1

ProjectReport

Peace ConferenceSimulation on Sri Lanka2009

From 26 to 31 January 2009, 10 students and two chaperones fromfive universities in Sri Lanka participated in a simulation of a peaceconference organized by the Peace Conference Simulation Group ofthe University of Oslo. The students were paired together with 10Norwegian, American, Japanese and Finnish students from theUniversity of Oslo and were asked to represent during a week ofsimulations the roles that they had previously been given.The roles were chosen with the goal of challenging students torepresent points of view contrary to their own. The simulationsconsisted of recreating a peace conference on Sri Lanka.

2

Norwegian Peace Council

Index

Foreword

Letter from the PCS President…………………….….

Key Messages………………………………………………..

Acknowledgements……………………….................

1 – What is Peace Conference Simulation?.……………..

2 – Execution of the Peace Conference Simulation….

3 – Student Peace Treaty for Sri Lanka………...............

4 – Sri Lanka Awareness Week…………………................

5 – Learning Before the Conference……………………….

6 – Learning During the Conference………………………

7 – Financial Report……………………………………………….

8 – PCS in the Media……………………….…………………….

9 - Reflection: The Way Ahead……………………...........

Appendixes

i. Conference Program

ii. Passed Memorandum of Understanding

iii. Summary of the delegates’ impressions

iv. PCS Finance

i

ii

iii

6

8

14

21

24

26

28

29

30

We are indebted to all of the

following for their various

contributions to the Peace Conference

Simulation.

Buddhist Dharma School - Sri Lanka

Care International

Colombo University

Eastern University of Sri Lanka

Embassy of Sri Lanka

FriFond.no

Jaffna University

Madrasa Colombo – Sri Lanka

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Norway

Norway Model United Nations

Norwegian Peace Centre

Norwegian Peace Council

Oslo Red Cross Student Association

Rotary Club

South Eastern University

Sri Lankan Association of Norway

St. Lucial Cathedral Sri Lanka

Stortinget

Studentparlamentet – UiO

Tamil Student Union

The Nobel Peace Prize

The Norwegian Children and Youth Council

UN Association of Norway

University of Oslo

University of Ruhuna

University of Ås

3

FOREWORD

In a way perhaps, the result was a heartening reflection

of what the coming decades could maybe someday be

like on Sri Lanka. The students, Tamils, Japanese,

Sinhalese, Muslims, Norwegians and Finnish, were able

to share the best of their cultures and work together

towards a common purpose. This is not to say that the

students necessarily arrived at a viable or satisfactory

solution in the end. Nor that there weren’t

disagreements or heated discussions every step of the

way towards the final document of the conference.

Indeed, it would have been a source of concern about

the realism of the excercise if that had been the case.

But they did teach us that cooperation and

disagreement are not mutually exclusive. They just

need a good dose of those three elements which we as

a group set out to promote: empathy, understanding

and good will.

This report brings together some of the other lessons

that we have learned from carrying out this project. Our

hope is that others will take up where we left off,

promoting understanding and empathy in any of the

asdf conflicts currently under way in the world.

Hopefully they will avoid some of our mistakes and

make future simulations even more successful than this

one proved to be.

Pablo Valverde

Group Leader

Peace Conference Simulation

As this report is being written, several hundred thousand

people are trapped in a small enclave in the North East of

the island of Sri Lanka. According to the Government of Sri

Lanka, civilians are being used as human shields by the

LTTE in a final attempt to stave off the inevitable defeat of

the organisation. They accuse the Tamil organization of

allowing civilians to die in order to demonise the actions

of the Sri Lankan military. According to the LTTE these are

people loyal to the cause of an independent Tamil nation.

They accuse the Sri Lankan army of targeting civilians in

designated safe areas and of being more worried about

winning the war than saving lives.

In a way, what is happening today is a tragic reflection of

the last three decades on Sri Lanka. Opponents become

entrenched in their positions. Accusations of atrocities are

made on all sides. Competing descriptions of reality vie for

the attention of the world. All sides claim to be fighting for

the people – and it is the people who suffer the most.

It is hard to reconcile this picture of antagonism with the

events that took place at Blindern during the last week of

January 2009. At the initiative of a small group of students

at the University of Oslo, ten students and two

chaperones from five universities in Sri Lanka were invited

to spend a week in cold and snowy Norway. Together with

other students from the University of Oslo, they were

asked to represent 13 delegations in a week-long

simulation of a peace conference on Sri Lanka. Most

importantly, the students had previously been given roles

which often were contrary to what they personally

believed. They were asked to prepare themselves and

learn as much as they could about their “new identities” in

advance so that they would be better able to represent

“their interests” at the negotiation table. In order to make

the most out of the experience, the students were also

given daily seminars and activities centered on the themes

relevant to the conference.

4

KEY MESSAGES

The primary role of the student project was building empathy and

understanding between students from different countries and realities. The

students ranged from a variety of nationalities and parts of Sri Lanka. Students

were allocated roles in direct contradiction to their personal believes, and had

to defend and argue this position for the entire duration of the negotiations; a

task that many felt was difficult but nevertheless, very rewarding.

The project facilitated learning for participants with assignments, educational

lunches and role guidelines well before the simulation took place. In Norway,

the primary focus was on educating the organisers and participants about Sri

Lanka through a very successful series of seminar-lunches. In Sri Lanka students

were paired with lecturers at their respective universities, who provided them

with the support needed.

During the students’ stay in Norway, they were provided with educational

lunches and activities focusing on peace building, diplomacy and democracy.

