sense of compassionate responsibility towards our fellow citizens. It is necessary for everyones voices to be heard and acknowledged. And as we have seen time and again in this study, it is always crucial to do continuous in-depth analysis to ensure we address problems from their roots. Finally, for initiatives to be effective in the long term, we must always contemplate their sustainability over time. The truce has offered a welcomed respite from some of the countrys violence, yet many people are holding their breath in anticipation of how the situation will proceed. Despite the current uncertainty of the truce, what has been achieved to this point merits great applause. Never before has El Salvador made such strides in addressing the countrys gang violence. And none of this would be possible if not for the creative vision, open-mindedness, empathy, pursuit of the common good, courage, dialogue, good faith, and collaboration of those who have earnestly invested in the process thus far. Needless to say, this is a situation that carries great weight for the future of the country and merits close monitoring. At this point, its relative success will depend on the extent to which all sectors of Salvadoran society choose to invest their energy and resources into this process, as well as peoples willingness to tell their stories, listen, grieve, reconcile and heal from past wrongs.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace ANNEX A
137
RESEARCH SUMMARY From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Societys Proposals for Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador Researcher: Colette Christine Hellenkamp University for Peace It is no new news that in El Salvador, the need for peace is urgent. As an inheritance from a military dictatorship of several decades and a bloody civil war, today the violence is lived and experienced in a multitude of forms in this beautiful country. According to the statistics, public policies that have been implemented throughout the years have not made any real impact on the levels of violence; rather, in many ways the violence has even worsened. Many people say that in El Salvador the violence has risen to a cultural level, impacting even psychology, vocabulary, and the way the Salvadoran people interact with one another. Taking into account that the public policy has been so ineffective up to this point in dealing with the topic of violence in all of its forms (physical, psychological, economic, gender, structural, etc.), it is time to search for new proposals. Amongst the Salvadoran people exists a richness of wisdom, experiences and knowledge that could and should serve as a principle source of inspiration and information in the formation of integral proposals to convert the current culture of violence to a true culture of peace. However, even when initiatives arise from different sectors of civil society to enter into dialogue or to work in conjunction, there is little aperture to do so even less so when these initiatives are launched on behalf of historically marginalized groups of Salvadoran society. With all this in mind, this study proposes to gather (1) personal stories and perspectives from different members of historically marginalized groups in Salvadoran civil society regarding the violence that is lived today in the country, (2) their analysis of different measures that have been taken in the past or that are currently being implemented to deal with the issue of violence in the country, and (3) their dreams and proposals regarding how to construct a true culture of peace in El Salvador. The final product will be a proposal containing integral and innovative measures that contemplates the responses of all of the people interviewed, giving a voice to the extremely important perspectives of civil society. Also, ideally the analysis will serve to motivate both politicians and civil society to take action in the construction of a true culture of peace in El Salvador. Brief Biography of the Researcher Colette Hellenkamp came to care about issues of violence and peace building in El Salvador through her experiences living in the country and working with youth from 2005 to 2010. She just finished her Masters studies in International Peace Studies at the University for Peace in Costa Rica, and she is more committed every day to the search for integral grassroots solutions for a true construction of peace in El Salvador and in the world.
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace ANNEX B
138
INTERVIEW GUIDE Research Study: From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Societys Proposals for Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador DESCRIBE THE VIOLENCE o Based on the following definition of violence, how would you describe the situation of violence in El Salvador? Which forms of violence are seen? Violence: The intentional use of power or physical force, threatened or real, against oneself, another person, a group or a community, resulting in or having a high probability of causing injuries, death, psychological harm, poor development or deprivation (WHO 2002) o What are your personal experiences of violence? (victim, protagonist, witness, family member or friend of victim, etc) o Who is instigating the violence? o How come this is happening? What are the root causes of this violence? EVALUATING EFFORTS FOR PEACE o Now based on the following definition of peace please mention some of the measures that you have seen taken to reduce violence and create peace both on behalf of the government and on behalf of civil society? Peace: The wholeness created by right relationships with oneself, other persons, other cultures, other life, Earth, and the larger whole of which all are a part (Earth Charter 2000) o In your mind, which of these measures have been effective? Which have not? How come? PROPOSALS o Now thinking of the concept of a culture of peace and dreaming big and without limits, what would you propose to create a true culture of peace in El Salvador? Culture of Peace: a set of values, attitudes, modes of behavior and ways of life that reject violence and prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through dialogue and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations (UNESCO, 2002) o What would need to be done on behalf of the state? o And on behalf of civil society? EL SALVADORS GREATEST STRENGTHS o In your mind, what are the greatest strengths that El Salvador possesses to be able to truly confront the violence in the country and construct a true culture of peace?
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace ANNEX C Informed Consent

