Professor Stein was the keynote speaker
Almost two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of attending the 10th Annual Peace, Conflict and Justice Conference, whose theme was Humanitarianism Exposed. This two-day event, which was hosted on Munk School grounds, brought together humanitarian practitioners and notable academics from across the world. The mission? To probe the institution of humanitarianism that doesn’t quite seem to be living up to its original goals.
One of the amazing things about the PCJ conference, besides the names it attracts, is the fact that it is proposed, planned and executed completely by students. As part of the team this year, I can say with confidence that the experience of seeing something through form start to finish, without relying on “adults”, is awesome.
The conference saw a full house
That said, that does not mean it was easy to bring this event together. Behind the seamless two days of keynotes, panels, and light refreshments were months and months of work and planning done by the chairs and the rest of the staff. There were meetings to be held, invitations to be sent, correspondences to keep, funds to raise, catering to hire, logistics to finalize, advertising to be dispersed, graphics to create. Before it all, there was a proposal. Behind this event was a gargantuan effort made by students who each had more than a full plate. As one of these lucky people, seeing the conference come together successfully was more than a source of pride—it was a relief. The hard work we had put in, finally, had been worth it.
A definite highlight for me, besides my own “heated panel” (more on that later), was they keynote address by Professor Janice Stein. Not only was it awesome to have such a respected academic address our conference, but the fact that she, too was the former director of the Munk School was the icing on the cake. If there was ever a time for Munk pride, this was it. Moreover, Professor Stein’s unapologetic probe into humanitarianism, complete with a thorough attack on many of the organizations that we currently trust to carry out humanitarian efforts set the best possible tone for the rest of the conference—one that ignores preconceived niceties and attacks humanitarianism at its core. Her goal, she said, was to make everyone in the room feel uncomfortable. And though there were certainly people who disagreed with her argument, I believe that it’s this spirit of debate and analysis that humanitarianism needs. And ultimately, that’s what the PCJ conference was all about.
Conn Neugent
The two panels, on corporate social responsibility and the private sector’s role in humanitarianism were also well run and quite interesting. Particularly, the panel on corporate social responsibility raised a lot of questions and, at times, drew attention to the irony of our presence at the Munk School. The fact that we were discussing corporate social responsibility, and casting light onto it’s often shady side, in the Munk School, which could itself be seen as an act of CSR, did not go unnoticed by the panelists. In fact, it was mentioned several times. But the fact that our panelists could raise these questions and confront this irony speaks volumes about not only the power of PCJ, but of the Munk School. These views were never silenced; rather, they were explored. It seems that Professor Stein’s goal of making people uncomfortable with the truth, then, was carried on throughout this panel. The second panel, on the role of the private sector in humanitarianism, also presented some opposing points—while it may seem easy to be either pro-private sector or anti-private sector, the panelists were able to present some of the nuances of the issue, and show that there are many factors that can determine whether private sector involvement is positive or not.
The Peace, Conflict and Justice Conference is organized annually by PCJ students. Here’s this year’s team.
And now, for my part of the conference: the heated forum. Though my official title was “Co-Debate Director,” and though I had every intention to run a debate leading up to the conference, circumstances in the final stretch before the conference—miscommunications, last-minute cancellations and cancelled flights— meant that a debate format would be impossible. To make the current list of speakers fit, we ultimately decided that a debate would be unfair and logistically impossible to run. Our solution, then, was the child of panel and debate: the heated forum, where all speakers could still present their opposing views and have space for rebuttal, but without formal sides and a vote. And for their part, all three of our speakers brought the requisite zest and—dare I say it, sass— to keep the original debate atmosphere alive in the heated forum. The result was an ongoing conversation, between both the speakers and the audience, on whether or not NGOs should be implicated in the post-conflict prevention process. Despite the initial roadblocks, the heated forum was a great success, and I wouldn’t have had it any other way.
Ultimately, this year’s PCJ Conference was such a rewarding experience. Not only did I enjoy working with the staff and speakers, but I loved the topic and learned a lot about humanitarianism. As someone often sitting in the audience, I was exposed to many different viewpoints and many factors I had never thought of before. Coming out this conference, I truly did feel that humanitarianism was exposed.