The students were given seminars by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign

Affairs, The Norwegian Parliament, the Norwegian Peace Council, the UN

Association of Norway, the Nobel Peace Centre and Nobel Peace Price

Institute.

Social activity was also a priority, and the Peace Conference Simulation Group

hosted a cultural evening with dancing, quiz and Sri Lankan food. Students had

the opportunity to engage with other Sri Lankan youth as well as Norwegian

students studying at the University of Oslo. Also several other student

organizations were invited to join the cultural evening, giving the event a

multinational characteristic.

Besides the simulation, a week of activities was coordinated with other

organizations during the Sri Lanka Awareness Week. The goal of these activities

was raising awareness about Sri Lanka among the general student population

of the University of Oslo.

5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report is a compilation of individual contributions from the organizing team and participating

students. A special thank you goes to Joachim Ulstein (Conference Chair), who wrote an excellent

evaluation of the conference rules of procedure. In addition, Monica Salmavelli and Tiril Skarstein

wrote a summary of the day-to-day events during the negotiations. Kirsten Meadow, wrote a

summary of the evaluation form filled in by the students. Lastly, Sarah Fossen Sinnathamby

contributed with a summary and evaluation of the events organized as part of the Sri Lanka

Awareness Week. Anton Eliston and Pablo Valverde provided the remainder of the text and layout,

while Astrid Stavseng provided the final editing.

The organisers also wish to acknowledge the enormous contribution of knowledge and advice from

Professors Kristian Stokke at the Institute for Human Geography (University of Oslo). Professors

Jayadeva Uyangoda of the University of Colombo and Nadarajah Shanmugaratnam of the University

of Ås also provided valuable council throughout the preparations. The group also benefited from a

fruitful cooperation with the Section for Peace and Reconciliation at the Norwegian MFA, the Sri

Lankan Embassy and members of the Tamil diaspora in Norway.

The PCS Group wishes to thank all the contributing organizations who donated their time and council

to see the successful completion of the student project. This includes, in alphabetical order, the

Buddhist Dharma School - Sri Lanka, Care International, Colombo University, Eastern University of Sri

Lanka, Embassy of Sri Lanka, FriFond.no, Jaffna University, Madrasa Colombo – Sri Lanka, Ministry of

Foreign Affairs Norway, Norway Model United Nations, Norwegian Peace Centre, Norwegian Peace

Council, Oslo Red Cross Student Association, Rotary Club, South Eastern University, Sri Lankan

Association of Norway, St. Lucial Cathedral Sri Lanka, Stortinget, Studentparlamentet – UiO, Tamil

Student Union, The Nobel Peace Prize, The Norwegian Children and Youth Council, UN Association of

Norway, University of Oslo, University of Ruhuna and the University of Ås.

In a team where everybody pulled together enviably, the PCS Group wishes to finally acknowledge

the efforts of two of its members in particular, without whom the project would probably not have

been completed so succesfully. Fawas, Jay, thank you both.

6

Aims and Objectives of PCS

PCS brings students with a special interest in conflict

negotiations together to act out the roles of the

parties in the civil war in Sri Lanka.

Simply reading about conflict negotiations may lead

to a lack of comprehension in grasping emotions and

historical understandings that underpin the conflict.

Thus, a simulation of peace talks aims to provide

students with further insight into the complexity of

conflict dynamics governing Sri Lanka.

In the spring of 2007, two students from the

University of Oslo played with the idea of carrying out

a simulation of a peace conference on Sri Lanka. The

initiative built on previous experiences by the United

States Institute of Peace (USIP) but took it one step

further:

Students from different ethnic groups in Sri Lanka

would be invited to Oslo and be asked to represent

roles contrary to those they would normally hold.

Thus, a Tamil student from Jaffna may be asked to

represent the Government of Sri Lanka,

a Sinhala student from the capital may be asked to

represent the Muslim Congress and a Muslim from

Ampara may for example be asked to represent the

LTTE.

Being asked to research their new positions, it was

hoped that the students would be better able to

understand “the others” points of view. Furthermore,

by being asked to represent their interests at the

negotiation table they would, it was hoped, increase

their empathy for “the others’” demands.

Although not seriously pursued at the time, the idea

was again picked up in January 2008.

Having formed a core group of students interested in

further developing it, the students proposed the

project to the student organization Norway Model

United Nations (NorMUN). NorMUN has extensive

experience in participating at similar simulations

around the world, albeit in the ambit of the UN. A

visiting student from the University of Colombo,

Mohamed Fawas, joined the group and was

instrumental as the contact person on Sri Lanka. With

an established core of organisers, the PCS Group was

ready to get to work.

What is Peace Conference

Simulation Group

7

As in any democratic organization where people are

encouraged to express their opinions, there were

intense and discussions about what should be the goals

of the exercise. Why was the group doing this? Were

we expecting politicians to pay attention to the project

or would it be enough to make a difference by

promoting empathy among students, ten at a time?

Was it worth all the group’s time and work just to be

content with going through the motions of a

simulation, or should the scope not be more grand?

Should we not aim ideally to provide a solution to the

conflict? As the violence exploded once again, the

question became even more pressing . Should not the

group be able to express its opinions about what was

taking place? At the same time, everyone was well

aware that the nature of the conflict is such that any

such opinions were potentially inflammatory and could

be taken up by either side as proof of partisan

interests.

