�ݺ�ߣshows by User: CivMilCoE

�ݺ�ߣshows by User: CivMilCoE / http://www.slideshare.net/images/logo.gif �ݺ�ߣshows by User: CivMilCoE / Tue, 09 Dec 2014 22:38:28 GMT �ݺ�ߣShare feed for �ݺ�ߣshows by User: CivMilCoE Evolution of protection of civilians in armed conflict /slideshow/evolution-of-protection-of-civilians-in-armed-conflict/42548203 acmcevolutionofprotectionofciviliansinarmedconflict-141209223828-conversion-gate01
International responses to conflict and complex humanitarian emergencies are diverse and multifaceted. Different actors – among them non-government organisations (NGOs), the United Nations (UN) protection mandated organisations, UN peacekeeping forces, both military and police – all have a role to play to mitigate the impact of armed conflict on civilian populations. Over the last 13 years a significant amount of work has been done to improve the international community’s response in relation to the protection of civilians (POC). This has been led by different actors – the UN Security Council, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the humanitarian community made up of UN humanitarian agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and NGOs – all working in the same complex humanitarian contexts. Despite the development of POC, there is a perceived ‘disconnect’ between the understanding of different forms of protection, the different disciplines practising or working on the POC, and the different guidance and legal regimes imposing obligations on both state and non-state actors in the area of protection. This paper is the first contribution to a broader research project that aims to determine whether the perceived disconnect between actors involved in protection work is real or anecdotal. By exploring the evolution of protection language and policy through the UN Security Council, DPKO and the humanitarian community, it is possible to develop an improved understanding of some of the reasons for distinct protection policies and definitions that exist between different actors. Some initial variations in the interpretation of POC are quick to emerge, giving rise to additional questions about how the distinctions can be better understood.]]>
International responses to conflict and complex humanitarian emergencies are diverse and multifaceted. Different actors – among them non-government organisations (NGOs), the United Nations (UN) protection mandated organisations, UN peacekeeping forces, both military and police – all have a role to play to mitigate the impact of armed conflict on civilian populations. Over the last 13 years a significant amount of work has been done to improve the international community’s response in relation to the protection of civilians (POC). This has been led by different actors – the UN Security Council, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the humanitarian community made up of UN humanitarian agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and NGOs – all working in the same complex humanitarian contexts. Despite the development of POC, there is a perceived ‘disconnect’ between the understanding of different forms of protection, the different disciplines practising or working on the POC, and the different guidance and legal regimes imposing obligations on both state and non-state actors in the area of protection. This paper is the first contribution to a broader research project that aims to determine whether the perceived disconnect between actors involved in protection work is real or anecdotal. By exploring the evolution of protection language and policy through the UN Security Council, DPKO and the humanitarian community, it is possible to develop an improved understanding of some of the reasons for distinct protection policies and definitions that exist between different actors. Some initial variations in the interpretation of POC are quick to emerge, giving rise to additional questions about how the distinctions can be better understood.]]> Tue, 09 Dec 2014 22:38:28 GMT /slideshow/evolution-of-protection-of-civilians-in-armed-conflict/42548203 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Evolution of protection of civilians in armed conflict CivMilCoE International responses to conflict and complex humanitarian emergencies are diverse and multifaceted. Different actors – among them non-government organisations (NGOs), the United Nations (UN) protection mandated organisations, UN peacekeeping forces, both military and police – all have a role to play to mitigate the impact of armed conflict on civilian populations. Over the last 13 years a significant amount of work has been done to improve the international community’s response in relation to the protection of civilians (POC). This has been led by different actors – the UN Security Council, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the humanitarian community made up of UN humanitarian agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and NGOs – all working in the same complex humanitarian contexts. Despite the development of POC, there is a perceived ‘disconnect’ between the understanding of different forms of protection, the different disciplines practising or working on the POC, and the different guidance and legal regimes imposing obligations on both state and non-state actors in the area of protection. This paper is the first contribution to a broader research project that aims to determine whether the perceived disconnect between actors involved in protection work is real or anecdotal. By exploring the evolution of protection language and policy through the UN Security Council, DPKO and the humanitarian community, it is possible to develop an improved understanding of some of the reasons for distinct protection policies and definitions that exist between different actors. Some initial variations in the interpretation of POC are quick to emerge, giving rise to additional questions about how the distinctions can be better understood. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/acmcevolutionofprotectionofciviliansinarmedconflict-141209223828-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> International responses to conflict and complex humanitarian emergencies are diverse and multifaceted. Different actors – among them non-government organisations (NGOs), the United Nations (UN) protection mandated organisations, UN peacekeeping forces, both military and police – all have a role to play to mitigate the impact of armed conflict on civilian populations. Over the last 13 years a significant amount of work has been done to improve the international community’s response in relation to the protection of civilians (POC). This has been led by different actors – the UN Security Council, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and the humanitarian community made up of UN humanitarian agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and NGOs – all working in the same complex humanitarian contexts. Despite the development of POC, there is a perceived ‘disconnect’ between the understanding of different forms of protection, the different disciplines practising or working on the POC, and the different guidance and legal regimes imposing obligations on both state and non-state actors in the area of protection. This paper is the first contribution to a broader research project that aims to determine whether the perceived disconnect between actors involved in protection work is real or anecdotal. By exploring the evolution of protection language and policy through the UN Security Council, DPKO and the humanitarian community, it is possible to develop an improved understanding of some of the reasons for distinct protection policies and definitions that exist between different actors. Some initial variations in the interpretation of POC are quick to emerge, giving rise to additional questions about how the distinctions can be better understood.

