!
#1 | July 2015
Building a Dialogue Support Platform in Ukraine:
Challenges and Opportunities
Report Based on a First Explorative Meeting
of the Dialogue Support Platform in Ukraine
14-15 July 2015
!
Disclaimer: This document is a collection of the main points presented by participants at the meeting on 14-15 July 2015 — it does not represent the opinion of
mediatEUr nor that of the UNDP. The mapping and identification of options are
an exercise in continuous evolution.
© 2015 mediatEUr and the UNDP.
Unless stated otherwise, all images are © 2015 mediatEUr.
2!
!
TABLE OF CONTENTS
!
SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 5
1. PARTICIPANT ORGANISATIONS IN THE PLATFORM: WHO IS WORKING WITH DIALOGUE
WHERE? ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.
WHAT IS DIALOGUE? ........................................................................................................................... 9
3.
CONFLICT ISSUES ............................................................................................................................... 11
4.
MAIN CHALLENGES ........................................................................................................................... 13
5. RESPONDING TO THE CHALLENGES: THE POTENTIAL OF THE DIALOGUE SUPPORT
PLATFORM ................................................................................................................................................... 16
6.
THE UNDP AS A SUPPORTER OF DIALOGUE .............................................................................. 18
7.
CONCLUSION AND IMMEDIATE STEPS ........................................................................................ 20
!
!
#1 | July 2015
Building a Dialogue Support
Platform in Ukraine:
Challenges and Opportunities
SUMMARY
Opportunities
Main Challenges
Facilitators working together
!
Building trust to develop communications, exchange and cooperation between facilitators
Culture of dialogue
!
Exploring a common understanding of the
meaning of “dialogue” and engaging media to
make it clear to the public
Dialogue Fatigue
!
Encouraging a discussion to evaluate the effect
of dialogues and finding ways to measure
them
Working with authorities
!
Promoting a conflict-sensitive approach in the
political agenda
Safety
!
Exploring the relationship between safety and
trust-building in detail
Preparation and coordination
!
Exchanging experiences and approaches to dialogue preparation
Immediate steps before the official launch of the platform
on the last week of September
Online Platform
In-country practical support
" Continued testing
" Continued engagement with Ukrainian dialogue initiatives; gathering of data on
needs and conflict issues for mapping.
" Invitation process for relevant
Ukrainian and international actors working on dialogue
" Continued promotion of cooperation
amongst Ukrainian dialogue initiatives and
" Improving the translation funcinternational organisations
tionality and the user experience
" Discussing the meaning of dialogue.
" Exploring the integration of new
" Considering the various ‘stages’ of conflict
tools.
that facilitators are working with.
!
BACKGROUND
The Ukraine Dialogue Support Platform is an online and in-country platform that helps Ukrainian dialogue
actors connect with each other, explore their needs, and communicate
with national actors and the international community, utilising interactive,
modern dialogue technologies. The
platform is an initiative of the European Forum for International Mediation
and Dialogue (mediatEUr), a nonprofit organization working in mediation and dialogue support with experience in supporting indigenous processes, in partnership with the United
Nations Development Programme in
Ukraine (UNDP).
On 14-15 July 2015, a pilot group of
facilitators met in Kyiv for a first technical meeting on the platform. The
goal was to discuss the main challenges for their work on dialogue for peace.
Together with colleagues from the
UNDP, the group explored:
1.! A mapping of initiatives for dialogue
2.! The meaning of dialogue
3.! Conflict issues being addressed
4.! The challenges for dialogue
practice in Ukraine
5.! The potential of the Platform
6.! The role of the UNDP
7.! The next steps for the Platform
Our goal is to generate positive thinking to help transform the conflict that
has affected Ukraine since 2013,
through modern technology and dialogue expertise. We connect Ukrainian
dialogue experts with people at all
levels of society, allowing for horizontal dialogue and fostering exchange
with the policy level and the international community. Ultimately, the platform helps define options for regional
engagement, reform, and a way forward. We do this through our incountry presence, supporting efforts on
the ground, and with an online platform that allows us to map, analyse
and present the results of these initiatives and expand their reach.