In the end the group decided that the potential for

doing more damage by being identified with one side

or another was larger than the potential for achieving

more by having ambitious goals. As a result the PCS

group decided to settle for very limited goals, choosing

to concentrate on setting the foundations for a lasting

peace through promoting empathy and understanding.

Goals of PCS

At the core of the project lies the belief that

understanding each other's positions is the first step

towards a lasting peace. By challenging ourselves to

defend positions which may at times be in direct

antagonism to our own, we force ourselves to think

outside the box of absolute categories and enter the

realm of empathy and compromise. A goal of the

project is furthermore to increase awareness of the

conflict amongst students in Oslo.

We thus seek to influence students at two levels:

At the first level, 10 Norwegian students, selected

through an application process, will be paired up with

their Sri Lankan peers to make up the delegations

present at the conference. For the duration of the

conference, these students will get first-hand

experience of the situation, greatly increasing their

understanding of the conflict and its positions.

At the second level the project seeks to increase

awareness in the student population at large through

the coordination of a "Sri Lanka awareness week". By

cooperating with other student organizations and Sri

Lankan organizations in Norway, we aim to organize

cultural events, lectures and debates on topics such

as Norway's mediation, what role the UN is playing

and why, or seeing the humanitarian perspectives of

the conflict.

8

Execution of the Peace

Conference Simulation

Opening Cermony

The conference startedwith an opening cermony at

the heart of international peace, namely the Nobel

Institute for Peace in Oslo. The conference was

officially opened by Prorector Haakon Benestad of the

University of Oslo (UiO).

The Pro-rector was quoted saying:

Simulations of peace talks can become farmore than an innocent game. Role playingis an educational tool that may evokeprofound emotions and perceptions. But itcan also lead to new and importantinsights. That's both the reason and thehope for this exercise.

...

Such knowledge can also become a basisfor processes of peace...

Additionally, the opening ceremony featured

Norwegian Folk songs by three students from UiO

and an address byNirmala Eidsgård from (MiFA at

UiO).

Later Pablo Valverde held some opening remarks

on behalf of the Peace conference Simulation

Group. He also provided the students with the

current scenario that the students were to work

under for the coming week.

9

Rules of the simulation

The main idea behind the way in which the simulation

was carried out was to maintain as much of the

realism of the negotiations as possible, while at the

same time providing a framework that would be strict

enough so that discussions would not degenerate into

chaos and insults. For this reason the group decided to

use its experience from Model United Nations and

take its rules of procedure as the starting point for the

simulations. The organisers were nevertheless well

aware that previous peace processes have often

capsized on precisely this point. Decisions of voting

rights, scope of the negotiations and method are

never innocent and will often determine how the

conference itself takes place.

The PCS Group did not wish to impose a method of

negotiation on the participants, believing that by so

doing they would be depriving the delegates of

experiencing how frustratingly complicated even these

stages of a peace conference can be. Consequently the

first item of the agenda for the delegates was to arrive

at a Memorandum of Understanding which they could

all agree on and which would guide their negotiations

for the remainder of the week.

The first day of negotiations was set out for this

purpose, well knowing that the whole week might

actually go by without the delegations coming to an

agreement on even the MoU. This, however, was

not something the organizers were squeamish

about. After all, if it happens in reality it should also

be allowed to happen in a simulation. If anything, it

would help all participants gain a better

understanding of how difficult things really are in a

peace simulation.

The rules of procedure may be found at the end of

this report as appendix 1. In order to accustom the

students to them, the delegates carried out a mock-

session on ice-cream the day before the

negotiations started. This was considered very

helpful by most as it gave them an opportunity to

see how negotiations would take place. One thing is

reading about how to negotiate, a completely

different thing is actually carrying it out in practice.

It may, however, have been a good idea to wait

until the next day to do this as the students from Sri

Lanka were arguably too tired after their long trip!

Fortunately the chair adopted a flexible line during

negotiations, ultimately facilitating the learning

process.

10

Evaluation of PCS Rules of Procedure.

Did they work?

The PCS Rules of Procedure (RoP) were based on the

UN General Assembly's procedures as interpreted by

the Harvard Model United Nations Society. In essence

this is a parliamentarian set of procedures, aimed at

achieving a common statement between highly

differentiated actors. Though binding for the opening

session, the idea was that the participants would

discuss and adapt the RoP. The first session produced

a memorandum outlining the aims, agenda and new

RoP for the conference. The final memorandum

adapted the rules on voting rights, granting the Tamil

Tigers and the Sri Lankan Government de facto veto

rights, but otherwise left the RoP fairly intact.

In the context of a simulation among students, the

formal parliamentarian procedures provided some

clear benefits. Student felt the gravity of the situation

and all participants took the discussions seriously. In

this way the formal procedure helped produce an

atmosphere that lent a sense of realism to the

simulation. The RoP also proved a quick way to

identify the important topics for discussion and the

necessity of trying to build a large consensus for the

final treaty.

However, the RoP also became a bit of stumbling point

for participants who were not accustomed to

formalized debate. Though many students overcame

this difficulty quickly, it proved a more persistent

problem for students who did not feel confident in the

use of English as a working language. Unfortunately,

this proved to be the case among the Tamil students,

and not the Sinhala, which added an unnecessary

tension between these two student groups. The

chairing language was adapted and the Tamil students

were told that they could get simultaneous

translations from and to Tamil. Though the students

never used the offer, it seemed to give them extra

confidence and the language problem eased

noticeably as the conference progressed.

