European Union Mediation Service Proposal

That a professional and politically supported international mediation service should be created under the auspices of the European Union, comprising recognised experts in mediation and conflict prevention, ready instantly to offer mediation expertise in cases of conflicts involving European Union member states, their neighboring states, and any European or Mediterranean state that wishes to join the mediation service as Associates members. Only full members of the European Union are eligible for full membership of the EU Mediation Service. The EUMS would be brought into being by special treaty of member nations of the EU. It would be staffed by a secretariat based in Brussels, and financed by a sufficient budget made available through the EU.

The purpose of the EU Mediation Service would be to have available a team of expert mediation professionals, trained to the very highest professional standards, to be drawn on by the European Union and by the rotating Presidency of the EU in case of international crises affecting any European country, especially European Union member countries.

Each member country of the EU would be asked to nominate a team of 10 meditation experts, and to make them available to stand-by in case of emergency. Each member state would select its own team of 10 mediators according to its own methods and protocols, according to an agreed rubric. The mediators would be either senior academics, judges, trained mediation professionals, religious studies experts, political scientists, philosophers, or people of similar calibre from other professional backgrounds. They would be able to be neutral and impartial and above reproach in matters of international conflict resolution, and of above average intelligence and wisdom. They would not be from particular partial political or religious persuasions which might sway their neutrality and professionalism. They would have a known commitment to peace, conflict resolution, non-violence and dialogue as a way of solving conflicts. Collectively the body of expert mediators would be known as the Panel of Mediators. The panel would, over time, by treaty be required to achieve gender parity, with 5 men and 5 women being appointed in each three year cycle of appointment. Gender parity would be observed at all levels of the operation of the EUMS.

The Chairmanship of the Panel of Mediators within each country would be by appointment within each country election from within the Panel of Mediators. The overall chairmanship of the EUMS would rotate in parallel with the Presidency of the overall European Union.

European Members of Parliament would have the right to initiate formal mediation requests on behalf of the EUMS, in cases of dispute involving either an EU member nation, or an associate member nation.

MEMBERSHIP
Full EU member countries would be full members of the EUMS automatically by right:

Types of disputes: Among the following types of disputes could be referred to the EUMS:

INTER-STATE DISPUTES: Trade disputes, refugee and immigration disputes, economic disputes, passport disputes, territorial disputes, military disputes, river and sea disputes, water disputes, natural resource disputes, legal disputes, compensation disputes, terrorism / anti terrorism disputes, ethnic conflicts, religious conflicts, protection of cultural or spiritual heritage disputes, linguistic minority rights disputes, human rights disputes, disputes over nomenclature and language use (e.g. in state titles), political disputes etc. In general, the definition of a dispute is open ended - whatever is regarded by one or both parties as a “dispute” - and in which at least one party is a state (in the internationally accepted use of this term, i.e. a recognised international state, a member of the United Nations etc.)

INTRA-STATE DISPUTES: Internal disputes within European nations, such as disputes about ethnic, religious, cultural or linguistic identity, and nationhood itself, could also be referred to the EUMS including disputes involving non-state actors seeking recognition from or within or across existing European or Mediterranean nation states. In these disputes, the parties need not be states, but may be peoples, groups, ethnicities, linguistic minorities etc. The EUMS would be dealing with collective disputes however rather than individual mediation cases. Normally, the states in which such disputes are ongoing would be expected to endorse the involvement of the EUMS, and subject to normal rules of confidentiality, would be kept informed of progress in resolving the disputes. The incentive for states to encourage EUMS resolution of disputes on their territories, and with their support, would be that it is in the long term interest of citizens in their countries that all such disputes should be resolved peacefully, non-violently, through diplomatic dialogue, negotiation and mediation - for the long term well being, prosperity and security of all its citizens.
Right of referral:

Any and all member states of the EU would have the right of referral for disputes to the EUMS. The referring country need not be a country in which the dispute is situated. Once referred the EUMS would by treaty be bound to investigate and offer mediation to both parties concerned. The EUMS would be a service available for all EU citizens, who would also have the right to refer cases, through appropriate protocols to ensure the actuality and seriousness of the dispute being referred, and also through their Euro MP’s. In most cases, if referred by citizens, their own governments could be expected to endorse and support the referral, but not in all cases, since some disputes might be intra-state disputes.