Title of Research Study: From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Societys Proposals for Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador
139
Objective of the Research: The objective of the research is to discover the different experiences and opinions of different groups within civil society regarding how to build a true culture of peace in El Salvador, and then to construct a proposal that gives a voice to these experiences and perspectives. What is proposed in this study? To do an interview with the researcher regarding your experiences and perspectives. How are the participants selected? The researcher will search for participants from different groups within civil society, particularly from groups who historically have not been taken into account in the formation of public policy regarding the construction of peace in the country. People will be sought out to interview from different geographical areas within the country and who have a diversity of experiences and projections in the work of peace building in the El Salvador. Required Time: The estimated time to complete an interview is one hour. Risks: Participation in this study will not put the participant at any risk. Compensation: There will be no monetary compensation for participating. Confidentiality: The process will be strictly confidential. Your name will not be utilized in any form when the results of the research are published. Voluntary Participation: Participation is strictly voluntary. Right to withdraw from the study: The participant will have the right to withdraw from the investigation at any moment. There will be absolutely no type of sanction or retaliation for your withdrawal. Who to contact in case of questions: Colette Hellenkamp, Researcher 7777-4746, colette.hellenkamp@gmail.com CONSENT I have read the procedure described above. The researcher has explained the study to me and has answered my questions. I voluntarily give my consent to participate in Colette Hellenkamps study regarding the construction of a culture of peace in El Salvador. I have received a copy of this procedure. _____________________________ ______________________________ _____________ Name Signature Date
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace References
140
Adams, D. (2000). Toward a Global Movement for a Culture of Peace. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 259-266. Adams, D., & True, M. (1997, March). UNESCO's Culture of Peace Programme: An Introduction. International Peace Research Newsletter. Alvarenga Venutolo, A. P. (1996). Cultura y tica de la violencia: El Salvador, 1880-1932. San Jos, Costa Rica: EDUCA. Andrieu, K. (2010). Civilizing Peacebuilding: Transitional Justice, Civil Society and the Liberal Paradigm. Security Dialogue, 537-558. Anonymous. (2010, May 23). (C. Hellenkamp, Interviewer) Arauz, S., Martnez, O., & Lemus, E. (2011, May 6). El Cartel de Texis. El Faro. Retrieved March 16, 2012 Archibold, R. C. (2012, March 6). In Latin America, Prisons Condemned to Crisis. New York Times. Retrieved March 16, 2012 Arson, C. J. (2003). El Salvador's Democratic Transition Ten Years After the Peace Accords. Woodrow Wilson Center Reports on the Americas. Retrieved September 8, 2010 Associated Press. (2010, September 2). Salvador bans gang membership after bus massacre. The Boston Globe. Retrieved October 24, 2010, from http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2010/09/02/salvador_bans_ga ng_membership_after_bus_massacre/ Bealey, F. (1999). The Blackwell dictionary of political science: a user's guide to its terms. Wiley-Blackwell. Retrieved from cited at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government Bloomfield, D., Barnes, T., & Huyse, L. (Eds.). (2003). Reconciliation After Violent Conflict: A Handbook. Stockholm, Sweden: International IDEA. Brannan, T. (2003). From 'Antipolitics' to 'Anti-Politics': What Became of East European 'Civil Society'? Byrne, S., & Irvin, C. (2002). A Shared Common Sense: Perceptions of the Material Effects and Impacts of Economic Growth in Northern Ireland. Civil Wars, 5(1), 55-86. Call, C. T. (2003). Democratisation, War and State-Building: Constructing the Rule of Law in El Salvador. Journal of Latin American Studies, 35, 827-862. doi:10.1017/S0022216X03007004
141