Evolution of protection of civilians in armed conflict from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 2318 11 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/acmcevolutionofprotectionofciviliansinarmedconflict-141209223828-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Perceptions about protection of civilians /slideshow/perceptions-about-protection-of-civilians/42547855 acmcperceptionsaboutprotectionofcivilians-141209221832-conversion-gate02
Historically, international humanitarian law (IHL) through the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 has required the protection of civilian populations in armed conflict. The Geneva Conventions provide guidance with regard to the obligations of states and parties to a conflict to apply the principle of distinction and to ensure precaution in attack as they pursue their military objectives. This was the first international legal framework to provide for the protection of civilians and forms the foundation of the ‘Protection of Civilians’ concept. Throughout the 1990s, devastating failures to protect civilians from violence and atrocities shaped thinking at the United Nations (UN) and gave rise to a more expansive concept of Protection of Civilians, incorporating international human rights law, international refugee law, and including best practices in peacekeeping operations and humanitarian response. This is reflected in the adoption of Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict as a thematic concern of the UN Security Council, and the development of policy and guidance relating to civilian protection since 1999, at the United Nations and elsewhere. The term ‘Protection of Civilians’ has expanded from a set of legal obligations in IHL to a conceptual and operational framework used by multiple ‘protection actors’ and practitioners—military and civilian, political and humanitarian. The concept of Protection of Civilians has developed in response to conflicts and crises as they emerged and as a result has developed unevenly. Combined with the fact that there is no operational definition of Protection of Civilians, there is a perception among protection practitioners that different actors involved in providing protection to people caught up in crisis understand and implement the concept differently. This perception raised questions among the researchers as to whether different understandings actually exist, and if so what the implications for the implementation of civilian protection might be. This gave rise to a research project titled In Search of Common Ground – Understanding Civilian Protection Language and Practice for Civil and Military Practitioners.]]>
Historically, international humanitarian law (IHL) through the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 has required the protection of civilian populations in armed conflict. The Geneva Conventions provide guidance with regard to the obligations of states and parties to a conflict to apply the principle of distinction and to ensure precaution in attack as they pursue their military objectives. This was the first international legal framework to provide for the protection of civilians and forms the foundation of the ‘Protection of Civilians’ concept. Throughout the 1990s, devastating failures to protect civilians from violence and atrocities shaped thinking at the United Nations (UN) and gave rise to a more expansive concept of Protection of Civilians, incorporating international human rights law, international refugee law, and including best practices in peacekeeping operations and humanitarian response. This is reflected in the adoption of Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict as a thematic concern of the UN Security Council, and the development of policy and guidance relating to civilian protection since 1999, at the United Nations and elsewhere. The term ‘Protection of Civilians’ has expanded from a set of legal obligations in IHL to a conceptual and operational framework used by multiple ‘protection actors’ and practitioners—military and civilian, political and humanitarian. The concept of Protection of Civilians has developed in response to conflicts and crises as they emerged and as a result has developed unevenly. Combined with the fact that there is no operational definition of Protection of Civilians, there is a perception among protection practitioners that different actors involved in providing protection to people caught up in crisis understand and implement the concept differently. This perception raised questions among the researchers as to whether different understandings actually exist, and if so what the implications for the implementation of civilian protection might be. This gave rise to a research project titled In Search of Common Ground – Understanding Civilian Protection Language and Practice for Civil and Military Practitioners.]]> Tue, 09 Dec 2014 22:18:32 GMT /slideshow/perceptions-about-protection-of-civilians/42547855 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Perceptions about protection of civilians CivMilCoE Historically, international humanitarian law (IHL) through the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 has required the protection of civilian populations in armed conflict. The Geneva Conventions provide guidance with regard to the obligations of states and parties to a conflict to apply the principle of distinction and to ensure precaution in attack as they pursue their military objectives. This was the first international legal framework to provide for the protection of civilians and forms the foundation of the ‘Protection of Civilians’ concept. Throughout the 1990s, devastating failures to protect civilians from violence and atrocities shaped thinking at the United Nations (UN) and gave rise to a more expansive concept of Protection of Civilians, incorporating international human rights law, international refugee law, and including best practices in peacekeeping operations and humanitarian response. This is reflected in the adoption of Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict as a thematic concern of the UN Security Council, and the development of policy and guidance relating to civilian protection since 1999, at the United Nations and elsewhere. The term ‘Protection of Civilians’ has expanded from a set of legal obligations in IHL to a conceptual and operational framework used by multiple ‘protection actors’ and practitioners—military and civilian, political and humanitarian. The concept of Protection of Civilians has developed in response to conflicts and crises as they emerged and as a result has developed unevenly. Combined with the fact that there is no operational definition of Protection of Civilians, there is a perception among protection practitioners that different actors involved in providing protection to people caught up in crisis understand and implement the concept differently. This perception raised questions among the researchers as to whether different understandings actually exist, and if so what the implications for the implementation of civilian protection might be. This gave rise to a research project titled In Search of Common Ground – Understanding Civilian Protection Language and Practice for Civil and Military Practitioners. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/acmcperceptionsaboutprotectionofcivilians-141209221832-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Historically, international humanitarian law (IHL) through the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 has required the protection of civilian populations in armed conflict. The Geneva Conventions provide guidance with regard to the obligations of states and parties to a conflict to apply the principle of distinction and to ensure precaution in attack as they pursue their military objectives. This was the first international legal framework to provide for the protection of civilians and forms the foundation of the ‘Protection of Civilians’ concept. Throughout the 1990s, devastating failures to protect civilians from violence and atrocities shaped thinking at the United Nations (UN) and gave rise to a more expansive concept of Protection of Civilians, incorporating international human rights law, international refugee law, and including best practices in peacekeeping operations and humanitarian response. This is reflected in the adoption of Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict as a thematic concern of the UN Security Council, and the development of policy and guidance relating to civilian protection since 1999, at the United Nations and elsewhere. The term ‘Protection of Civilians’ has expanded from a set of legal obligations in IHL to a conceptual and operational framework used by multiple ‘protection actors’ and practitioners—military and civilian, political and humanitarian. The concept of Protection of Civilians has developed in response to conflicts and crises as they emerged and as a result has developed unevenly. Combined with the fact that there is no operational definition of Protection of Civilians, there is a perception among protection practitioners that different actors involved in providing protection to people caught up in crisis understand and implement the concept differently. This perception raised questions among the researchers as to whether different understandings actually exist, and if so what the implications for the implementation of civilian protection might be. This gave rise to a research project titled In Search of Common Ground – Understanding Civilian Protection Language and Practice for Civil and Military Practitioners.