Success / Failure - outcomes of cases referred:

In the event of one party refusing to take up the offer of mediation, and another party accepting the offer, the case would remain live until such time as both parties had accepted mediation. The proportion of successes to failures of mediation interventions would be analysed and improvements would be constantly sought, including using methodological flexibility in mediation styles, and keeping the Mediation Panel up to date in new thinking about mediation. Ongoing work by the Research Office of the EUMS would also be expected to contribute to solving even the most intractable of conflicts, by thinking up new devices, and new strategies, to resolve even old embedded conflicts, in the end. No case would be formally closed, once accepted, until it had been satisfactorily closed to the benefit of both parties.

RESEARCH OFFICE FOR THE WORK OF THE EUMS:

In addition to the work of the Panel of Mediators, each country would also nominate a staff of Research Officers, to provide background work on cases coming before the work of the EUMS. Staff serving as Research Officers to the EUMS would come from recognised academic backgrounds, such as history, international affairs, geography, economics, law, political science, diplomatics, philosophy and theology, military or strategic studies etc. Researchers would have access to full IT support, as well as being given administrative and technical support staff to enable them to complete their work effectively. The budgets for the work of the EUMS Research Office would be commensurate with its grave responsibilities and would come from EU central funding according to agreed founding treaty.

RATIONALE FOR REGIONAL OUTREACH:

Whilst the core work of the EUMS would be based around member nations of the EU, it is important from the outset to involve as Associate members, those countries that adjoin the European Union, or its neighbouring seas and oceans, including the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Atlantic Ocean and the Caspian Sea. Throughout all these regions different European countries have important interests and a vital stake in ensuring that peace prevails throughout the area, for commercial, diplomatic, historic and moral reasons. If instability and conflict prevails in any one of these regions Europe itself, ultimately, also suffers, and cannot stand back and watch from behind guarded frontiers and wash its hands in indifference. Therefore the work of the EUMS would be proactive in offering to help resolve sometimes longstanding conflicts in these regions also.

Liaison with Other organisations:

The EUMS would work in concert with the United Nations, the European Council and other bodies which promote peace and justice worldwide. It would seek to support their work rather to replace it, and would deal with specific regional disputes affecting Europe and European and Mediterranean region nations.

RELATIONSHIP WITH RELIGIOUS ORGANISATIONS:

It is to be hoped that all religious organizations active in European countries, and their neighbors, would endorse and support the good work of the EUMS, since all bona fide religious traditions known to mankind have at their innermost heart the ambition to foster a climate of peace, prosperity and love among the citizens of the planet. At the heart of European tradition and culture and spiritual lineage, the Christian tradition, has specifically endorsed peace as a supreme virtue, and peacemaking as a moral duty for all Christians. Uniquely, in Europe, there is also the Vatican, the worldwide centre of the Roman Catholic Church, which includes many millions of believers in Europe, as well as globally - which state would be hoped to become an Associate Member of the EUMS in its own right, and thus be able to share some of its own unique channels for peacemaking to the advancement of the work of the EUMS in general. Likewise Protestant and Orthodox Christianity have both arisen in European and Mediterranean regions, and have likewise a long and profound tradition of peacemaking and conflict prevention. Some historic churches have gone so far as to embrace complete pacifism as a manifestation of their faith. Their support for the work of the EUMS would be a way of helping to ground their peaceful ideals in pragmatic social and political reality. Other religions active in European countries which also advocate peace and goodwill and harmony between its citizens would also be encouraged to support the work of the EUMS, including Islam, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Bahaism, Judaism, Shintoism, Taoism, Freemasonry, Paganism, New Age beliefs etc. In short the entire spectrum of the world’s religions, which find in Europe a microcosmic, or important echo, would be acknowledged as to their constituting part of Europe’s complex mosaic of identities and communities; positive working would be encouraged between all such groups, and their collective support for the work of the EUMS would be likewise encouraged pragmatically. Likewise the EUMS would encourage the support of existing interfaith peace organisations which are doing such good work across Europe to encourage a climate of interfaith dialogue, respect and tolerance between faith communities. The work of the EUMS would however be secular, as are the institutions of the EU in general, but sympathetic to the common spiritual ideals and aspirations of all its citizens, and above all to their aspirations towards peace, security and prosperity, to which end the EU itself was founded. While some debates have been held recently as to whether the acknowledgment of the existence of God, (and if so, which God - Christian or generic) should be referenced in the proposed European Constitution, the proposed EUMS would remain positively neutral in this debate and inclined towards the argument that since any Creator worthy of genuine worship or acknowledgment, would assuredly endorse peaceful working relationships and living conditions for mankind, the best way for Europe to acknowledge the Creator would be to genuinely work for peace in our society, and among our neighbours. By founding the EUMS the citizens and Governments of Europe are moving this debate over the role of God in our constitution to a more sophisticated level of discourse, as befits those bequeathed the intellectual heritage of Socratic thought and the combination of freedom of rational inquiry, together with a profound commitment to ethical action, which constitutes the heritage of classical European philosophy to all subsequent religious formulations of belief.

