Chuck Thiessen
Dr. Chuck Thiessen is an Associate Professor in International Relations at the Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations at Coventry University in the United Kingdom. He acquired a PhD in Peace and Conflict Studies from the Arthur Mauro Centre for Peace and Justice at the University of Manitoba in Canada. Dr. Thiessen is a scholar and practitioner whose academic research has focused on international peacebuilding in Afghanistan and other war-torn contexts. Previous to his current position, Dr. Thiessen worked in Kabul, Afghanistan, as a research manager for a peacebuilding NGO. He has consulted for several international and local organizations including the UN Peacebuilding Fund in Afghanistan and Kyrgyzstan.
My email: [email protected]
My profile and CV: https://pureportal.coventry.ac.uk/en/persons/chuck-thiessen
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChuckThiessen
Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations (CTPSR), Coventry University, UK
Webpage: http://www.coventry.ac.uk/research/areas-of-research/trust-peace-social-relations/
Address: Coventry, Coventry, United Kingdom
My email: [email protected]
My profile and CV: https://pureportal.coventry.ac.uk/en/persons/chuck-thiessen
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChuckThiessen
Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations (CTPSR), Coventry University, UK
Webpage: http://www.coventry.ac.uk/research/areas-of-research/trust-peace-social-relations/
Address: Coventry, Coventry, United Kingdom
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (12)
Uploads
Papers by Chuck Thiessen
This issue brief introduces findings on the strategic shift of UN peacebuilding interventions toward PVE and the barriers these interventions face to protecting human rights, drawing on research conducted in Kyrgyzstan. It concludes that PVE approaches to peacebuilding are fundamentally ambiguous, which may be hindering promotion of human rights. These ambiguities lie both in the terminology and strategies of intervention and in the drivers of radicalization and violent extremism. By clarifying its approach to PVE, the UN can dilute the inherent contradiction in its dual role as a critic and supporter of host states and reduce the odds that its interventions legitimize human rights violations.
In response, the UN commissioned the 2013 Peacebuilding Needs and Priorities Assessment in the Kyrgyz Republic (PBNA), which highlighted a series of underlying factors that need to be addressed to reduce the likelihood of resumed violence in the future. The PBNA guided the development of a Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) sponsored Peacebuilding Priority Plan (PPP) in Kyrgyzstan that involves the implementation of a three-year program of projects to achieve a series of peacebuilding outcome results. The PPP Results Framework contains 12 outcome indicators for which this research and report provides baseline data.
This baseline research and report gathered data from a ‘control group’ that was not targeted by UN PBF project work in order to clarify the effects of UN project support at the local level. Baseline data has been disaggregated according to key variables such as ethnic/linguistic group, gender, age, and geographic locations, if they are statistically significant to explain results. Baseline strategies and instruments were jointly developed through a series of working group meetings which brought together the PBF Secretariat, the international consultant, and clusters of RUNO representatives. GAMSUMO and the President’s Office were also involved in the finalization of methodologies and instruments.
Baseline data for this report was gathered during February to March 2015 through two commissioned surveys – a Local Self Governance Area (LSG) survey and a community perception survey. The LSG survey methodology required two teams of researchers to visit 20 ‘local self-governance’ areas - ten ‘intervention’ areas (Aiyl Okmotus) with a strong UN project presence, and 10 ‘non-intervention’ control areas (Aiyl Okmotus).
The community perception survey measured the change in perceptions, attitudes and behaviours among a representative sample of the population that was exposed to or indirectly impacted by UN PBF project activities. This perception survey also produced data on perceptions of a comparable ‘control group’ that were not targeted by the UN PBF project activities in order to validate that changes in perceptions are likely a result of PBF projects. The community perception survey utilized a multi-stage cluster sampling strategy with ‘probability proportional to size’ requiring probability sampling of clusters (localities) within 20 ‘intervention’ municipalities and 20 control municipalities. This survey was subject to several layers of quality checks and inspections.