In the context of the actual peace discussions, the RoP

quickly proved to be a trade-off between structure

and flexibility. Though the debates were highly

structured and points of disagreement were quickly

identified, it proved challenging to negotiate

compromises in the formal sessions. A major

hindrance was that the RoP did not allow for direct

dialog between delegates.

The students adapted to this difficulty by actively

using the option of moving into unmoderated

discussions. Another, even more severe, hindrance

was that the formal agenda made it difficult to link

issues that were set to different sessions. With

hindsight, it might have been beneficial to link

different issues to each other

11

A delegate’s account of how the

negotiations took place

The hope of the organizing committee in setting up a

parliamentarian set of procedures, was that one could

produce a larger consensus around the final treaty

than has been achieved in former peace talks on Sri

Lanka. The committee also hoped that the RoP would

allow for a rotation in the majority that voted in favor

of different elements of the treaty.

A rotating majority could have produced a treaty that

provided more benefits than losses to all parties in the

talks, and a broader consensus around the outcome in

the Sri Lankan population.

However, the RoP ended up being the major reason

for the opposite result. The draft articles voted into

the treaty often got voted in on the minimum required

majority (2/3 including the Tamil Tigers and Sri Lankan

government). Worst, it was the same delegations that

voted against almost all parts of the treaty. The RoP

directly highlighted the parallel cleavages in the

conflict, and gave the discussions an atmosphere of

competition rather than consensus. As a result the JVP

and JHU soon felt too estranged from the discussions

to continue to participate, and withdrew from the

peace talks. The JVP also stated that they refused to

continue in their support of the current Sri Lankan

government, which they felt had neglected them

during the talks. So, though the final treaty achieved

the required consensus, it would hardly have been a

viable solution in real life.

“It is refreshing to see students take the idea of

Model United Nations and develop it in new and

exciting ways. Conference simulation has long been

used as a way of showing young people how the

United Nations works and, perhaps more importantly,

why it sometimes is extremely difficult to agree on a

solution. The students taking part in this exercise will

be in a better situation to understand each others'

points of view than their peers, but they will also have

learned that without the ability to compromise this

will not always be enough. Sometimes, that lesson is

the hardest to learn."Line Begby, Information Officer, UN Association of Norway

In short the RoP, though in part beneficial in the

context of a student simulation, would clearly be ill

suited for an actual peace negotiation on Sri Lanka.

Monday:

All parties to the conference presented their opening

statement. These statements gave everyone the

possibility to get to know the other parties’ positions.

It was also a chance for every delegation to take the

floor and to get a first feel of what it is like to stand in

front of the peace conference assembly.

The delegation of Norway presented a draft

Memorandum of Understanding. It included

procedural rules, who should be given the right of veto

and the topics to be discussed.

Tuesday:

The toughest discussions on the MoU took place on

Tuesday. The parties agreed to grant the LTTE and the

Government of Sri Lanka de facto veto rights after a

discussion where the LTTE unsuccessfully lobbied for

removing the words de facto. The Muslim congress

demanded veto rights on the behalf of Sri Lanka’s

Muslim population, but their amendment was voted

down by one vote.

12

Muslim population, but their amendment was voted

down by one vote. The parties agreed on a ceasefire

for the duration of the conference. The LTTE argued

that they would not agree to participate in

negotiations if a temporary ceasefire was not in place.

The assembly also engaged in discussions about which

topics should be included in the final document, and

ended up agreeing on the following:

1. The question of a ceasefire

2. Confidence building measures

3. The disarmament of paramilitary groups

4. Political compromise,

5. Political representation

6. Economic development

7. IDPs and refugees.

The participants nevertheless recognized that all of

the topics above would not be discussed during the

simulation, because of time constraints.

Wednesday:

The MoU was passed unanimously Wednesday

morning. JVP and JHU had voiced their opposition to

several points, but did however vote in favour of the

MoU in order to take part in the negotiations.

This is when the real peace negotiation got started.

Ceasefire was the first topic of discussion. The debate

regarded the length of the ceasefire, where the

government in the beginning was in favour of a six

month ceasefire, and voiced their fear of LTTE getting

time to rearm. LTTE supported a longer ceasefire, and

in the end all parties agreed upon a one year ceasefire,

followed by renegotiations.

There was agreement about establishing a new

monitoring mission, but tough debates about its

composition. JVP and JHU were consistently sceptical

to international involvement.

This is when the real peace negotiation got started.

Ceasefire was the first topic of discussion. The debate

regarded the length of the ceasefire, where the

government in the beginning was in favour of a six

month ceasefire, and voiced their fear of LTTE getting

time to rearm. LTTE supported a longer ceasefire, and

in the end all parties agreed upon a one year ceasefire,

followed by renegotiations.

13

There was agreement about establishing a new

monitoring mission, but tough debates about its

composition. JVP and JHU were consistently sceptical

to international involvement.

Thursday:

Norway promised to give a carrot, in the form of a

lump of money for humanitarian purposes, which

would be donated to Sri Lanka if the ceasefire was

kept. This promise was followed by detailed discussions

about the composition of a group which should

administer the distribution of the money. The parties

also agreed to let some organizations working with

humanitarian aid, reconstruction and rehabilitation to

get access to the war-torn areas. The organizations to

be let in at this point were the ICRC and several UN

bodies.

Friday:

This day things got very intense. We started by voting

on the whole chapter about the ceasefire, which was

then included in the treaty. The JHU and JVP voted

against. Due to the limited time frame, we decided to

halt discussions on chapter two and moved instead

directly to chapter three to discuss political

compromise. The delegates seemed to regard this as

one of the most crucial topics of the negotiations. Until

now we had often brought the discussions forward

during several unmoderated caucuses. Friday

we used this opportunity to an even larger degree, and

we established some semi-moderated discussion

circles.