The meeting was held in preparation
for an official launch in the last week
of September 2015, and it was captured using Debategraph methodology. This report summarises the main
findings and recommendations from
the two days of work and offers a first
interpretation of the mapping of dialogue initiatives, their needs, and their
challenges as discussed at the meeting. The Platform will continue the
work to expand on these issues and
identify options. A regularly updated
mapping can be found online at
dialoguesupport.org/mapping.
5
!
6!
!
1.! PARTICIPANT ORGANISATIONS IN THE PLATFORM: WHO IS
WORKING WITH DIALOGUE WHERE?
The Dialogue Support Platform is designed for inclusivity; we aim to reach
dialogue initiatives in all regions of
Ukraine, at all levels of society, and
from all points of view. The meeting
in July was a first step in this direction, and included twelve women and
ten men working with dialogue in
Kyiv, Sumy, Luhansk region, Donetsk
region (Dobropolye), Kremenchuk,
Mykolayiv, Odessa and Kherson. In the
future, the participation will expand to
a broader regional representation.
!
The platform also aims to engage international organisations working on
dialogue in Ukraine in order to forge
stronger links and increase cooperation. mediatEUr will work with its
partner organisation, the United Nations Development Program in
Ukraine, to engage other international
organisations working on dialogue in
Ukraine such as the OSCE Project Coordinator in Ukraine and the OSCE
Special Monitoring Mission, as well as
other INGOs and NGOs.
Dialogue Initiatives and Regions Represented in the Dialogue Support Platform
Foundations for Freedom (F4F)
Ukrainian Dialogue Facilitator Network
Institute for Peace and Common Ground (IPCG)
International Centre for Policy Studies (ICPS)
Dignity Space
Theatre for Dialogue
Institute of Cultural Affairs Ukraine (ICA Ukraine)
Nova Kraina
Ukrainian Peacebuilding School
Kyiv
"!
"!
"!
"!
"!
"!
"!
"!
"!
Sumy
"! Centre for Social Partnership
Mykolayiv
"! Mykolayiv Dialogue Initiative
Dobropolye
Odessa
Luhansk region
"! Zahist Rodini
"! Odessa Regional Mediation Group
"! Luhansk Regional Mediation Group
7!
8!
!
Areas where organisations represented in the platform have developed dialogue initiatives.
Visit dialoguesupport.org/regions-and-representation for an interactive version of this map.
!
!
“
Dialogue is an opportunity to talk
and listen in a protected environment
Participant at the July Meeting
“
2.! WHAT IS DIALOGUE?
!
The first meeting showed that there is
clear diversity in the understanding of
the term ‘dialogue’. To some, dialogue
is “the ability to talk and listen in a
safe place.” To others, it may be about
“empathic interaction – people who
are capable of listening and speaking
to each other properly.”
When comparing various dialogue
initiatives, it may help to ask the
question: what are the aims of this
process? This may help to discover
differences but also similar goals that
would highlight overlaps and potential for cooperation amongst initiatives.
Some dialogues aim “to help people
hear each other to find common understanding.” Often, as a result of the
conflict in Ukraine or otherwise, people do not have an effective way to
communicate with each other constructively about existing problems or
different views — these dialogue initiatives aim to create this space.
Another aim of some dialogues highlighted by participants at the meeting
is “to help with strategic planning,
understanding community barriers,
helping to create joint actionplanning.” The focus of these approaches is on the future: problemsolving, strategic thinking, policymaking, developing ideas and proposals, etc. Often these take the format of round-tables, but the effectiveness of this format has been
brought into question. One challenge,
for instance, is that people in conflict
may not be ready to rationally work
together on problem-solving. In these
cases, it often takes time and energy
before participants can begin a constructive discussion and, unfortunately, the time can then run out. Similarly, dialogue participants may have
different levels of understanding of
and expertise on dialogue or the issues at hand, the different needs, and
the different hopes, which can make it
difficult for the group to find collective
goals and work together on them.
9!
!