This Baseline report will eventually be followed up by an Endline data gathering exercise following the conclusion of UN PPP project activities. The Endline research will require a return fact finding visit to the same group of intervention and control LSGs, and the commissioning of another community perception survey. Progress or regression in UN intervention sites can be compared to non-intervention sites. The results of this analysis, when compared to Baseline results, should be indicative of the effectiveness of UN PBF-sponsored project work in Kyrgyzstan. Due to a wide variety of factors such as ethnic demographics, the varying experience of ethnic violence in 2010, and the presence of other internationally-funded project work across the country, the conclusions from the this survey may not be representative for all areas of Kyrgyzstan.
This chapter is structured around the following two broad conclusions. First, elite and grassroots peacebuilding leaders continue to hold starkly competing conceptions of the necessity of justice in the journey towards sustainable peace, particularly when considering reconciliation with Taliban political leaders and the inclusion of former Mujahedeen warlords in political structures. Second, grassroots peace and justice work has been largely ignored and, perhaps, suppressed, in favour of upper-level or military-led ‘peace’ strategies. Consequently, grassroots populations in Afghanistan appear to be significantly disconnected from upper-level peace processes, and are struggling to connect with formal justice structures and processes.
These 13 well-researched chapters use a variety of empirical and theoretical approaches drawn from psychology, political science, and anthropology. Its topics include terrorism, education, peace studies, and conflict resolution. Experts from eight countries share their findings and offer a comprehensive overview of violence and responses to it. The book builds on current thinking regarding causal factors, such as inequality, exclusion, lack of opportunity, or grievance. It broadens the conceptualization of the phenomena and links it with tangible measures that reduce conflict and promote peace.
This book is an important source for researchers and students of conflict, violence, and peace. It is accessible to anyone with broad interests in studying aggressive behavior and methods of reducing it."
Library and bookstore shelves are filled with critiques of the negative impacts of religion in conflict scenarios. Peace on Earth: The Role of Religion in Peace and Conflict Studies offers an alternate view that suggests religious organizations play a more complex role in conflict than a simply negative one. Faith-based organizations, and their workers, are often found on the frontlines of conflict throughout the world, conducting conflict management and resolution activities as well as advancing peacebuilding initiatives.
The report is designed to identify changes in community perceptions of the justice system in Kunduz province within the context of the ongoing Dutch mission to build the capacity of rule of law (RoL) institutions. It measures confidence in institutions charged with protecting and delivering justice, including the Afghan Uniform Police (AUP) and the judiciary, against the baseline study conducted in 2011. In doing so, it draws primarily from community perception surveys and interviews with the police, government officials, community elders and prisoners, and relies on additional primary and secondary data provided by key institutions.
This issue brief introduces findings on the strategic shift of UN peacebuilding interventions toward PVE and the barriers these interventions face to protecting human rights, drawing on research conducted in Kyrgyzstan. It concludes that PVE approaches to peacebuilding are fundamentally ambiguous, which may be hindering promotion of human rights. These ambiguities lie both in the terminology and strategies of intervention and in the drivers of radicalization and violent extremism. By clarifying its approach to PVE, the UN can dilute the inherent contradiction in its dual role as a critic and supporter of host states and reduce the odds that its interventions legitimize human rights violations.
In response, the UN commissioned the 2013 Peacebuilding Needs and Priorities Assessment in the Kyrgyz Republic (PBNA), which highlighted a series of underlying factors that need to be addressed to reduce the likelihood of resumed violence in the future. The PBNA guided the development of a Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) sponsored Peacebuilding Priority Plan (PPP) in Kyrgyzstan that involves the implementation of a three-year program of projects to achieve a series of peacebuilding outcome results. The PPP Results Framework contains 12 outcome indicators for which this research and report provides baseline data.
This baseline research and report gathered data from a ‘control group’ that was not targeted by UN PBF project work in order to clarify the effects of UN project support at the local level. Baseline data has been disaggregated according to key variables such as ethnic/linguistic group, gender, age, and geographic locations, if they are statistically significant to explain results. Baseline strategies and instruments were jointly developed through a series of working group meetings which brought together the PBF Secretariat, the international consultant, and clusters of RUNO representatives. GAMSUMO and the President’s Office were also involved in the finalization of methodologies and instruments.
