Violent conflicts today are complex and increasingly protracted, involving more nonstate groups and regional and international actors. It is estimated that by 2030—the horizon set by the international community for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals—more than half of the world’s poor will be living in countries affected by high levels of violence. Information and communication technology, population movements, and climate change are also creating shared risks that must be managed at both national and international levels. Pathways for Peace is a joint United Nations†“World Bank Group study that originates from the conviction that the international community’s attention must urgently be refocused on prevention. A scaled-up system for preventive action would save between US$5 billion and US$70 billion per year, which could be reinvested in reducing poverty and improving the well-being of populations. The study aims to improve the way in which domestic development processes interact with security, diplomacy, mediation, and other efforts to prevent conflicts from becoming violent. It stresses the importance of grievances related to exclusion—from access to power, natural resources, security and justice, for example—that are at the root of many violent conflicts today. Based on a review of cases in which prevention has been successful, the study makes recommendations for countries facing emerging risks of violent conflict as well as for the international community. Development policies and programs must be a core part of preventive efforts; when risks are high or building up, inclusive solutions through dialogue, adapted macroeconomic policies, institutional reform, and redistributive policies are required. Inclusion is key, and preventive action needs to adopt a more people-centered approach that includes mainstreaming citizen engagement. Enhancing the participation of women and youth in decision making is fundamental to sustaining peace, as well as long-term policies to address the aspirations of women and young people.

Lund, an international relations consultant, defines early warning and preventive diplomacy, looking at which methods work and why, who uses them, and recent preventive efforts, and suggests how multilateral and national entities including the US government can overcome operational challenges to effective preventive action. He outlines a more systematic, global preventive regime that draws on the strengths of individual states, the UN, regional organizations, and NGOs. For students and scholars of international relations. Annotation copyright by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

How do ordinary people, neither pacifists nor peace activists, come to decide collectively to eschew violent conflict and then develop strategies for maintaining their region as a nonwar area despite myriad pressures to the contrary?Mary Anderson and Marshall Wallace analyze the experiences of thirteen nonwar communities that made conscious-and effective-choices not to engage in the fighting that surrounded them. Tracing the steps that these communities took, the strategies that evolved in each setting in response to local circumstances, the authors find lessons, as well, with broader relevance for international efforts to prevent violent conflict.

Overcoming Evil describes the origins of genocide, violent conflict and terrorism, principles and practices of prevention, and avenues to reconciliation. It considers societal conditions, culture and insitutions, and the psychology of individuals and groups. It aims to promote knowledge and "active bystandership" by leaders, the media and citizens. It uses both past cases such as the Holocaust, and contempoary ones such as Rwanda, the Congo, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and contemporary terrorism as examples.

Three inescapable observations form the foundation of this report. First, deadly conflict is not inevitable. Violence on the scale of what we have seen in Bosnia, Rwanda, Somalia, and elsewhere does not emerge inexorably from human interaction. Second, the need to prevent deadly conflict is increasingly urgent. The rapid compression of the world through breathtaking population growth, technological advancement, and economic interdependence, combined with the readily available supply of deadly weapons and easily transmitted contagion of hatred and incitement to violence, make it essential and urgent to find ways to prevent disputes from turning massively violent. Third, preventing deadly conflict is possible. The problem is not that we do not know about incipient and large-scale violence; it is that we often do not act. Examples from "hot spots" around the world illustrate that the potential for violence can be defused through the early, skillful, and integrated application of political, diplomatic, economic, and military measures. The Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict does not believe in the unavoidable clash of civilizations or in an inevitably violent future. War and mass violence usually result from deliberate political decisions, and the Commission believes that these decisions can be affected so that mass violence does not result. To undertake effective preventive action, the Commission believes that we must develop an international commitment to the concept of prevention, a habit of preventive investment, more effective regimes for controlling destructive weaponry, and a working portfolio of legal standards that rest on a normative consensus regarding the responsibilities of governments to each other and to their peoples. Responsible leaders, key intergovernmental and nongovernmental institutions, and civil society can do far better in preventing deadly conflict than the record of this century and the current epidemic of violence suggest. c.

New wars will continue to erupt if greater and smarter efforts are not made to prevent them. Current dangers stem from factors such as rise of unstable regimes, global economic turbulence, climate change, and shift in global power distribution. Preventing relapse after wars end is insufficient to prevent most new conflicts, because post-conflict recurrences constitute only a minority of all conflict outbreaks. A wide range of governments, including United States, and many intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations have made commitments to take serious efforts to prevent violent conflicts. These commitments represent a more than adequate normative foundation and a supportive political environment for development of more effective conflict prevention strategies.

In this landmark book, William Ury-- best-selling author and director of the Project on Preventing War at the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School-- and a stellar panel of experts from several scientific disciplines debunk the commonly held notion that violence is a predictable part of the human condition and outline an innovative paradigm for preventing violent confrontations. Must We Fight? presents compelling new research and insights into human nature which clearly demonstrate that humankind is not doomed to continue the seemingly endless cycle of violent conflict. With intelligence and sensitivity, Ury describes a brilliant program for personal and community empowerment called The Third Side. As he explains, in most conflicts between two parties there is actually a third entity-the community in which the combatants, and their dispute, are embedded. The Third Side is a proven model for ending conflict that shows how to mobilize communities to stop and, in some cases, prevent individual and group violence.