In solidifying the next steps, it will be
important to continue the discussion
about what dialogue means to the
members of the Dialogue Support
Platform, exploring the aims and principles that underline the different
methodologies. Furthermore, mapping dialogue initiatives and methodologies will help to create a ‘bigger
picture’ of the overall dialogue context
and where each initiative links in.
Some of the many methodologies in
place in the different regions of the
#
#
#
#
country as communicated by the participants are listed below. It should be
noted that there may be overlaps in
processes, principles and approaches
amongst them, which demonstrates
the wealth of dialogue practice in
Ukraine:
#! Non-violent Communication
#! Alternatives to Violence
#! Process-oriented psychology
#! Technology of Participation
#! Round-tables
#! Restorative Circles
#! Theatre for Dialogue
Dialogue provides a space for constructive thinking and communication
Dialogue comprises different methodologies and different aims
Different dialogue approaches may have similar challenges and needs
The Platform can help identify and overcome these challenges.
This is what the DSPU’s first mapping, from July 2015, looks like. Dialogue is a rich practice with
multiple methodologies, issues and challenges — revealing commonalities and a joint way ahead
requires continued support.
10
!
3.! CONFLICT ISSUES
Such initiatives require strong local
support and, importantly, they must
be informed by the issues on the
ground that fuel tensions. The group
at the meeting in July brought a broad
range of topics to the table that concern their communities, from issues
such as renaming streets, to changing
the rhetoric of mass media, providing
assistance to displaced persons or
promoting business development.
Charting these topics and the challenges and options identified within
them will (a) provide a basis for the
promotion of the principles of dialogue and (b) serve as a source of information from the communities:
what are the communities concerned
about? What are the options they
identify for the most pressing challenges? What is the scope for the future?
“
We are interested in the
human side, the value
level. Both sides should
understand they’re both
human beings;
once they do, they’ll be
able to understand and
work with each other.
“
In the past two years, dialogue has
gained a new momentum in Ukraine.
In the face of the armed conflict in the
Eastern regions, different initiatives
have been launched for national dialogue, with different results, by international organisations. Such initiatives
have brought dialogue to the public
interest, and have focused mainly on
the national/political level. At the
same time, policy makers have embarked on reform agendas to review
some of the most pressing issues in
the country; constitutional reform,
corruption, IDPs are just some examples.
Participant at the July Meeting
!
11!
!
Some issues identified at the meeting
are conflicts:
#! between local authorities and civil
society;
#! between regional authorities and
national authorities;
#! between civil activists belonging to
various political parties;
#! between “Maidan” and “AntiMaidan”;
#! between patriotic and pro-Russian
groups;
#! between Ukrainians who are ‘active’ and those who are ‘inactive’;
#! between local residents and military;
#! between local residents and IDPs;
#! relating to governance and decentralisation;
#! relating to new legislation;
#! relating to monuments;
#! relating to renaming of streets;
#! relating to mobilisation;
#! relating to utility costs;
#! relating to uniting civil society
(e.g. conflicts amongst activists).
The online mapping represents all issues, needs and challenges, and establishes links between them. In the future, these links will help identify joint
solutions.
12
!
4.! MAIN CHALLENGES
#
#
#
#
#
#
Facilitators working together
Culture of dialogue
Dialogue fatigue
Working with authorities
Safety
Dialogue preparation and coordination
Facilitators working together
Amongst people working with dialogues in Ukraine there is naturally a
variety of methodologies, approaches,
personalities and views. According to
the participants at the July meeting,
the main challenge for the members
of the Platform is to find joint understanding of these differences and of
dialogue work in the country. The
Platform can help the facilitators to
develop their communication, exchange and cooperation.
Guaranteeing the effectiveness of the
Platform requires a certain level of
trust built with the participants and
amongst them. In addition to existing
policies on privacy, confidentiality and
use of the online platform, the next
working meeting should focus on
trust-building within the group.