Centro de Estudios Monetarios Latinoamericanos. (2012, February). El perfil de la poblacin de origen salvadoreo en Estados Unidos. Retrieved May 23, 2012, from http://www.cemlaremesas.org/principios/pdf/perfilpoblacionSV.pdf Chupp, M. G. (2003). Creating a Culture of Peace in Postwar El Salvador. In C. Sampson, M. AbuNimer, C. Liebler, & D. Whitney (Eds.), Positive Approaches to Peacebuilding: A Resource for Innovators. Pact Publishing. Damen, L. (1987). Culture Learning: The Fifth Dimension in the Language Classroom. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. Darsie, J. (1995, May/June). Catalysts of Peace. Americas. DeLugan, R. M. (2005). Peace, Culture, and Governance in Post-Civil War El Salvador (1992-2000). Journal of Human Rights, 233-249. Duhaime, L. (2012). Legal Dictionary. Retrieved from Duhaime.org: http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/G/Government.aspx Earth Charter Commission. (2000). The Earth Charter. Retrieved August 28, 2010, from http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/content/pages/read-the-charter.html El Ejrcito salvadoreo apoyar un ao ms en labores de Seguridad del Estado. (2011, May). infodefensa.com: Informacin y Defensa. Retrieved March 14, 2012, from http://www.infodefensa.com/?noticia=el-ejercito-salvadoreno-apoyara-un-ano-mas-enlabores-de-seguridad-del-estado Foley, M. W. (1996). Laying the Groundwork: The Struggle for Civil Society in El Salvador. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 38, 67-104. Retrieved May 15, 2012, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/166396 Galtung, J. (1964). An Editorial. Journal of Peace Research, 1-4. Galtung, J. (1976). Three Approaches to Peace: Peacekeeping, Peacemaking, and Peacebuilding. Peace, War and Defense: Essays in Peace Research, 2, 297-298. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilisation. Oslo: PRIO. Gomez, I., Meyers, C., Vasquez, M. A., & Williams, P. (1999). Religious and Social Participation in War-Torn Areas of El Salvador. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, 53-71. Holiday, D., & Stanley, W. (1993). Building the Peace: Preliminary Lessons from El Salvador. Journal of International Affairs, 415-438. Hume, M. (2008, September). The Myths of Violence: Gender, Conflict, and Community in El Salvador. Latin American Perspectives, 35(5), 59-76.
142
Instituto de Derechos Humanos de la UCA. (2006, August 31). Muriendo para vivir: el camino del emigrante. Retrieved September 8, 2010 Jimenez, I. (Ed.). (2010, September). Comunicado de la Mara MS13 y la Pandilla la 18. Retrieved May 22, 2012, from Hombres Contra la Violencia: El Salvador: http://hombrescontralaviolencia.blogspot.com/2010/09/comunicado-de-las-mara-ms13-yla.html Kaba, M., Mathew, J. C., & Haines, N. (Eds.). (2010). Something is Wrong: Exploring the Roots of Youth Violence. Chicago, Illinois: Project NIA, Chicago Freedom School, and Teachers for School Justice. Krug, E. G., Dahlberg, L. L., Mercy, J. A., Zwi, A. B., & Lozano, R. (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva: World Health Organization. Lederach, J. (1995). Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. NY: Syracuse University Press. Lederach, J. (1997). Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace. Llarull, R. (2010, September 10). Pandillas: Qu hay detrs del paro de transporte? Voces Diario Digital. Retrieved October 24, 2010 Los Voceros Nacionales de la Mara Salvatrucha MSX3 y Pandilla 18. (2012, March 19). Retrieved from El Faro: http://www.elfaro.net/attachment/395/comaras.pdf?g_download=1 Maiese, M. (2003, September). Peacebuilding. Beyond Intractability. (G. Burgess, & H. Burgess, Eds.) Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Retrieved from Beyond Intractability: http://www.beyondintractability.org/bi-essay/peacebuilding Ministerio de Haciendo: Direccin General del Presupuesto. (2011, September 30). Mensaje del Proyecto de Presupuesto 2012. Retrieved May 23, 2012, from Ministerio de Hacienda: Direccin General del Presupuesto: http://www.mh.gob.sv/portal/page/portal/PTF/Presupuestos_Publicos/Presupuestos_vot ados/Anio2012/Mensaje_2012.pdf Ministry of Education of El Salvador. (1993). Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador (Synthesis). UNESCO. Miroff, N., & Booth, W. (2010, July 27). Mexican drug cartels bring violence with them in move to Central America. Washington Post. Retrieved September 11, 2010 Organization of American States. (2011). International Migration in the Americas: First Report of the Continuous Reporting System on International Migration in the Americas (SICREMI). Retrieved May
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace 23, 2012, from http://www.migracionoea.org/sicremi/documentos/SICREMI_2011_ENGLISH.pdf Paffenholz, T., & Spurk, C. (2006, October). Civil Society, Civic Engagement, and Peacebuilding. Social Development Papers, p. 2.
143