RELATIONS WITH POLITICAL PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS:

The work of the EUMS would be non party-political, and unbiased in its operations, as befits a project of the European Union as a whole, and effectively as a department of the European Union’s civil service. It would expect the support and goodwill of all bona fide European Union political parties and movements, since all bona fide democratic political parties and their elected representatives are supposed to be by definition committed to peace and the non-violent resolution of conflicts. In its pre-launch phase, the EUMS would anticipate the support of all major political parties in EU nations, both those in government and those in opposition, as a matter of common sense, and as showing a way forward for the work of the Union as a whole in the public imagination and as a way of fostering a more positive image for the work of the EU in general. For those parties traditionally oriented in support of the work of the EU (liberal democratic parties, moderate socialist parties, and moderate conservative parties) strong support for the proposal and launch of the EUMS would be anticipated. For those parties with a more critical position against the work of the EU (nationalist or limitationist orientations) support could also be expected as it would be giving the EU a more useful role in the public eye that interfering in e.g. the nomenclature of the sizes of tomatoes or bananas (which the founders of the EU surely never envisaged). For those parties with a more environmentalist outlook (e.g. green parties) there could be expected also strong support since the promotion of peace and international concord remains a central plank of their outlook, given that environmental destruction is often a side effect of wars, and resource scarcity a prime cause of wars and conflict). It is to be hoped, in sum, that politicians of stature and vision, statesmen and women concerned about the well being of European civilisation unto future generations, will endorse and support enthusiastically the long term vision of the work of EUMS and give its birth and creation all assistance possible in their national legislatures as well as in the formal European Union institutions necessary to bring it into existence in as creative and effective and rapid a way as possible.

RELATIONSHIP with Military Alliances:

The EUMS would maintain proper professional relations with military alliances as long as they genuinely work for peace and only use military force as an absolute last resort, such as NATO, whilst making it clear that the terms of reference of the EUMS are at variance with all such military alliances, either existing now or in the future - namely the prevention of armed conflict, and the resolution of disputes which may already have escalated into armed conflict, and the preemptive non-violent resolution of conflicts which have the potential in time to become violent.

RELATIONSHIP WITH NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS SECTOR:

It is to be hoped and anticipated that the project of the EUMS would receive the strongest possible support form the NGO sector across Europe - e.g. women’s organisations, environmentalist organisations, human rights groups, peace organisations, the cultural sector, educational and academic sector, scientific, tourism, business sector, community development sectors etc. This is because all such sectors stand to benefit from the existence of a secure mechanism in place at the heart of the European Union which prevents conflict, war and violence taking place either between European nations, or on its borders or environs, either presently, or in the future. The mechanisms and institutions of civil society, in all their complexity and interconnectedness, stand to gain lasting benefits from the work of the EUMS - economically, spiritually, socially and pragmatically.