Culture of dialogue
There is a parallel between the need
to find clarity about the meaning of
dialogue amongst the facilitators and
a greater need to find clarity about the
meaning of dialogue in Ukrainian society. Meeting participants noted that
there is no “culture of dialogue” in
Ukraine, and pointed out that there is
a prevalent understanding of dialogue
as debate, where the aim is to effectively defend one’s position and win
arguments against people with a different point of view. The latter may be
influenced by a debate culture in
Ukrainian politics, which then permeates mass media and influences people’s understanding of the term “dialogue.”
In order to protect the integrity of dialogues and to build trust in dialogue
processes in Ukraine (and in the contribution it can make to conflict transformation), it is important to differentiate them from debate. Discussions
on the platform have emphasised the
need to continue building a culture of
dialogue in Ukraine by informing authorities, through mass media, and
making the meaning of “dialogue”
clear to the public. However, some
13!
!
meeting participants noted that, before trying to promote this culture,
there is a need to find a common understanding of dialogue amongst facilitators themselves.
Dialogue fatigue
The term “dialogue” has been used
extensively in Ukraine — as discussed
during the meeting, in some instances
without constructive results nor positive change from its use. While recognising the difficulty in explaining or
measuring the results of dialogue, the
pilot group is conscious of the ‘dialogue fatigue’ that can emerge as a
result. At the same time, facilitators
have faced challenges in promoting
the value of dialogue for conflict
transformation — some actors are not
convinced of its contribution, and
their readiness, understanding and
motivation to participate varies.
The Platform should encourage a discussion on evaluating the effect of
dialogues and whether it is possible to
provide quantitative or qualitative
results that would minimise dialogue
fatigue. Similarly, it should assess the
space for enhanced dialogue while
avoiding contributing to this dialogue
fatigue.
Working with authorities
Another challenge that was raised
during the discussions is the difficulty
for some facilitators and civil society
in working with local and national
14
authorities. There is a need for “local
dialogues to be acknowledged at a
higher, political level. Authorities need
to publically acknowledge that dialogues are a very effective way to resolve problems,” highlighted a participant.
It was suggested that some authorities do not engage constructively with
dialogues, from being sceptical to using them for their own political purposes or even actively resisting dialogue efforts. One view is that there is
generally a lack of democratic traditions linked with dialogue — some
officials seem to believe consulting
with the public does not result in constructive ideas. This may be related to
the previous challenge of changing
the culture of dialogue. Participants
also noted that after Ukraine's independence, many local authorities did
develop more trust in democratic processes and began consulting local
communities, which suggests there is
room to continue the work. Another
suggestion is that there is also a distinction between officials and those
who actually hold power and influence — in some cases, public officials
are limited in what they can and cannot comment on during a dialogue
meeting.
For dialogue work to be successful, it
must be aware of the role of the authority figures it aims to engage, and
how much autonomy they have to
!
ties? How do preliminary assessment
and preparation contribute to trustbuilding? What ground rules do facilitators employ? And how does our focus on safety affect the nature of the
dialogue itself? By trying to ensure
safety, can we stifle dialogue by having too rigid processes? The Platform
should explore these questions of
safety and trust-building in detail.
Safety
One issue that resonated with the pilot group was safety in dialogues.
Many facilitators face the challenge of
creating a safe space for communication — this means both safety for participants during the event but also
their safety as a result of the consequences of them participating in the
event.
Dialogue preparation and coordination
Building trust in dialogues requires
heavy preparation work. In fact, this
preparation work may sometimes be
more crucial than the dialogue itself:
sometimes a three-hour forum requires a week of preparation, consuming valuable resources. Facilitators
have expressed a need for logistical
support, both organising and coordinating dialogues and developing their
initiatives to ensure viability. Various
initiatives have built significant preparation and coordination capacity, and
this may be an area for better exchange of experiences and approaches. This may include finding entry
points, pre-dialogue strategies, building trust, risk assessment, logistics etc.
There are different strategies to creating a safe space, and this is one area
where it would be beneficial for facilitators to share their experiences. As an
example, some facilitators do not require participants to identify themselves, while others make sure to
break up opposing groups by seating
participants randomly.
A main point is that safety emerges
from trust. How do we build trust
with participants, and with authori-
“
To work cooperatively on
resolving conflict, we must first
work constructively together and
resolve our own differences.