Perceptions about protection of civilians from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1444 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/acmcperceptionsaboutprotectionofcivilians-141209221832-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Civil-Military Occasional Paper 2-2014 - The Links Between Security Sectory Reform and Development /slideshow/occasional-paper-2-2014-links-between-ssr-and-development/38849598 occasionalpaper2-2014-linksbetweenssranddevelopment-140908200618-phpapp01
This paper explores the relationship between security and development, with a focus on how different types of violence inhibit development in fragile and conflict-affected states. This paper is based upon a comprehensive literature review of separate pieces of research including academic studies, datasets and policy analysis. It explores statistics and figures that illustrate the barriers that insecurity poses to achieving development outcomes in fragile and conflict-afflicted states. It also examines these dynamics in detail in four countries: Afghanistan, Solomon Islands, South Sudan and Timor-Leste. The assignment was not to come up with policy recommendations per se; rather it was to present a comprehensive synopsis of how different types of violence shackles and inhibits development in fragile and conflict-affected states. The research team believes that the material presented will be of use to inform policy debate and development, including in the field of security sector reform. The analysis is contextualised by focusing on three types of violence: political, criminal and interpersonal. The barriers these different types of violence pose to development is presented throughout the report, and embedded in the country case studies. The statistics uncovered in the course of the project are stark and unnerving. These statistics, among others, are used to highlight the barriers that different types of violence pose to development. It is not only the financial cost, but also the broader institutional and social costs that generate a series of barriers for meaningful development. Through synthesising these statistics, this paper contributes to the understandings of the links between security and development, paving way for policy recommendations and lines of action for Australia and development practitioners. ]]>
This paper explores the relationship between security and development, with a focus on how different types of violence inhibit development in fragile and conflict-affected states. This paper is based upon a comprehensive literature review of separate pieces of research including academic studies, datasets and policy analysis. It explores statistics and figures that illustrate the barriers that insecurity poses to achieving development outcomes in fragile and conflict-afflicted states. It also examines these dynamics in detail in four countries: Afghanistan, Solomon Islands, South Sudan and Timor-Leste. The assignment was not to come up with policy recommendations per se; rather it was to present a comprehensive synopsis of how different types of violence shackles and inhibits development in fragile and conflict-affected states. The research team believes that the material presented will be of use to inform policy debate and development, including in the field of security sector reform. The analysis is contextualised by focusing on three types of violence: political, criminal and interpersonal. The barriers these different types of violence pose to development is presented throughout the report, and embedded in the country case studies. The statistics uncovered in the course of the project are stark and unnerving. These statistics, among others, are used to highlight the barriers that different types of violence pose to development. It is not only the financial cost, but also the broader institutional and social costs that generate a series of barriers for meaningful development. Through synthesising these statistics, this paper contributes to the understandings of the links between security and development, paving way for policy recommendations and lines of action for Australia and development practitioners. ]]> Mon, 08 Sep 2014 20:06:18 GMT /slideshow/occasional-paper-2-2014-links-between-ssr-and-development/38849598 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Civil-Military Occasional Paper 2-2014 - The Links Between Security Sectory Reform and Development CivMilCoE This paper explores the relationship between security and development, with a focus on how different types of violence inhibit development in fragile and conflict-affected states. This paper is based upon a comprehensive literature review of separate pieces of research including academic studies, datasets and policy analysis. It explores statistics and figures that illustrate the barriers that insecurity poses to achieving development outcomes in fragile and conflict-afflicted states. It also examines these dynamics in detail in four countries: Afghanistan, Solomon Islands, South Sudan and Timor-Leste. The assignment was not to come up with policy recommendations per se; rather it was to present a comprehensive synopsis of how different types of violence shackles and inhibits development in fragile and conflict-affected states. The research team believes that the material presented will be of use to inform policy debate and development, including in the field of security sector reform. The analysis is contextualised by focusing on three types of violence: political, criminal and interpersonal. The barriers these different types of violence pose to development is presented throughout the report, and embedded in the country case studies. The statistics uncovered in the course of the project are stark and unnerving. These statistics, among others, are used to highlight the barriers that different types of violence pose to development. It is not only the financial cost, but also the broader institutional and social costs that generate a series of barriers for meaningful development. Through synthesising these statistics, this paper contributes to the understandings of the links between security and development, paving way for policy recommendations and lines of action for Australia and development practitioners. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/occasionalpaper2-2014-linksbetweenssranddevelopment-140908200618-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This paper explores the relationship between security and development, with a focus on how different types of violence inhibit development in fragile and conflict-affected states. This paper is based upon a comprehensive literature review of separate pieces of research including academic studies, datasets and policy analysis. It explores statistics and figures that illustrate the barriers that insecurity poses to achieving development outcomes in fragile and conflict-afflicted states. It also examines these dynamics in detail in four countries: Afghanistan, Solomon Islands, South Sudan and Timor-Leste. The assignment was not to come up with policy recommendations per se; rather it was to present a comprehensive synopsis of how different types of violence shackles and inhibits development in fragile and conflict-affected states. The research team believes that the material presented will be of use to inform policy debate and development, including in the field of security sector reform. The analysis is contextualised by focusing on three types of violence: political, criminal and interpersonal. The barriers these different types of violence pose to development is presented throughout the report, and embedded in the country case studies. The statistics uncovered in the course of the project are stark and unnerving. These statistics, among others, are used to highlight the barriers that different types of violence pose to development. It is not only the financial cost, but also the broader institutional and social costs that generate a series of barriers for meaningful development. Through synthesising these statistics, this paper contributes to the understandings of the links between security and development, paving way for policy recommendations and lines of action for Australia and development practitioners.

