The Institute Builds for the Future

The Institute of Peace has emerged from a period of budgetary scrutiny with full funding through 1997, and is developing new approaches to managing international conflict.

For the United States Institute of Peace, as for all organizations funded by the U.S. government, the past two years have been a time of testing, of justifying our claim for federal budgetary support. We base our claim on the significant role the Institute plays in fulfilling its congressional mandate, which is to strengthen our nation's capacity to "promote international peace and the resolution of conflicts . . . without recourse to violence."

I am pleased to inform our many supporters and colleagues that the Institute has come through this period of intense scrutiny with full funding for its programs in fiscal years 1996 and 1997 (in the amounts of $11.5 and $11.2 million, respectively). This means that, after several yearly cycles of testimony before our congressional appropriating committees, and consultations with those in the administration responsible for overseeing our budget, we have been able to maintain a stable level of budgetary support and program activity over the last six fiscal years.

Addressing the Issues of Our Time

I believe we have succeeded in sustaining our support because of the relevance and quality of our programs. The Institute is helping our nation respond to the changing demands of managing international conflict in the post-Cold War world.

The end of the U.S.-Soviet nuclear standoff has been a blessing for humankind and has opened up new opportunities to resolve long-standing conflicts--in Cambodia, Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa. However, the last years of the 20th century are turning out to be not an era of peace, but a time of ethnic and religious conflicts, humanitarian crises, and regional rivalries for which most governments and international agencies, our own included, have not been well-prepared.

To address this rapidly changing environment, the Institute has refocused its efforts by developing new programs designed to help policymakers and practitioners think through the evolving requirements of international conflict management and peacebuilding:

Our Research and Studies Program is working with the government to develop non-military approaches to dealing with such conflict situations as the confrontation on the Korean Peninsula and the territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas. Our work on "preventive diplomacy" and self-determination--carried out in cooperation with the Policy Planning Staff of the State Department--and our research and training project in cross-cultural negotiating skills are designed to expand political options for the government and enhance the skills of foreign policy professionals in carrying them out.

The Institute's training programs for foreign affairs professionals in international conflict management and resolution skills, conducted in part through a collaborative program with the U.S. Army's Peacekeeping Institute, demonstrate our ability to work with both government agencies and private-sector organizations involved in international affairs to help them prepare for new modes of operation. Our work with nongovernmental organizations dedicated to humanitarian assistance programs around the world is critical to implementing peace settlements, especially at a time when government aid programs are contracting.

In an era in which private-sector efforts to resolve international conflicts have gained new currency, Institute personnel have been called upon to facilitate "track two" conflict resolution dialogues or training programs affecting peace processes in Bosnia, Cambodia, Kashmir, South Africa, and the Sudan. And our work on war crimes accountability is finding important applications in support of the Dayton accords for Bosnia, the peace processes in Rwanda and Cambodia, and post-apartheid reforms in South Africa.

Today, many private foundations are cutting back on funding for research on international issues. The Institute's 11-year-old Grant Program has thus become an even more important source of support for university and "think tank" research at home and abroad on foreign affairs problems. And the Jennings Randolph fellowship program, now in its 10th year, has brought together more than 130 senior scholars and practitioners from around the world to explore new approaches to international conflict management and peacebuilding.

We have just published Managing Global Chaos, a unique text focused on the problems of international conflict resolution in today's world. The volume--edited by Chester Crocker, chairman of the Institute's board of directors, Fen Hampson, a former senior scholar in our Jennings Randolph fellowship program, and Pamela Aall, deputy director of the Institute's Education and Training Program--demonstrates our commitment to stay at the forefront of education programs for teachers and students. The text is gaining widespread use in college classes in international affairs, and will be extremely useful in our summer training institutes for high school, community college, and university teachers.

The Institute's determination to be a center of innovative ideas on international affairs was evident in the positive reception given our 1994 10th anniversary conference on the theme of "Managing Chaos." This program, which attracted more than 1,200 conferees, succeeded in bringing together representatives of government agencies and the community of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) concerned with humanitarian assistance abroad to assess the needs of cooperative international programs. In April 1997, the Institute will convene another landmark conference--this time on the subject of "Virtual Diplomacy"--to assess the impact of the global information revolution on the conduct of international affairs and the new opportunities it is creating for conflict management and resolution.

These Institute programs express the commitment of our staff to be at the forefront of public education, professional training, practical research, and policy support in the field of international conflict management and resolution. They also reflect the determination of our board of directors--11 private citizens and 4 government officials nominated by the White House and confirmed by the Senate--to ensure that the Institute uses its annual congressional appropriation with both prudence and creativity in support of our mandated national mission.

Building a Permanent Home

As a public institution, the Institute of Peace does not take its congressional support for granted. We will continue to justify our annual appropriations year by year through the quality and relevance of our programs.

That said, it is some measure of the extent to which the Institute has fulfilled the hopes of its founders that Congress and the administration recently have made it possible for us to build a permanent headquarters. With passage of legislation providing for the acquisition of a small but centrally located plot of federal property, the Institute is now in a position to raise private-sector funding for a facility that will help us promote our education and training, policy development, and peacebuilding programs at a higher level of performance. In a world in which the challenges of reducing international conflict and building peace are as daunting as ever, we are fortunate to face a future of opportunity to better fulfill our congressional mandate in permanent and well-sited quarters.

In sum, this is an exciting and challenging time for the Institute of Peace. The character of post-Cold War international conflict has given renewed meaning to our charter. Our staff is responding creatively with new program initiatives, and Congress has reaffirmed its support for our efforts. We look forward to building on the opportunities ahead.

--Richard H. Solomon, President