Participant at the July meeting
15
“
represent their own views. Finally, a
broader challenge is that the peacebuilding agenda may not match the
political agenda. Dealing with this will
require adopting a “conflict-sensitive”
approach with thorough analysis and
engagement, transparency and coalition-building, building partnerships
and trust, and taking a rights-based
and needs-based perspective.
!
5.! RESPONDING TO THE CHALLENGES: THE POTENTIAL OF THE
DIALOGUE SUPPORT PLATFORM
Addressing issues such as a change in
the culture of dialogue requires a clear
strategic direction and focus. In light
of the challenges raised by the participants, the Platform can make a contribution to conflict transformation in
at least four ways:
Capacity building
Several facilitators expressed a need
for professional development in the
practice of dialogue. This includes
workshops, supervision, intervision
and reinforcing reflective practice. The
platform can help identify such opportunities for professional development
and promote the exchange of experience between local and international
facilitators (UNDP, mediatEUr, and
others). It can also serve as a resource
hub online where experts can share
their knowledge and promote capacity-building, ultimately empowering
dialogue initiatives for peace in
Ukraine.
Based on a keen interest expressed by
Ukrainian dialogue practitioners, the
Platform will now develop together
with them a workshop to be run in
September prior to the official launch.
It is expected that UNDP, mediatEUr
and other dialogue resources will be
central to adding value to this work-
16!
shop and that it will focus on trustbuilding within the group.
Active mapping
Through Debategraph, the website
and its reports, the Dialogue Platform
can provide up-to-date mapping of
dialogue initiatives in Ukraine, their
needs, and the conflict issues being
discussed in various regions. It is envisaged that the Platform will train
Ukrainian facilitators to use Debategraph technology in their own dialogue work in order to achieve autonomy with mapping and maintain the
results on a centralised and accessible
system.
The meeting in July was also informed
by an online survey assessing dialogue initiatives, their needs and conflict issues encountered, shared with
participants prior to the meeting. The
thorough and continuing contributions from this survey helps to add
valuable information to the existing
mapping on the platform. The team
will continue to explore other data
collection, visualisation and presentation tools and approaches.
Coordination
The Dialogue Platform will aim to operate on a principle of transparency
and inclusivity, promoting an attitude
!
of cooperation amongst those working on dialogue in Ukraine. The Platform has already identified potential
for increasing communication and
cooperation amongst dialogue initiatives in Ukraine. Some meeting participants noted that its role as an impartial actor could be useful for bringing
together various initiatives and ‘facilitating the facilitators’.
The aim is to establish useful vertical
and horizontal links and promote better coordination of dialogue efforts.
Instead of taking on a central coordinating role, the Dialogue Support
Platform aims to serve as a platform
promoting self-organisation and constructive communication while respecting the autonomy of each dialogue initiative.
Continuity and momentum
The bimonthly Dialogue Analysis and
Coordination meetings, complemented by the online interaction on the
online platform, aim to maintain the
momentum of dialogue initiatives. In
conjunction, they will provide a dynamic and up-to-date map of issues
and challenges as well as any concrete
results of discussions in order to minimise this feeling of “dialogue fatigue”
and disillusionment.
The team will continue exploring
ways to build trust in the platform
and to generate value for the various
dialogue initiatives.
17
!
6.! THE UNDP AS A SUPPORTER OF DIALOGUE
In March 2015, the United Nations
Development Programme, the World
Bank and the European Union concluded a ‘Recovery and Peacebuilding
Assessment’ (RPA), which evaluated
the impact of the crisis in eastern
Ukraine, assessed the recovery needs
and recommended a programmatic
framework for recovery of infrastructure, economic activities, good governance and the social fabric that had
been damaged by the conflict. The
RPA highlighted the promotion of a
culture of dialogue as a fundamental
component in the work for reconciliation and sustainable development in
the country. On 5 August, the RPA was
18!
formally endorsed by the Cabinet of
Ministers, with the Prime Minister of
Ukraine instructing all State structures
to use this framework in planning and
implementing recovery activities in
eastern Ukraine.