Civil-Military Occasional Paper 2-2014 - The Links Between Security Sectory Reform and Development from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1281 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/occasionalpaper2-2014-linksbetweenssranddevelopment-140908200618-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document White http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Occasional Paper 1/2014: Conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence: An Introductory Overview to Support Prevention and Response Efforts /slideshow/occasional-paper-12014-conflictrelated-sexual-and-genderbased-violence/31190560 conflict-relatedsexualandgender-basedviolence-140213192829-phpapp02
Sexual and gender-based violence is widespread in conflict-affected environments. The field of conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence is active and constantly expanding. Recent research and analysis are drawing attention to the complexity of this form of violence, reflecting a shift away from simplified narratives. They also point to the need for a more inclusive understanding of sexual violence, which acknowledges, for example, male victims and survivors, as well as the experiences and motivations of perpetrators. The wealth of information, activity and debate that characterises this field can be daunting. This paper offers an introductory overview of conflict- related sexual and gender-based violence, in particular for those who are beginning their involvement with the subject—whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines a number of dominant patterns of sexual and gender-based violence in conflict-affected environments. It surveys a range of causes and motivations that can contribute to the perpetration of this form of violence, and explores persistent gaps and weaknesses in current efforts to deal with such violence. Throughout the report, where relevant, information is provided about what is being done to prevent and respond to conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence, with a sampling of efforts from the international, regional and domestic levels.]]>
Sexual and gender-based violence is widespread in conflict-affected environments. The field of conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence is active and constantly expanding. Recent research and analysis are drawing attention to the complexity of this form of violence, reflecting a shift away from simplified narratives. They also point to the need for a more inclusive understanding of sexual violence, which acknowledges, for example, male victims and survivors, as well as the experiences and motivations of perpetrators. The wealth of information, activity and debate that characterises this field can be daunting. This paper offers an introductory overview of conflict- related sexual and gender-based violence, in particular for those who are beginning their involvement with the subject—whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines a number of dominant patterns of sexual and gender-based violence in conflict-affected environments. It surveys a range of causes and motivations that can contribute to the perpetration of this form of violence, and explores persistent gaps and weaknesses in current efforts to deal with such violence. Throughout the report, where relevant, information is provided about what is being done to prevent and respond to conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence, with a sampling of efforts from the international, regional and domestic levels.]]> Thu, 13 Feb 2014 19:28:28 GMT /slideshow/occasional-paper-12014-conflictrelated-sexual-and-genderbased-violence/31190560 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Occasional Paper 1/2014: Conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence: An Introductory Overview to Support Prevention and Response Efforts CivMilCoE Sexual and gender-based violence is widespread in conflict-affected environments. The field of conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence is active and constantly expanding. Recent research and analysis are drawing attention to the complexity of this form of violence, reflecting a shift away from simplified narratives. They also point to the need for a more inclusive understanding of sexual violence, which acknowledges, for example, male victims and survivors, as well as the experiences and motivations of perpetrators. The wealth of information, activity and debate that characterises this field can be daunting. This paper offers an introductory overview of conflict- related sexual and gender-based violence, in particular for those who are beginning their involvement with the subject—whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines a number of dominant patterns of sexual and gender-based violence in conflict-affected environments. It surveys a range of causes and motivations that can contribute to the perpetration of this form of violence, and explores persistent gaps and weaknesses in current efforts to deal with such violence. Throughout the report, where relevant, information is provided about what is being done to prevent and respond to conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence, with a sampling of efforts from the international, regional and domestic levels. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/conflict-relatedsexualandgender-basedviolence-140213192829-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Sexual and gender-based violence is widespread in conflict-affected environments. The field of conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence is active and constantly expanding. Recent research and analysis are drawing attention to the complexity of this form of violence, reflecting a shift away from simplified narratives. They also point to the need for a more inclusive understanding of sexual violence, which acknowledges, for example, male victims and survivors, as well as the experiences and motivations of perpetrators. The wealth of information, activity and debate that characterises this field can be daunting. This paper offers an introductory overview of conflict- related sexual and gender-based violence, in particular for those who are beginning their involvement with the subject—whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines a number of dominant patterns of sexual and gender-based violence in conflict-affected environments. It surveys a range of causes and motivations that can contribute to the perpetration of this form of violence, and explores persistent gaps and weaknesses in current efforts to deal with such violence. Throughout the report, where relevant, information is provided about what is being done to prevent and respond to conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence, with a sampling of efforts from the international, regional and domestic levels.