OFFICIAL LANGUAGES:

The two working languages of the EUMS would be English and French, but translation services would be provided for the translation of all key documentation from other member countries as appropriate.

RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER NON-EUROPEAN AND NON-MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES:

Other countries internationally experiencing conflict, either intra-state or inter-state would also have the opportunity to refer their own disputes for settling within the framework of the EUMS, should occasion arise. In addition, other world regions would be encouraged to establish their own regional Mediation Services.

INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPING THE EU. MEDIATION SERVICE:

A major incentive for neighboring European and Mediterranean countries, not yet member states of the EU, to use the EUMS, would be that in so doing, and in showing the good faith involving in being prepared to resolve ongoing disputes peacefully and through negotiation and dialogue, their own eventual accession to the EU itself would thereby become more likely. The whole purpose behind the creation of the EU in its very inception, was to establish an inter-state mechanism that would make future wars unthinkable in Europe, which had experience of two huge world wars on its soil, not to mention the two preceding Balkan Wars, as well as innumerable other armed conflicts century after century. So far as the EU is concerned this had indeed seemed to work, but states on the borders of the EU have tragically witnessed several major conflicts since the end of World War 2, not least in the Balkans, and now in the Caucuses, as well as the tensions of the Cold War epoch, which also spilled over into conflicts in other theatres. A major purpose of the EUMS, therefore, would be to be prepared to act pragmatically in solving some of the detailed problems that the UN has appeared unable to solve, perhaps due to its inherent state-based architecture. If Europe, however, is indeed to foster a sense of citizenship and security among its peoples, and if a continent-wide identity is to be forged over coming generations, which will continue to ensure the peace, stability, prosperity and well being of all its member peoples, then the work of the EUMS could prove a crucial part of that important task, by providing a professional mechanism and process whereby
conflicts which could otherwise threaten the very existence of civilisation as we know it, could be resolved nonviolently and in a win-win scenario.

STATUS OF EUMS:

The Chairman of the Panel of Mediators in each member country would have automatic Cabinet rank in each member country government, and sit as an ex-officio member of the government, independent of whichever ruling party was in power. They would be excused from having to attend Cabinet meetings however, unless specific matters were to be discussed of relevance to the work of the EUMS. They would be known as the Minister for Peace with a mandate to speak for peaceful and nonviolent solutions to conflicts which might occur during their Chairmanship. The Chairmen of the EUMS in each country, as government Ministers, would also therefore have full access to intelligence channels of information, and to be able to make use of them at their discretion, only in so far as they might help solve conflicts, prevent wars and foster a climate of non-violence within and between their respective countries and their neighboring countries.

BUDGET OF THE EUMS:

The budget of the EUMS would derive from central EU funds and would be commensurate with the grave responsibility of preserving and building peace on the periphery of existing EU territories, including the entire Mediterranean rim, and through the Balkans and Caucuses regions. The potential losses to the European Union, in terms of major conflicts breaking out (again) in those territories would be incalculably large (e.g. Israel/Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, Kurdistan, Iraq, Caucuses region, Russia, Ukraine, Poland etc.). Such losses would be caused by 1) loss of peaceful trade with such nations 2) Influx of economic migrants caused by domestic instability 3) Necessity of ongoing major aid assistance due to humanitarian disasters caused by wars and conflicts. The total income of the EUMS would therefore be fixed at 1% of the total military expenditure (including military intelligence) of each member country of the EU in sum, for the first 10 years of its operation. This figure would rise one percentage point each decade, thus in the second decade of its operation it would rise to 2% of the total military budgets of the member states, and so on. This calculation means that theoretically after 1000 years of operation, it would comprise 100% of the total military expenditure of each member state, but in fact it would be fixed at 99% maximally, since it is not envisaged that the need for some military expenditure would be totally removed even after such a long span of time, taking into account the past 5000 years of European history. The relative proportions of how much is spent by European nations on militarism and how much on peace and conflict resolution however, is intended to be reversed over a long span of time by the mechanism of the introduction of the EUMS into formal existence, so that this paradigm shift may take place, over time, in pragmatic reality and not merely in utopian aspiration. In the first year of its formal existence, therefore, and for the rest of that decade, the budget it would have to operate with, would be as described above, namely 1% of the total military budget of each member nation, calculated on the last but one fiscal year’s actual military expenditure, paid in advance of the year’s actual EUMS operations i.e. the budget for 2010 for the operation of the EUMS (probably the first realistic year it which it would be able to operate) would be fixed at 1% of the total of 2008 military expenditure. For mediations undertaken by the EUMS on behalf of non EU countries, or parties therein, there would be no fees charged, and it would be a free service from the European people and nations to their neighbours and other countries worldwide, as a way of apologising for the export of European wars in the past worldwide. Associate member nations who wish to join the EUMS formally, would also be required to contribute the 1% of their annual military expenditure towards its working budget.