The LTTE argued for a federal state structure, which

the government hesitated to accept. The Muslim

Congress feared a two-state solution. The parties

agreed to keep the nine provinces, which already

exist, and give these a greater autonomy, guaranteed

in the constitution. Hence we incorporated the

definition of a federal state, but without using this

exact wording.

Then we started thorough discussions about power-

sharing between the central government and the state

governments. After a while we did realised, however,

that so far we had been discussing things that were

already in place, on least at paper, and could be

agreed upon by the parties. The focus was then shifted

towards new issues. These were e.g. the police force,

the legal system, the position of the languages in

schools and the public sector, and changing the

administrative system considering the civil services.

The parties also agreed upon an equality of all

religions, hence taking away the position of a state-

religion from Buddhism. However, it was decided that

there would be held a separate referendum on this.

The JVP and JHU were opposed to many of the issues

being agreed on in chapter 3 by the other parties, and

expressed their concern for the outcome. When the

formal debate continued and chapter 3 was about to

be voted in, the two parties announced their

withdrawal from the peace negotiations. As a result,

the assembly took away their rights to speak and vote.

Finally the whole chapter three was voted for and

included in the treaty. During the discussions earlier,

some parties had simultaneously been working on

articles for other chapters, which they now presented

to the assembly. These concerned the situation of

IDP’s and refugees, as well as confidence building

measures. These articles were voted for unanimously,

almost without any debate. Right before the time set

for the peace negotiations ended on Friday afternoon,

the assembly, consisting now of five parties with a

substantive voting right, voted in favour of the whole

peace treaty.

14

The Student Peace Treaty for

Sri Lanka

Goal: Solve the conflict in Sri LankaIn order to reach this goal, the delegates were given

pointers about what kind of topics they should be

discussing in the form of the diagram on the right.

The aim with these questions was to leave it open to

the delegates themselves and to the deliberations of

the conference to come up with the actual scope of

the final document themselves instead of having it

imposed on them by the organisers.

The delegates were therefore asked to try to come

up with a comprehensive treaty and given

suggestions to what such a treaty would cover. At

the same time it was made clear that any solution is

better than none. In other words, they would not fail

if they only managed to come up with a ceasefire

agreement or even a Memorandum of

Understanding if that was all they managed to agree

on. The important part from the organisers’ point of

view was the process by which they reached an

agreement, rather what that agreement actually

looked like in the end.

15

“On 31 January 2009, the delegates of the Peace

Conference Simulation – Sri Lanka gathered at the MS

Innvik for the historic signing of the Treaty on Sri

Lanka. The participants were first congratulated for

their endeavors by Secretary of State of the Obama

Administration, the Honorable Hillary Clinton, who

praised their efforts and dedication during the last

week. The delegates then committed their signatures

to the final document, a copy of which was given to

the delegation representing the Government of Sri

Lanka, another to the delegation of the LTTE, and a

third was handed over to the representative of the

UNHCR for filing at the UN’s Secretariat in accordance

with article 102 of the United Nations Charter where it

reads: "every treaty and every international

agreement entered into by any Member State of the

United Nations after the present Charter comes into

force shall as soon as possible be registered with the

Secretariat and published by it".

Following the solemn ceremony, certificates of

participation were awarded to all participants and

prices were awarded to the delegates who had in some

way or another stood out for their work during the

conference. The delegates were then invited to a

dinner overlooking the Oslo Opera, where they also

had a chance to say goodbye after a most eventful and

successful week”

The Final Treaty and the Memorandum of

Understanding

The final treaty is included in the pages below for the

sake of showcasing the efforts carried out by the

delegations. As the product of a simulation, it is not

intended to be fully realistic nor is it intended to

represent the positions held by the participating

delegations. Nevertheless, it does provide an

interesting exercise in what Sri Lankan and Norwegian

youth perceive as areas where compromise should be

possible or at least attempted. It also provides a

glimpse as to the many difficult aspects that need to

be taken into account in an eventual treaty. Perhaps

most importantly, it also highlights the many points

that will remain pending even after a military solution

is pursued.

Before arriving at a final treaty, the delegates had to

arrive at a Memorandum of Understanding which

would guide the way their negotiations would take

place. The MoU is often the most difficult thing to

arrive at, as it determines what the rest of the

negotiations will look like. It is therefore included at

the end of this report as appendix 2.

A number of participants distinguished themselves

during the simulation and were also recognized during

the closing ceremony with the following awards:

Best Researched Award - Deepanjalie

Diplomacy Award - Johannes, Thiru and Erandi

Peer Award - Monika

16

17

18

19

20

21

‘’

Sri Lanka Awareness Week

(SLAW)

Purpose of SLAWAt its very essence, the PCS initiative was intended to

be an educational experience for everyone involved.

This was the case at three levels: in the first place, it

was the idea of the organizers that students from

different ethnic groups would be more willing to see

each others’ points of view and be more willing to

compromise, if they were subjected to other

impressions and perspectives. In the second place, the

organizers wished to raise awareness about Sri Lanka

among the broader student population in Oslo. Finally,

it was recognized very early in the project that in order

to organize an event of this kind, the organising

committee itself would need to be a lot more

knowledgable about Sri Lanka and its history. As a

result, a series of educational measures were added to

the original project to increase its educational aspect.