Occasional Paper 1/2014: Conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence: An Introductory Overview to Support Prevention and Response Efforts from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 3478 18 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/conflict-relatedsexualandgender-basedviolence-140213192829-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document White http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Civil-Military Working Paper 03/2013 - A Strategic Framework for Mass Atrocity Prevention /CivMilCoE/3-2013-a-strategic-framework-for-mass-atrocity-prevention 3-2013astrategicframeworkformassatrocityprevention-131121223205-phpapp01
At the 2005 World Summit of the United Nations, more than 170 Heads of State and Government accepted three interlinked responsibilities, which together constitute the principle of ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P). First, States accepted their primary responsibility to protect their own population from mass atrocity crimes. Second, they pledged to assist each other in fulfilling their domestic protection responsibilities. And finally, as members of the international community, they assumed the collective responsibility to react, in a timely and decisive manner, if any State were ‘manifestly failing’ to protect its population from mass atrocity crimes. Those three responsibilities are now commonly summarised in the language of R2P’s ‘three pillars’. Among the key constitutive elements of the principle of R2P, prevention has been deemed by many as the single most important. Scholars and policy-makers alike concede that it is both normatively and politically desirable to act early to prevent mass atrocity crimes from being committed—rather than to react after they are already underway. Yet, while the more general topic of conflict prevention has been—and continues to be—a subject of explicit discussion by policy-makers, an important field of inquiry for academics, and a crucial area of advocacy for civil society groups, there has been comparatively less attention paid to the prevention of the four specific crimes related to R2P. Too often, as in the original report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, there is an assumption that more general conflict prevention concepts and frameworks can be borrowed for the purpose of thinking strategically about what the prevention of R2P crimes entails. However, this way of conceptualising R2P’s prevention dimension is increasingly being challenged. As the International Peace Institute notes in a 2009 report: ‘The references to genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity … give [Responsibility to Protect] a distinctive focus and imperative.’ This working paper seeks to develop a more specific strategic framework for the prevention of mass atrocity crimes, which can serve to inform the use of particular prevention tools.]]>
At the 2005 World Summit of the United Nations, more than 170 Heads of State and Government accepted three interlinked responsibilities, which together constitute the principle of ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P). First, States accepted their primary responsibility to protect their own population from mass atrocity crimes. Second, they pledged to assist each other in fulfilling their domestic protection responsibilities. And finally, as members of the international community, they assumed the collective responsibility to react, in a timely and decisive manner, if any State were ‘manifestly failing’ to protect its population from mass atrocity crimes. Those three responsibilities are now commonly summarised in the language of R2P’s ‘three pillars’. Among the key constitutive elements of the principle of R2P, prevention has been deemed by many as the single most important. Scholars and policy-makers alike concede that it is both normatively and politically desirable to act early to prevent mass atrocity crimes from being committed—rather than to react after they are already underway. Yet, while the more general topic of conflict prevention has been—and continues to be—a subject of explicit discussion by policy-makers, an important field of inquiry for academics, and a crucial area of advocacy for civil society groups, there has been comparatively less attention paid to the prevention of the four specific crimes related to R2P. Too often, as in the original report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, there is an assumption that more general conflict prevention concepts and frameworks can be borrowed for the purpose of thinking strategically about what the prevention of R2P crimes entails. However, this way of conceptualising R2P’s prevention dimension is increasingly being challenged. As the International Peace Institute notes in a 2009 report: ‘The references to genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity … give [Responsibility to Protect] a distinctive focus and imperative.’ This working paper seeks to develop a more specific strategic framework for the prevention of mass atrocity crimes, which can serve to inform the use of particular prevention tools.]]> Thu, 21 Nov 2013 22:32:05 GMT /CivMilCoE/3-2013-a-strategic-framework-for-mass-atrocity-prevention CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Civil-Military Working Paper 03/2013 - A Strategic Framework for Mass Atrocity Prevention CivMilCoE At the 2005 World Summit of the United Nations, more than 170 Heads of State and Government accepted three interlinked responsibilities, which together constitute the principle of ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P). First, States accepted their primary responsibility to protect their own population from mass atrocity crimes. Second, they pledged to assist each other in fulfilling their domestic protection responsibilities. And finally, as members of the international community, they assumed the collective responsibility to react, in a timely and decisive manner, if any State were ‘manifestly failing’ to protect its population from mass atrocity crimes. Those three responsibilities are now commonly summarised in the language of R2P’s ‘three pillars’. Among the key constitutive elements of the principle of R2P, prevention has been deemed by many as the single most important. Scholars and policy-makers alike concede that it is both normatively and politically desirable to act early to prevent mass atrocity crimes from being committed—rather than to react after they are already underway. Yet, while the more general topic of conflict prevention has been—and continues to be—a subject of explicit discussion by policy-makers, an important field of inquiry for academics, and a crucial area of advocacy for civil society groups, there has been comparatively less attention paid to the prevention of the four specific crimes related to R2P. Too often, as in the original report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, there is an assumption that more general conflict prevention concepts and frameworks can be borrowed for the purpose of thinking strategically about what the prevention of R2P crimes entails. However, this way of conceptualising R2P’s prevention dimension is increasingly being challenged. As the International Peace Institute notes in a 2009 report: ‘The references to genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity … give [Responsibility to Protect] a distinctive focus and imperative.’ This working paper seeks to develop a more specific strategic framework for the prevention of mass atrocity crimes, which can serve to inform the use of particular prevention tools. