Ep. 021:  Tom Hill

Thomas_Hill.jpg

Show Notes

  • Susan hosting Tom Hill, a peace building practitioner with over fifteen years of experience focusing on Iraq. Tom also teaches at NYU, his courses centering on conflict resolution and global affairs.
  • Tom has spearheaded NYU’s peace-building program.
  • How did you get the ball rolling for the peace-building program at NYU?
  • Tom began teaching and received positive reactions from students—many of whom appreciated a less-conventional approach to conflict resolution.
  • Most students maintained little more than a garden-variety understanding of conflict resolution.
  • Tom wants students to appreciate both the academic, and the professional sides of conflict resolution.
  • It is imperative to avoid templates. That is to say that what may work under a particular set of circumstances will not necessarily work under another set—no matter how similar. Mediators must be strategic and flexible in their approach to each case.
  • Tom’s definition of peace building is: any human activity that can lead to higher levels of peacefulness on any number of scales.
  • Effective peace building necessitates a multidisciplinary approach.
  • Who comes to the program?
  • People who want to make a positive difference—a constructive and rigorous crowd.
  • Program does well to blend the practical with the theoretical.
  • Many students work with NGO’s, the UN, and various governments after graduation.
  • What sort of vision should peace builders have?
  • Staying task-oriented while slowly working towards a positive peace.
  • Working with smaller units of work translates into movement within the larger systems.
  • What planted seeds for you Tom?
  • Initially, Tom wanted to be a sports journalist.
  • Was not satisfied with sports writing.
  • Tom switched to conflict resolution after a decade long career in journalism.
  • Center for International Conflict Resolution exploded Tom’s view of the possibilities of peace building (https://sipa.columbia.edu).
  • Took an opportunity in 1999 to work on mediation program with Kurdish politicians.
  • Duhok, a forty-five minute ride from Mosul.
  • Barzan Omar wanted to set up conflict resolution program at local university.
  • Duhok University President called Tom to implement program.
  • In 2003, amidst heavy political imbalances, Tom and his team set out for Duhok.
  • Tom’s introduction to Iraq included a lovely prepared lunch and a houseful of automatic firearms.
  • Peace-building curriculum was censored by university administration.
  • Barzan was killed in 2004 while driving through Mosul—his death representing a huge loss within the peace building community.
  • Program linked all three universities in the region—a consortium that would then work with Tom and his team.
  • Goals of the program: to hold seminars, and to interact with domestic and foreign professionals and organizations.
  • In 2008 Duhok University received support to set up masters programs in conflict resolution.
  • The center continues to grow today.
  • Community Peace Education is an ongoing program that works with roughly four thousand Duhok locals.
  • The programs at Dahuk are proving wildly successful; Duhok University has now fully institutionalized conflict resolution.
  • Important to remember that this type of work has long gestation periods.
  • Seemingly bad moments can lead to constructive outcomes, and vice versa.
  • Why are students interested in the program?
  • There is a level of responsibility among youth today that was absent when Tom first visited Duhok and Mosul.
  • The structural issues within Iraq are in fact very similar to our own issues in the US.
  • Higher education systems in both countries yield unhealthy stratification among our young generations.
  • Time and patience are essential in raising a successful program.
  • You must have genuine relationships with partners.
  • Anything is possible, barring the limits of human ability.
  • Be humble.
  • Be weary of a strong belief in yourself; we must foremost be listeners.
  • We ought to acknowledge the difference between our culture and another; however, this should not dictate, nor limit our interactions with that country.