Parajon, F. L., Lourenco, M., & Adams, D. (1996). The UNESCO Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador: An Initial Report. International Journal of Peace Studies, 1-20. Paris, R. (2002). Peacebuilding in Central America: Reproducing the Sources of Conflict? International Peacekeeping, 39-68. Pastrn, R. M. (2010, July 8). Delincuencia cuesta ms de $2,010 Mlls. a El Salvador. El Diario de Hoy. Retrieved September 8, 2010, from http://www.elsalvador.com/mwedh/nota/nota_completa.asp?idCat=6374&idArt=4952795 Pedraza Faria, L., Miller, S., & Cavallaro, J. L. (2010). No Place to Hide: Gang, State, and Clandestine Violence in El Salvador. Cambridge, Massachusetts: International Human Rights Clinic, Human Rights Program, Harvard Law School. PNUD: El Salvador es el pas ms violento del mundo. (2011, October). La Prensa Grfica. Retrieved March 14, 2012 Reinharz, S., & Davidman, L. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press. Richmond, O. P. (2007). Emancipatory Forms of Human Security and Liberal Peacebuilding. International Journal, 62(3), 458-477. Retrieved June 9, 2012, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40184855 Rummel, R. (n.d.). Understanding Conflict and War - Volume 5: The Just Peace. Retrieved May 2012, from What is Peace? Concepts, Qualities and Social Contract: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/TJP.CHAP2.HTM Salvadoran President Funes criticised for police choice. (2012, January 24). BBC. Retrieved March 14, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16711514 Salvadoran signs tough anti-gang measure into law. (2010, September 10). La Prensa. Retrieved October 24, 2010 Sanz, J. L. (2012, April 2). Las pandillas estn mandando un gesto de buena voluntad a la sociedad. El Faro. Retrieved April 2, 2012, from http://www.elfaro.net/es/201203/noticias/8165/ Sanz, J. L., & Martnez, C. (2012, May 14). El trabajo de monseor Colindres y Ral Mijango era una pieza de mi estrategia. El Faro. Retrieved June 15, 2012, from http://www.salanegra.elfaro.net/es/201205/entrevistas/8541/
144
Shachter, B., & Seinfeld, J. (1994). Personal Violence and the Culture of Violence. Social Work, 347350. Steenkamp, C. (2005, April). The Legacy of War: Conceptualizing a 'Culture of Violence' to Explain Violence after Peace Accords. The Round Table, 94, 253-267. Talentino, A. K. (2007). Perceptions of Peacebuilding: The Dynamic of Imposer and Imposed Upon. International Studies Perspectives, 152-171. The World Bank. (2011). Migration and Remittances Factbook 2011. Retrieved May 22, 2012, from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTLAC/Resources/Factbook2011-Ebook.pdf Toh, S.-H. (2002). Pathways to the Building of a Culture of Peace. In UNESCO-APNIEVE, APNIEVE Second Teachers Sourcebook on Values Education (pp. 165-174). Bangkok: Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education. Retrieved May 22, 2012, from http://www2.unescobkk.org/elib/publications/LearningToBe/LearningToBe.pdf UNESCO. (1986). Seville Statement on Violence. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/cpp/uk/declarations/seville.pdf UNESCO. (2002). Mainstreaming the culture of peace. Paris: Culture of Peace Co-ordination of the Bureau of Strategic Planning. United Nations. (1992). An Agenda for Peace: Preventative Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peacekeeping. New York: United Nations. United Nations Committee of Experts on Public Administration. (2006). Definition of basic concepts and terminologies in governance and public administration. New York: United Nations Economic and Social Council. United Nations Peacebuilding Support Office. (2010, September). UN Peacebuilding: an Orientation. United States Institute of Peace. (n.d.). Truth Commission: El Salvador. Retrieved May 22, 2012, from United States Institute of Peace: Truth Commissions Digital Collection: http://www.usip.org/publications/truth-commission-el-salvador Useem, J., & Useem, R. (1963). Men in the middle of the third culture. Human Organizations, 22(3). Valencia, D., Labrador, G., & Caras, P. (2011, June 1). Funes propone servicio militar obligatorio para jvenes en riesgo. El Faro. Retrieved June 6, 2011 Valencia, R. (2012, June 10). Esa utopa llamada reinsercin. El Faro. Retrieved June 15 2012, from http://www.salanegra.elfaro.net/es/201206/cronicas/8614/
From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Violencia, un problema de exclusin Son las pandillas las responsables? (2010, August 11). Voces Diario Digital. Voices on the Border. (2010, February 24). A New Approach to Youth Violence? Voices from El Salvador. Retrieved March 15, 2013 What is Culture? (2012, May 1). Retrieved from Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition: http://www.carla.umn.edu/culture/definitions.html
145
World Bank. (2012). Health Nutrition and Population Statistics (HNP). Retrieved May 23, 2012, from World dataBank: http://databank.worldbank.org/ddp/htmljsp/QuickViewReport.jsp?RowAxis=HNP_Series~&ColAxis=HNP_Time~&PageAxis=H NP_Ctry~&PageAxisCaption=Country~&RowAxisCaption=Series~&ColAxisCaption=Ye ar~&NEW_REPORT_SCALE=1&NEW_REPORT_PRECISION=0&newReport=yes&R OW_COUNT=
Total Word Count: 42,943