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/3-2013astrategicframeworkformassatrocityprevention-131121223205-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> At the 2005 World Summit of the United Nations, more than 170 Heads of State and Government accepted three interlinked responsibilities, which together constitute the principle of ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P). First, States accepted their primary responsibility to protect their own population from mass atrocity crimes. Second, they pledged to assist each other in fulfilling their domestic protection responsibilities. And finally, as members of the international community, they assumed the collective responsibility to react, in a timely and decisive manner, if any State were ‘manifestly failing’ to protect its population from mass atrocity crimes. Those three responsibilities are now commonly summarised in the language of R2P’s ‘three pillars’. Among the key constitutive elements of the principle of R2P, prevention has been deemed by many as the single most important. Scholars and policy-makers alike concede that it is both normatively and politically desirable to act early to prevent mass atrocity crimes from being committed—rather than to react after they are already underway. Yet, while the more general topic of conflict prevention has been—and continues to be—a subject of explicit discussion by policy-makers, an important field of inquiry for academics, and a crucial area of advocacy for civil society groups, there has been comparatively less attention paid to the prevention of the four specific crimes related to R2P. Too often, as in the original report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, there is an assumption that more general conflict prevention concepts and frameworks can be borrowed for the purpose of thinking strategically about what the prevention of R2P crimes entails. However, this way of conceptualising R2P’s prevention dimension is increasingly being challenged. As the International Peace Institute notes in a 2009 report: ‘The references to genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity … give [Responsibility to Protect] a distinctive focus and imperative.’ This working paper seeks to develop a more specific strategic framework for the prevention of mass atrocity crimes, which can serve to inform the use of particular prevention tools.

Civil-Military Working Paper 03/2013 - A Strategic Framework for Mass Atrocity Prevention from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1060 10 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/3-2013astrategicframeworkformassatrocityprevention-131121223205-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Occasional Paper 1/2013: Gendered Crises, Gendered Responses - The Necessity and Utility of a Gender Perspective in Armed Conflicts and Natural Disasters: An Introductory Overview /slideshow/gendered-crises-gendered-responses/25900978 genderedcrises-genderedresponses-130904192817-
Armed conflicts and natural disasters are inherently gendered crises; they can affect women, men, girls and boys in profoundly different ways. It is increasingly accepted that understanding these differences—or adopting a gender perspective—improves the effectiveness of responses to these crises, as well as the efforts of policy-making, advocacy, research and training institutions that focus on them. A gender perspective is more frequently recognised as a core requirement for all personnel involved in these efforts. However, there are many who are expected to engage with gender issues, yet remain unfamiliar with them. For this audience, there is a dearth of literature that provides an introductory overview of gender issues in crisis environments. This paper is intended to be an educational and awareness-raising resource for those who are beginning to engage with gender issues in crisis environments, whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines gender dimensions commonly observed in conflict and disaster environments, such as differences in casualty trends, risks, threats, vulnerabilities, needs, opportunities and stresses. It provides examples of the operational benefits of a gender perspective and the harmful consequences resulting from the absence of a gender perspective.]]>
Armed conflicts and natural disasters are inherently gendered crises; they can affect women, men, girls and boys in profoundly different ways. It is increasingly accepted that understanding these differences—or adopting a gender perspective—improves the effectiveness of responses to these crises, as well as the efforts of policy-making, advocacy, research and training institutions that focus on them. A gender perspective is more frequently recognised as a core requirement for all personnel involved in these efforts. However, there are many who are expected to engage with gender issues, yet remain unfamiliar with them. For this audience, there is a dearth of literature that provides an introductory overview of gender issues in crisis environments. This paper is intended to be an educational and awareness-raising resource for those who are beginning to engage with gender issues in crisis environments, whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines gender dimensions commonly observed in conflict and disaster environments, such as differences in casualty trends, risks, threats, vulnerabilities, needs, opportunities and stresses. It provides examples of the operational benefits of a gender perspective and the harmful consequences resulting from the absence of a gender perspective.]]> Wed, 04 Sep 2013 19:28:17 GMT /slideshow/gendered-crises-gendered-responses/25900978 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Occasional Paper 1/2013: Gendered Crises, Gendered Responses - The Necessity and Utility of a Gender Perspective in Armed Conflicts and Natural Disasters: An Introductory Overview CivMilCoE Armed conflicts and natural disasters are inherently gendered crises; they can affect women, men, girls and boys in profoundly different ways. It is increasingly accepted that understanding these differences—or adopting a gender perspective—improves the effectiveness of responses to these crises, as well as the efforts of policy-making, advocacy, research and training institutions that focus on them. A gender perspective is more frequently recognised as a core requirement for all personnel involved in these efforts. However, there are many who are expected to engage with gender issues, yet remain unfamiliar with them. For this audience, there is a dearth of literature that provides an introductory overview of gender issues in crisis environments. This paper is intended to be an educational and awareness-raising resource for those who are beginning to engage with gender issues in crisis environments, whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines gender dimensions commonly observed in conflict and disaster environments, such as differences in casualty trends, risks, threats, vulnerabilities, needs, opportunities and stresses. It provides examples of the operational benefits of a gender perspective and the harmful consequences resulting from the absence of a gender perspective. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/genderedcrises-genderedresponses-130904192817--thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Armed conflicts and natural disasters are inherently gendered crises; they can affect women, men, girls and boys in profoundly different ways. It is increasingly accepted that understanding these differences—or adopting a gender perspective—improves the effectiveness of responses to these crises, as well as the efforts of policy-making, advocacy, research and training institutions that focus on them. A gender perspective is more frequently recognised as a core requirement for all personnel involved in these efforts. However, there are many who are expected to engage with gender issues, yet remain unfamiliar with them. For this audience, there is a dearth of literature that provides an introductory overview of gender issues in crisis environments. This paper is intended to be an educational and awareness-raising resource for those who are beginning to engage with gender issues in crisis environments, whether they are civilian, military or police. It examines gender dimensions commonly observed in conflict and disaster environments, such as differences in casualty trends, risks, threats, vulnerabilities, needs, opportunities and stresses. It provides examples of the operational benefits of a gender perspective and the harmful consequences resulting from the absence of a gender perspective.