On the basis of the RPA findings,
UNDP has sought to integrate dialogue and social cohesion components
into its recovery efforts in eastern
Ukraine. However, UNDP has encountered many of the same problems —
while there is a great wealth of
knowledge among practitioners, dialogue has yet to reach the population
with a clear definition and understanding.
At times, policy and community actors
are unclear as to what dialogue really
entails: dialogue between whom? To
what purpose? This perspective, highlighted by the UNDP at the meeting in
July, is shared by most of the facilitators in the pilot group, who called for
a deep process of identification of dialogue in order to be able to promote a
joint vision of its practice.
“
“
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Ukraine works in
four main areas – poverty reduction,
democratic governance, environment
and energy, and local development. However, cross-cutting issues
such as promotion of human rights,
recovery and stabilisation, and peacebuilding and conflict prevention, are
integrated throughout most of UNDP’s
programmatic work. In responding to
the crisis in Ukraine and the armed
conflict in eastern Ukraine, UNDP has
significantly up-scaled its work on
recovery, stabilisation, social cohesion
and
dialogue,
with
an
aim
to strengthening indigenous
peacebuilding efforts and laying the foundations for longer-term reconciliation.
Without reconciliation […], lasting
peace and recovery are unlikely to
be achieved.
UNDP, EU and World Bank (2015) Recovery and
Peacebuilding Assessment: Analysis of Crisis Impacts and Needs in Eastern Ukraine, p.111.
!
Three options for UNDP technical support to dialogue were identified:
Developing a public
communication strategy
to cultivate a culture of
dialogue in Ukraine and
motivate officials to engage in dialogue with
civil society actors
Support and highlight
dialogue projects making
an immediate, tangible
difference.
Sustained mentoring and
training, to support and
build the long-term capacity of Ukrainian dialogue facilitators.
The Dialogue Support Platform in Ukraine can
help the UNDP pursue its objective of supporting
dialogue; it provides a safe space for facilitators to
identify their needs and a direct mapping of the
immediate needs and options.
19
!
7.! CONCLUSION AND IMMEDIATE STEPS
This first, technical meeting in Kyiv
explored some pressing challenges for
the promotion and practice of dialogue in Ukraine. The group identified
areas of work for the Platform, and
charted the next steps. The need for a
deeper understanding of dialogue and
its practice seems evident as well as
the need for trust-building within the
platform and amongst those working
with dialogues in Ukraine. Similarly,
the creation of a safe environment
that allows for the necessary flexibility
in dialogue remains a challenge, as
does the promotion of dialogue without falling into dialogue fatigue.
A range of initiatives, methodologies
and dialogue experiences in Ukraine
were showcased. It is important to
acknowledge that the various Ukrainian dialogue initiatives will continue to
do their own work in their own way
— the value and potential of the Dialogue Platform is to find where these
initiatives share common needs and
aims and explore the options to respond to them, to promote more
common understanding of dialogue
and conflict issues, and to foster trust
and cooperation rather than distrust
and competition.
Immediate steps before the official launch of the platform
on the last week of September
Online Platform
In-country practical support
# Continued testing and identification of areas to improve
# Continued engagement with Ukrainian
dialogue initiatives; gathering of data on
needs and conflict issues for updated mapping.
# Invitation process for relevant
Ukrainian and international
actors working on dialogue
# Improving the translation
functionality and the user experience
# Exploring the integration of
new tools.
# Continued promotion of cooperation
amongst Ukrainian dialogue initiatives and
international organisations
# Discussing the meaning of dialogue.
# Considering the various ‘stages’ of conflict
that facilitators are working with.
Further opportunities
# Explore the potential of the Platform as a mechanism for early warning and
conflict prevention
20!
#
!
© 2015 mediatEUr and the UNDP.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without full attribution. The
views expressed in this publication are that of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of mediatEUr, or the funding agency.
!
mediatEUr in Brussels:
Av. des Arts 24, 10th Floor Letterbox 8
B-1000, Brussels, Belgium
[email protected]
In partnership with
UNDP in Ukraine
Klovskyi Uzvis 1
01021 Kyiv, Ukraine