It was decided early on in the planning process to use

the synergies of the simulation to coordinate a week

of information events around the subject of Sri Lanka

at Blindern. The reason behind this was that Sri Lanka

has long been a priority for Norwegian foreign policy,

yet very few people have anything beyond a very

rudimentary

understanding of the situation on the island. The

conflict is all permeating and does not allow for other

aspects of Sri Lanka, such as its long history and rich

culture, to come through. At the same time the

conflict is extremely complicated, with more angles

and competing realities than most people are aware

of. Finally, it allowed the PCS group to tap into other

sources of funding reserved for the spreading of

information, such as LNU’s information fund, which

would otherwise had been closed to the organizers.

A SLAW Coordinator was thus elected with the

mandate to contact other student organizations who

would be interested in carrying out cultural or

educational activities during the week of the

simulation and to facilitate these events.

22

‘

SLAW in short

SLAW was hosted with the aim of engaging the

student at the University of Oslo. The first event aimed

to appeal to the curiosities of Sri Lankan culture. The

cultural evening included performance of traditional

Sri Lankan dance, Indian Bhangra Music and Sri Lankan

food. This event was greatly enhanced by the

participation of the conference delegates, showing

how the two activities (PCS and SLAW) could

complement each other.

The second event took place at Blå in Oslo, and had

the title “Women and War”. The event consisted of a

showcase of the award-winning film “My daughter the

terrorist” by Beate Arnestad, followed by a debate on

why The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) have

such a high number of female cadres. The questions

that were discussed included: What implications does

the high number of female guerilla soldiers have for

the Sri Lankan society-is it a sign of improvement for

gender equality or not? The panel consisted of

professor in social anthropology at UIO Øivind

Fuglerud, delegate in the city council of Oslo and

representative of Tamil women in Norway,

Khamshajiny Gunaratnam and film producer Beate

Arnestad.

The third event invited students to a seminar with the

humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka on the agenda. The

seminar was organized by the Oslo Red Cross Student

Team at Blindern. They had invited Kristian Stokke, a

Professor at the institute for Human Geography at the

University of Oslo, to give brief overview of the

current situation in Sri Lanka. Later humanitarian

organizations explained the way they worked in Sri

Lanka.

The main objectives of these events were to increase

the understanding, interest and knowledge about Sri

Lanka. Moreover draw attention to the conflict on-

going conflict in Sri Lanka amongst Norwegians, and in

particular among Norwegian students. The events

were open to everyone. The briefing on the

humanitarian situation and the cultural evening took

place at the UIO campus.

Despite the fact that all of these activities under the Sri

Lanka Awareness Week were prone to attract student

already interested in South Asia, the events proved to be

well attended by students from very different areas of

study. This was most likely because the expansion of the

warfare in Sri Lanka happened simultaneously with the

conference, increasing the interest in our events. At the

same time, the developments in Sri lanka made the

events more difficult to execute here in Oslo.

The cultural evening was organised in collaboration witha Tamil and a Sinhalese organization, who agreed toperform traditional Tamil and Sinhalese dances at theevent. However the Sinhalese organization had towithdraw some months before the cultural evening wasdue to take place because they lacked dancers.

This was a plausible reason considering the fact that theSinhalese population in Norway only counts somehundred people. However the Tamil organization alsowithdrew their dance contribution, but they did it justthe night before the event. The reason for withdrawalwas the current situation in Sri Lanka and the fact thatthe program was organized in cooperation withSinhalese in Norway.

Nevertheless, replacements were found and theprogram could still be executed.

This incident illustrates how difficult it was to arrangethe PCS and the SLAW, because we continuously had toaccommodate the two parts in order not be looked uponas favoring one of the two sides.

Cultural Evening

23

The debate at Blå was attended by about 30-40

people. We encountered some problems considering

this event as well because the topic that was discussed

makes people ofSri Lankan origin very emotional. On

the debate there were many Tamil spectators and

some Sinhalese. As earlier said, the war in Sri Lanka

was intensifying during the week the PCS took place.

This was also easy to observe among our spectators.

One Tamil girl among the spectators became so

emotional when she was about to ask a question to

the debating panel that she started to cry. As an

arranger of the debate, I think it was hard to know

exactly where to draw the line between questions that

were within the boundaries of the debate topic, and

questions which were not. Anyway, there were many

good questions coming from the spectators, both the

ethnically Norwegians and the ones of Sri Lankan

origin. And the debating panel came with several

interesting analysis. So even if the debaters and the

spectators clearly did not agree with one another, it

seemed that everyone got some interesting points to

think about.

When it comes to the briefing on the humanitariansituation it was clearly the least problematic event tocreate, as the aim of this event was quite forward togive an objective as possible briefing on thehumanitarian situation. We arranged this eventtogether with Oslo Red Cross Student Team. Havingthe Red Cross on the arranging list also contributed tobrand this as a neutral event. Around 50 peopleshowed up to this event.

As we in the PCS group had never arranged anythinglike the PCS before, it was difficult to make estimateson how many people would turn up on the events. Wewere pleased with the turnout on the cultural evening,because quite many people come. We were alsopleased with the turnout on the briefing on thehumanitarian situation in Sri Lanka, because the topicwas quite narrow, which made it improbable to reachout to a large audience. However, we could have donemore advertisement for the “Women at War” event.

Women and War

Briefing on the Humanitarian

Situation in Sri Lanka

Since this had a broader scoop than the two other

events, it should have been able to reach out to

people both with an interest for Sri Lanka, but also to

people with an interest for women and development.