Occasional Paper 1/2013: Gendered Crises, Gendered Responses - The Necessity and Utility of a Gender Perspective in Armed Conflicts and Natural Disasters: An Introductory Overview from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 7212 30 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/genderedcrises-genderedresponses-130904192817--thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document White http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Working paper 2 2013 - Policing – The Face of Peace in Afghanistan /slideshow/2-2013-policing-the-face-of-peace-in-afghanistan/23487514 2-2013policingthefaceofpeaceinafghanistan-130625201956-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Tue, 25 Jun 2013 20:19:56 GMT /slideshow/2-2013-policing-the-face-of-peace-in-afghanistan/23487514 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Working paper 2 2013 - Policing – The Face of Peace in Afghanistan CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2-2013policingthefaceofpeaceinafghanistan-130625201956-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Working paper 2 2013 - Policing – The Face of Peace in Afghanistan from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1064 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/2-2013policingthefaceofpeaceinafghanistan-130625201956-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Working paper 1 2013 police-military interaction /slideshow/working-paper-1-2013-policemilitary-interaction/22031525 workingpaper1-2013police-militaryinteraction-130527222811-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Mon, 27 May 2013 22:28:11 GMT /slideshow/working-paper-1-2013-policemilitary-interaction/22031525 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Working paper 1 2013 police-military interaction CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/workingpaper1-2013police-militaryinteraction-130527222811-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Working paper 1 2013 police-military interaction from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1385 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/workingpaper1-2013police-militaryinteraction-130527222811-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 CMIS Report 2011 /slideshow/cmis-report-2011/17296051 cmisreport2011-130317185919-phpapp02
Conference report from the Civil-military Interaction Seminar 2011 from the ACMC]]>
Conference report from the Civil-military Interaction Seminar 2011 from the ACMC]]> Sun, 17 Mar 2013 18:59:19 GMT /slideshow/cmis-report-2011/17296051 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) CMIS Report 2011 CivMilCoE Conference report from the Civil-military Interaction Seminar 2011 from the ACMC <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/cmisreport2011-130317185919-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Conference report from the Civil-military Interaction Seminar 2011 from the ACMC

CMIS Report 2011 from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 2144 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/cmisreport2011-130317185919-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Bob Hall - Presentation �ݺ�ߣs from 8th ILLC December 2012 /slideshow/bob-hall-presentation-slides-from-8th-illc-december-2012/15663941 bobhall-121216210222-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Sun, 16 Dec 2012 21:02:22 GMT /slideshow/bob-hall-presentation-slides-from-8th-illc-december-2012/15663941 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Bob Hall - Presentation �ݺ�ߣs from 8th ILLC December 2012 CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/bobhall-121216210222-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Bob Hall - Presentation �ݺ�ߣs from 8th ILLC December 2012 from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 563 2 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/bobhall-121216210222-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Nicholas Coppel speech at international lessons Conference 5 December 2012 /slideshow/nicholas-coppel-speech-at-international-lessons-conference-5-december-2012/15663076 120612speechbyscatacmcinternationallessons-121216184423-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Sun, 16 Dec 2012 18:44:23 GMT /slideshow/nicholas-coppel-speech-at-international-lessons-conference-5-december-2012/15663076 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Nicholas Coppel speech at international lessons Conference 5 December 2012 CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/120612speechbyscatacmcinternationallessons-121216184423-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Nicholas Coppel speech at international lessons Conference 5 December 2012 from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 495 3 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/120612speechbyscatacmcinternationallessons-121216184423-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Chalmers david op sumatra assist - rusi paper /slideshow/chalmers-david-op-sumatra-assist-rusi-paper/15599140 chalmersdavid-opsumatraassist-rusipaper-121211220017-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Tue, 11 Dec 2012 22:00:17 GMT /slideshow/chalmers-david-op-sumatra-assist-rusi-paper/15599140 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Chalmers david op sumatra assist - rusi paper CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/chalmersdavid-opsumatraassist-rusipaper-121211220017-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Chalmers david op sumatra assist - rusi paper from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 715 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/chalmersdavid-opsumatraassist-rusipaper-121211220017-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Hadr aide memoire final 2012 /slideshow/hadr-aide-memoire-final-2012/15598355 hadraidememoirefinal2012-121211204618-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Tue, 11 Dec 2012 20:46:18 GMT /slideshow/hadr-aide-memoire-final-2012/15598355 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Hadr aide memoire final 2012 CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hadraidememoirefinal2012-121211204618-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Hadr aide memoire final 2012 from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1699 11 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/hadraidememoirefinal2012-121211204618-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 International Conference on Building Security Capacity /slideshow/international-conference-on-building-security-capacity/15362231 12168conferencereport4-121126222240-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Mon, 26 Nov 2012 22:22:38 GMT /slideshow/international-conference-on-building-security-capacity/15362231 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) International Conference on Building Security Capacity CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12168conferencereport4-121126222240-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