Baseline data for this report was gathered during February to March 2015 through two commissioned surveys – a Local Self Governance Area (LSG) survey and a community perception survey. The LSG survey methodology required two teams of researchers to visit 20 ‘local self-governance’ areas - ten ‘intervention’ areas (Aiyl Okmotus) with a strong UN project presence, and 10 ‘non-intervention’ control areas (Aiyl Okmotus).
The community perception survey measured the change in perceptions, attitudes and behaviours among a representative sample of the population that was exposed to or indirectly impacted by UN PBF project activities. This perception survey also produced data on perceptions of a comparable ‘control group’ that were not targeted by the UN PBF project activities in order to validate that changes in perceptions are likely a result of PBF projects. The community perception survey utilized a multi-stage cluster sampling strategy with ‘probability proportional to size’ requiring probability sampling of clusters (localities) within 20 ‘intervention’ municipalities and 20 control municipalities. This survey was subject to several layers of quality checks and inspections.
This Baseline report will eventually be followed up by an Endline data gathering exercise following the conclusion of UN PPP project activities. The Endline research will require a return fact finding visit to the same group of intervention and control LSGs, and the commissioning of another community perception survey. Progress or regression in UN intervention sites can be compared to non-intervention sites. The results of this analysis, when compared to Baseline results, should be indicative of the effectiveness of UN PBF-sponsored project work in Kyrgyzstan. Due to a wide variety of factors such as ethnic demographics, the varying experience of ethnic violence in 2010, and the presence of other internationally-funded project work across the country, the conclusions from the this survey may not be representative for all areas of Kyrgyzstan.
This chapter is structured around the following two broad conclusions. First, elite and grassroots peacebuilding leaders continue to hold starkly competing conceptions of the necessity of justice in the journey towards sustainable peace, particularly when considering reconciliation with Taliban political leaders and the inclusion of former Mujahedeen warlords in political structures. Second, grassroots peace and justice work has been largely ignored and, perhaps, suppressed, in favour of upper-level or military-led ‘peace’ strategies. Consequently, grassroots populations in Afghanistan appear to be significantly disconnected from upper-level peace processes, and are struggling to connect with formal justice structures and processes.
These 13 well-researched chapters use a variety of empirical and theoretical approaches drawn from psychology, political science, and anthropology. Its topics include terrorism, education, peace studies, and conflict resolution. Experts from eight countries share their findings and offer a comprehensive overview of violence and responses to it. The book builds on current thinking regarding causal factors, such as inequality, exclusion, lack of opportunity, or grievance. It broadens the conceptualization of the phenomena and links it with tangible measures that reduce conflict and promote peace.
This book is an important source for researchers and students of conflict, violence, and peace. It is accessible to anyone with broad interests in studying aggressive behavior and methods of reducing it."
Library and bookstore shelves are filled with critiques of the negative impacts of religion in conflict scenarios. Peace on Earth: The Role of Religion in Peace and Conflict Studies offers an alternate view that suggests religious organizations play a more complex role in conflict than a simply negative one. Faith-based organizations, and their workers, are often found on the frontlines of conflict throughout the world, conducting conflict management and resolution activities as well as advancing peacebuilding initiatives.
The report is designed to identify changes in community perceptions of the justice system in Kunduz province within the context of the ongoing Dutch mission to build the capacity of rule of law (RoL) institutions. It measures confidence in institutions charged with protecting and delivering justice, including the Afghan Uniform Police (AUP) and the judiciary, against the baseline study conducted in 2011. In doing so, it draws primarily from community perception surveys and interviews with the police, government officials, community elders and prisoners, and relies on additional primary and secondary data provided by key institutions.
This book responds to this need for revised peacebuilding paradigms and: (1) introduces the topic of local ownership of peacebuilding in Afghanistan; (2) surveys current shifts in peacebuilding theory and practice that are only starting to be realized on the ground; (3) sets the context for a discussion of local ownership of peacebuilding; (4) reports on the perceptions of foreign and Afghan peacebuilding leaders working in Afghanistan in regards to the journey towards local ownership of peacebuilding; and (5) suggests the creation of a locally designed and led conflict transformation system that might help restructure local-foreign relations and advance the journey towards Afghan ownership of peacebuilding.