However we were not good enough to link the event

to the latter topic.

Lessons to draw from SLAW

There many lessons to be drawn from SLAW. Firstly,when one organizes events with a geographical limitedscoop, it is important to find other topics that theevent can be linked up to. This is especially importantto draw additional students to the event. Anotherlesson to be drawn in the course of organizing SLAWrelates to the sensitivities around inviting participantswhose availability will depend on the current situationof the conflict. Minister of Development, Erik Solheimfor example had agreed to take part in a public debateon Sri Lanka as part of SLAW but had to cancel in thevery last minute. Thus, it is always important to beprepared for such “unforeseen circumstances”.

24

Learning before the

conference

Preparation before the conference

One of the greatest challenges facing the PCS group was

how to ensure that all participants were aware of and

comfortable using the rules of procedure that would

govern the negotiations during the simulation. With the

students in Oslo this could be made somewhat easier

through seminars and mini-simulations before the

event. Moreover, as rules of procedure would in general

follow MUN procedures, some of the participants were

already comfortable using them from earlier

conferences. With the students in Sri Lanka, such

meetings before the event were obviously unfeasible.

As the students came from five different universities

spread throughout the country, it was also impossible

to gather them together for a “virtual” session. It

quickly became very clear that a handbook of sorts

would have to be made and distributed to all

participants. Besides the rules of procedure, the

handbook had to include information about the conflict

and the parts involved as well as where to find further

information. More importantly, the organizers wished

to make sure that none of this information would

“color” the participants’ perceptions of either their

roles or the history of the conflict.

As a result participants were first assigned roles and

partners, and then asked to coordinate with the other

members of their delegations a common position that

they would probably adopt. One of the students said

this about the position paper in the evaluation form.

These “position papers” are well known from MUN

conferences and have the advantage of forcing

participants to do some research in advance of the

conference. In our case they had the added advantage

of promoting dialogue between the delegates and

arriving at common positions within the delegations

long before any of the delegates had actually met each

other.

Feedback from a delegate.

“The position paper we had to do was a great

start. It gave us a thorough understanding ... of

the role we were supposed to play.

Pairing me with my partner was the next best

thing. We had chats on-line about our role, the

current situation in the country and it formed a

very good rapport.

25

It may be debated, however, whether the handbooks

were as useful as they could have been. Although

some of the delegates did study its content

thoroughly, it was only until the rules of procedure

had been explained in person that the contents of the

handbook were really understood. The handbooks

would therefore had been a lot more effective if their

launch would have been followed by a seminar of

some kind to go through them and explain their

content.

Brown Bag Lunches Prior to Conference

It soon became very clear that the organizers of the

PCS did not know enough about the situation on Sri

Lanka to navigate through the many pitfalls of the

conflict. Many had joined for the opportunity to learn

more about the conflict and the country. The board

was itself determined to increase the knowledge of the

group itself, not only of the participating delegates.

The group started by inviting Professor Kristian Stokke

to a seminar-breakfast for the organisers. It was an

eye-opening experience. Participants started to realize

how incredibly complicated the situation really was

and it was unanimously decided to carry out a series of

weekly seminars for the organisers themselves.

Participants were invited to eat their lunches at the

seminar while a professor or PHD candidate was

invited to speak about something related to Sri Lanka:

from the latest developments of the conflict to the

role of the diaspora in keeping it alive.

The idea was bringing in as many points of view as

possible so as to get as clear an image of reality as

possible. Thus were the PCS Brown Bag Lunches

invented as an attempt to equip the organizers with

the necessary knowledge to carry out the simulation.

The value of this activity was quickly appreciated and

soon there were people outside the PCS group coming

to these seminars. It was therefore decided to carry

out this exercise with the participants of the

simulation, and a Brown Bag Lunch was planned for

each of the days of the conference.

Besides the opportunity this provided for including

more activities for participants, it provided the PCS

group with two additional advantages. In the first

place, it helped to free up some means, as

organisations hosting the BBL were invited to provide

lunch for participants. Perhaps more importantly, it

also increased the buy-in of other organizations which

would otherwise have been reticent to be identified

with the initiative. Providing funds and assistance may

be read to imply support for the project; hosting a

seminar is simply a way of increasing awareness for

visiting students.

The Brown Bag Lunches were one of the project’s most

successful activities. They provided the opportunity for

organisers and participants alike to be presented with

different points of view which they otherwise would

not have had. The only critique towards them is that

they were not implemented earlier in the planning

process.

26

Learning during the conference

Brown Bag Lunches during the Conference

In order to enhance the experience of the participating

students from Norway and Sri Lanka, a number of

activities were organized to educate the students on

democracy, diplomacy and peace. This was done

through events and visits to the Ministry of Foreign

Affairs, The Norwegian Parliament, Nobel Peace Price

centre and Nobel Peace Price Institute. Moreover,

seminars were conducted by the UN Association of

Norway and the Norwegian Peace Centre.

Visit to the Nobel Peace Institute: After the opening

ceremony at the Nobel Peace Institute, we were given a

guided tour of the institute. It was a great experience

and the students were given a brief explanation of the

history of the Nobel Peace Price, and why Norway was

given the task to decide the Nobel Peace Price.

Visit to the Norwegian Parliament: This provided the

students with the opportunity to understand the

Norwegian Political system. It was especially nice for

some of the Sri Lankan students who had never

believed that public citizens would be allowed to

actually enter the Parliament.