From A Culture of Violence To A Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Society's Proposals For Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

From A Culture of Violence To A Culture of Peace: Salvadoran Civil Society's Proposals For Integral Cultural Transformation in El Salvador

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

University for Peace

Universidad para la Paz

Annex A: Research Summary Page for Participants Annex B: Interview Guide

Annex C: Participant Consent Form References

20 27 48 49 52 55-57 63 66-67 71 74 76-78 83-84 88 89

From a Culture of Violence

From a Culture of Violence

From a Culture of Violence

From a Culture of Violence

From a Culture of Violence

From a Culture of Violence

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Promoting international peace/security (Adams, Toward a Global Movement, 2000, p. 261)

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace Development of Cultures of Violence

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Figure 2: Delineation of UNESCOs Culture of Peace Programme in El Salvador (MINED, 1993)

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Social FORMS OF VIOLENCE

Figure 4: Forms of current-lived violence in El Salvador

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Figure 5: Participants personal experiences with violence

Government Modus Operandi

ROOT CAUSES OF THE VIOLENCE

# 21 19 17 (14) (5) 14 8 7 6 6 24 19 11 22 20 20 (20) (3) (3) (1) 14 12 11 6 6 3 2 21 21 19 18 16 14

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Government Modus Operandi (contd.)

Judicial System Legislative System, Policy/Laws ROOT CAUSES OF THE VIOLENCE

Executive Branch Societal (contd.)

Economic Factors/ Structural Economic Exclusion Structural Social Exclusion

Social & Cultural Norms, Attitudes and World View

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

ROOT CAUSES OF THE VIOLENCE

Social & Cultural Norms, Attitudes and World View (contd.)

Historic Normalization of Violence

Internal Influences that Support Violence on Macro Level

Figure 6: Root causes of El Salvadors violence

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Social Initiatives & Programs

Figure 7: Government efforts to reduce violence and build peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

Values, Attitudes, Perspectives

Programs & Projects

Figure 9: Elements that contribute to success in peacebuilding

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace

From a Culture of Violence to a Culture of Peace