International Conference on Building Security Capacity from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 853 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12168conferencereport4-121126222240-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Working Paper 05/2012 Future directions in civil-military responses to natural disasters /slideshow/working-paper-052012-future-directions-in-civilmilitary-responses-to-natural-disasters/13624432 12089cmacpaper5futuredirections1-120713005416-phpapp01
]]>
]]> Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:54:13 GMT /slideshow/working-paper-052012-future-directions-in-civilmilitary-responses-to-natural-disasters/13624432 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Working Paper 05/2012 Future directions in civil-military responses to natural disasters CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper5futuredirections1-120713005416-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Working Paper 05/2012 Future directions in civil-military responses to natural disasters from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1689 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper5futuredirections1-120713005416-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Working Paper 04/2012 Rebuilding war-torn states: tomorrow's challenges for post-conflict reconstruction /slideshow/working-paper-042012-rebuilding-wartorn-states-tomorrows-challenges-for-postconflict-reconstruction/13624420 12089cmacpaper4rebuildingwar-tornstates1-120713005224-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:52:23 GMT /slideshow/working-paper-042012-rebuilding-wartorn-states-tomorrows-challenges-for-postconflict-reconstruction/13624420 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Working Paper 04/2012 Rebuilding war-torn states: tomorrow's challenges for post-conflict reconstruction CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper4rebuildingwar-tornstates1-120713005224-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Working Paper 04/2012 Rebuilding war-torn states: tomorrow's challenges for post-conflict reconstruction from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 764 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper4rebuildingwar-tornstates1-120713005224-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Working Paper 03/2012 Civil-military interaction and the future of humanitarian action /slideshow/working-paper-032012-civilmilitary-interaction-and-the-future-of-humanitarian-action/13624410 12089cmacpaper3civil-militaryinteraction1-120713005041-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:50:39 GMT /slideshow/working-paper-032012-civilmilitary-interaction-and-the-future-of-humanitarian-action/13624410 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Working Paper 03/2012 Civil-military interaction and the future of humanitarian action CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper3civil-militaryinteraction1-120713005041-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Working Paper 03/2012 Civil-military interaction and the future of humanitarian action from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 870 5 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper3civil-militaryinteraction1-120713005041-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Working Paper 02/2012 Conflict prevention in practice: from rhetoric to reality /slideshow/working-paper-022012-conflict-prevention-in-practice-from-rhetoric-to-reality/13624402 12089cmacpaper2conflictpreventioninpractice1-120713004826-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:48:23 GMT /slideshow/working-paper-022012-conflict-prevention-in-practice-from-rhetoric-to-reality/13624402 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) Working Paper 02/2012 Conflict prevention in practice: from rhetoric to reality CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper2conflictpreventioninpractice1-120713004826-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

Working Paper 02/2012 Conflict prevention in practice: from rhetoric to reality from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 663 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper2conflictpreventioninpractice1-120713004826-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 ACMC Working Paper 01/2012 Disaster response: lessons from Christchurch /slideshow/12089-cmac-paper-1christchurch1/13624336 12089cmacpaper1christchurch1-120713003711-phpapp01
Working Paper 01/2012 ]]>
Working Paper 01/2012 ]]> Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:37:09 GMT /slideshow/12089-cmac-paper-1christchurch1/13624336 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) ACMC Working Paper 01/2012 Disaster response: lessons from Christchurch CivMilCoE Working Paper 01/2012 <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper1christchurch1-120713003711-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Working Paper 01/2012

ACMC Working Paper 01/2012 Disaster response: lessons from Christchurch from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 573 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/12089cmacpaper1christchurch1-120713003711-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 University of Woolongong Detention of Non-State Actors Conference and Workshop: Summary 21 May 2012 /slideshow/university-of-woolongong-detention-of-nonstate-actors-conference-and-workshop-summary-21-may-2012/13316672 universityofwoolongongdetentionofnonstateactorsconferencesummary-21may2012-120613192743-phpapp02
]]>
]]> Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:27:42 GMT /slideshow/university-of-woolongong-detention-of-nonstate-actors-conference-and-workshop-summary-21-may-2012/13316672 CivMilCoE@slideshare.net(CivMilCoE) University of Woolongong Detention of Non-State Actors Conference and Workshop: Summary 21 May 2012 CivMilCoE <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/universityofwoolongongdetentionofnonstateactorsconferencesummary-21may2012-120613192743-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" />

University of Woolongong Detention of Non-State Actors Conference and Workshop: Summary 21 May 2012 from Australian Civil-Military Centre

]]> 1037 4 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/universityofwoolongongdetentionofnonstateactorsconferencesummary-21may2012-120613192743-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds document Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/profile-photo-CivMilCoE-48x48.jpg?cb=1522974916 Official account of the Australian Civil-Military Centre. Promoting civil-military collaboration for conflict prevention and sustainable peace. acmc.gov.au/ https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/acmcevolutionofprotectionofciviliansinarmedconflict-141209223828-conversion-gate01-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/evolution-of-protection-of-civilians-in-armed-conflict/42548203 Evolution of protectio... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/acmcperceptionsaboutprotectionofcivilians-141209221832-conversion-gate02-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/perceptions-about-protection-of-civilians/42547855 Perceptions about prot... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/occasionalpaper2-2014-linksbetweenssranddevelopment-140908200618-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/occasional-paper-2-2014-links-between-ssr-and-development/38849598 Civil-Military Occasio...