2009 - Immediate grant to work out its protocols and pragmatic and technical and operational feasibility, including drafting of Governing Treaty for the EUMS
2010 - Preliminary Office of EUMS established within EU machinery in Brussels, with adequate budget, and founding Conference of EUMS to sign Treaty by combined EU Foreign Ministers (invitation of Associate Members to join conference)
2011 - First full year of operation of EUMS with operating budget as outlined above.

BACKGROUND TO PROPOSAL:

This policy document originates from a specialist peace research institute in the UK which deals with peace studies, conflict resolution, historical research, interfaith mediation, the formal academic study of global philosophy, and the philosophical analysis of the world situation and international affairs. It is a proposal inspired by over 25 years in depth study into conflict prevention, diplomacy, history and religious, philosophical and political studies. More specifically, it originates from the author’s recent study tour (August 2008) of several European and Middle Eastern countries, at the same time as the conflict in the Caucuses involving Georgia, Russian Federation, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. At this time the author visited Israel, Palestine, Greece, FYROM, Serbia, Slovenia and Italy. The author has been a long-standing member of the International Peace Research Association, and has served for a term as governing board member of the European Peace Research Association (EUPRA). He has served as a member of the European Coordinating Committee of the World Conference on Religions and Peace (WCRP) from 1990-1997, and attended numerous senior interfaith conferences and symposia for peace, including at the Vatican in 1997, attended by over 900 religious leaders worldwide. He has worked on projects for UNESCO and spoken twice at the UN Headquarters in New York on the role of Universities in promoting peace studies, and sits on the Commission of the International Association of University Presidents on peace studies. He has lectured for the Universities of Oxford and London on comparative philosophy and peace studies, and has also served as a secondary school teacher (religious education, history, citizenship, personal, social, and health education) in the UK education system. He was awarded his PhD for his doctoral work on Transpersonal History and the Search for Peace 1945-2001 from the University of London in 2008. The author is a dual British-Canadian citizen, and was born in Montreal, Canada in 1956.. He has travelled widely and lectured throughout Canada, the USA, India, Korea, and the Philippines etc. He teaches regularly in Rajasthan, India, and sits on the governing board of a bilingual Gaelic-English Irish University in Dublin (Saor Ollscoil na h’Eireann). He worked for the University of London to research the feasibility of establishing a major new International Institute of Peace Studies, out of which project the work of IIPSGP has grown. He has co-chaired 35 seminars in the House of Lords in the UK on Peace, Ethics and Global Policy and was elected Coordinator of International Philosophers for Peace and Global Responsibility in Moscow in 1990.

Previously, the author has visited, lectured, and undertaken various aspects of peace research in the following European and Mediterranean countries:

This proposal is being circulated to the current Presidency of the European Union and all member states’ Prime Ministers, in the hope that a political momentum can be generated within the E.U.’s serving governments to agree the wording of a Treaty bringing the EUMS into being, and authorising a sufficient budget to run the Service efficiently and effectively. In addition to this top-down approach, and since the project is a proposal for the lasting benefit of all European Union citizens, and their neighbors, it is also being circulated to appropriate specialized peace research, mediation and conflict resolution organisations. Since it would also depend on the good will and support of the European Parliament, and the existing frameworks and mechanisms of EU institutions, it is hoped that it will be widely available and freely circulated within the EU departments and institutions. The full text of the founding treaty of the EUMS would have to be negotiated and worked out in detail by EU lawyers, on condition that the language used is simple, direct, transparent and comprehensible to every European citizen of even average educational ability. This is a project for the benefit of all the people of Europe and their neighbors, and it must be understood by them, which is not always the case with existing European Union legislation. Once the founding Treaty of the EUMS has been adopted by every member country of the EU it would become law, and the EUMS would come into formal existence. Member states would not have a right of veto on which cases should or should not come before the EUMS for consideration. This document is published in good faith by its author as a serious proposal for study and consideration by all European citizens, and those of neighboring countries, and those internationally minded citizens in other lands who support peace and goodwill worldwide. In the interim period, before it is formally adopted by Treaty and comes into effect, the proposed EUMS, can be regarded as being in a state of gestation, and during this period, we are calling for help and support from all qualified and committed people of goodwill, who are hereby invited to become DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES of the proposed EUMS. To work effectively, the EUMS will need a committed network of peace researchers, peace scholars, mediation experts and ordinary men and women from across Europe (and beyond) who are committed to making the ideals and goals of the EUMS a pragmatic reality. You are therefore invited to join this project as an Development Associate, and to assist its manifestation both in concrete and strategic ways. Please see the form at the end of this document.

RESPONSE REQUEST FROM IIPSGP (INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PEACE STUDIES AND GLOBAL PHILOSOPHY):

Please schedule all responses, at whatever level, individual, institutional, formal, political etc. to the author of this Policy Document, by e-mail (iipsgp@educationaid.net) in the first instance. This is a working document in progress, and all positive suggestions or recommendations for improvement are welcomed. Readers can support this work by forwarding copies of this text to appropriate contacts and colleagues etc. provided that the text is not altered in any way and provided that the authorship of this document is acknowledged, to whom copyright remains. Purchase of this document in book form is also possible at www.lulu.com/iipsgp. The formal implementation of the proposed EUMS is one of several ongoing projects and goals of the IIPSGP. IIPSGP is willing to work with any and all NGO and research organisations, or formal governmental bodies, across the wider Europe, willing and able to assist the creation and implementation of the EUMS proposal. IIPSGP Director is also available for talks, interviews, seminars and lectures concerning the EUMS proposal and related projects of IIPSGP.

PLEASE NOTE, This document and the ideas it contains, are copyright to the author, Dr. Thomas C. Daffern, but the document may be reproduced so long as it is reproduced in full, and giving all details as herein contained. The document is being shared with appropriate colleagues, peace thinkers, peace academics and strategic studies experts, conflict resolution specialists, political theorists and political, leaders, throughout the European Union, and beyond, to the wider Mediterranean and Caspian regions. It is designed to fill a major hole in the security and peace architecture of Europe, and if adopted would be the first time that a serious conflict prevention and resolution system was embedded into the European Union framework, to the lasting benefit of all the peoples who share our continent, as well as our neighbours, worldwide. In a wider sense however, the proposal “belongs” to the people who together comprise the European Union, and the other neighbouring European and other citizens, who are not yet members of the Union in a formal sense, but morally and spiritually can be said to belong to European civilisation. The proposed EUMS is designed for their lasting benefit, and thus, once adopted and in place, can be said to “belong” to us all.

Dr. Thomas Clough Daffern B.A. (Hons.) PGCE, D.Sc. (Hons)
Director, International Institute of Peace Studies and Global Philosophy (IIPSGP)
Initiator, Multifaith and Multicultural Mediation Service (MMMS)
Founder / Chairman, Truth and Reconciliation Commission for the Middle East (TRCME)
Founder / Chairman, Truth and Reconciliation Commission for Britain and Ireland (TRCBI)

iipsgp@educationaid.net
www.educationaid.net
www.lulu.com/iipsgp
Www.holisticchannel.org.uk

Mailing address: International Institute of Peace Studies and Global Philosophy,
Le Musee de la Paix, 13 Grande Rue, Betete, La Creuse, Limousin, Aquitaine, 23270, France

Email: iipsgp@educationaid.net. Website: https://ceppr.wordpress.com/eums-proposal/