27

Visit to Ministry of Foreign Affairs: One of the students

described the visit to the Ministry in the following way:

Our visit to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs greatly

enriched the Peace Conference Simulation. We were

graced with the presence of Mr. Jon Hanssen-Bauer,

who led an excellent presentation on his experience as

a mediator while thoroughly answering our questions.

Rarely in our studies are we afforded an opportunity to

see first-hand into the mind of a top level negotiator.

This luncheon explained how simulations are very

much a script for the reality in which we live.

Simulations can function as a tool by which students

realize their future ambitions; personal skills necessary

for negotiation are best created and enhanced through

practice. Mr. Hanssen-Bauer confirmed this when he

stated that as a negotiator you must learn to

understand complexity [and simultaneously] not be

overwhelmed by it.

Visit to the Nobel Peace Centre: This was for some a

truly enchanting experience. Many of the students were

amazed by how the previous Nobel Peace Price winners

were exhibited and the story behind them.

Seminar with UN Association of Norway: In order to

understand the role of UN in Sri Lanka, UN Association

of Norway was invited to hold a seminar on UN Peace

Keeping Forces. It was a detailed presentation and did

not focus too much on Sri Lanka, which provided the

students with insight from other conflicts in the world.

Seminar with Norwegian Peace Centre: This was a

seminar on dialog with first generation and second

generation tamil students. The seminar touched upon

issues and perceptions on the current situation in Sri

Lanka. Many students believed this was an interesting

seminar where all different opinions were heard.

28

Financial Report

Financial Report

As with any project of this kind, the most frustrating

and time-consuming part of the exercise was finding the

necessary funding. The group wrote in total more than

20 applications, from simple letters and project

descriptions to a massive application to Norad’s REFLEX

project in conjunction with the Norwegian Peace

Council. In the end the project was completed with a

surplus of NOK 30,000 (NOK 45,000 with LNU’s NOK

15,000 contribution, which was later returned as it was

not deemed necessary in the end).

That this was the case was in large part due to the fact

that the group managed to carry out the exercise at a

cost very much under what was originally budgeted.

Instead of the NOK 193,050 that the group had

expected to use, the actual expenses were NOK

108,733.92. Savings were made on almost every post,

including food and drink (almost NOK 3,000); PR and

information (almost NOK 4,000 due to the decision to

digitalise the publication); and especially delegate

expenses, with savings of almost NOK 60,000. The total

budget and expenses can be found in the appendix.

29

PCS in the MediaPCS in Student and national print mediaPCS was featured in Vårt Land as well as Norads

Bistandsaktuelt blog. The article in Vårt Land featured

two of the students taking part with the headline: Peace

in 96 Hours. The article compares the current situation to

the environment that the students are working under

and poses the question of whether peace is possible

under these fictitious conditions.

Norad’s Bistandsaktuelt provides interviews with the

participants and their hopes for peace in Sri Lanka. And

what the students believe they will get out of the

simulation. To access the article, please refer to this link:

http://bistandsaktuelt.typepad.com/blade/2009/01/my-

entry.html

The Norwegian Peace Center (Norges Fredssenter) also

published a peace on the PCS project on their website

which may be found at the following address:

http://fredssenter.no/wb/pages/sri-lanka-mote-jan-

08.php

The students themselves also contributed actively to

getting the word out about the project. SLAW

Coordinator Sarah Sinnathamby wrote an excellent piece

for the newspaper Zoon Politikon of the University

of Oslo. The University’s media also picked up on

the events taking place and an interview was given

to Uniforum for an article in the University’s paper.

Strict Media guidelines

Due to concerns about the security of the

delegates, the PCS board decided to limit the

access of the media during the sessions of

negotiations. This was predominantly because of

the possibility for misinterpreting the role being

played by the participants as being their actual

belief and personal opinion.

30

Reflection: the way ahead

The Peace Conference Simulation was an excellent

experience for everyone involved. For the organisers, the

many hours of hard work have paid off in the form of a

successful conference and the gratitude of the

participants. For the participants the long trip and the

hours of preparation in advance have paid off in

increased knowledge, empathy and understanding. All of

us have made friendships that will outlive the conflict.

It should therefore not be surprising that many of us look

at the year that has been with a certain sadness that it’s

all over. For just one week, Tamils, Singalese, Muslims,

Norwegians, students all, achieved peace in Sri Lanka – if

only in a role play.

Role-playing should not be underestimated however. The

first step towards a lasting peace must surely be healing

the sores of nearly three decades of war. Empathy and

understanding are necessary first steps for this to take

place. Role-playing provides both, while at the same time

providing an example of what possible cooperation could

look like.

The goal of the Peace Conference Simulation Group

therefore is that the conference held during the last

week of January will not be the last one of its kind.

There are currently more than 40 ongoing conflicts in

the world, on which simulations may be carried out. It is

our hope that the Peace Conference Simulation

initiative will be a yearly offer for members of the

Norway Model United Nations organization.

It is also the goal of the PCS Group that the process that

was started with ten Sri Lankan students and two

chaperones may be continued on the island itself.

Despite the probable military victory, the roots of the

conflict still need to be properly managed if Sri Lanka is

not to lose the peace. There is still an important role for

negotiations and for compromise; there is still an

important need for empathy and understanding. There

is, in other words, a place for role-playing.

The PCS Group has hopes of planning a similar

simulation in Sri Lanka using the surplus from the

budget. The idea is inviting the students who

participated in Oslo and opening up to ten new

students. Only time will tell whether this turns out to be

as resounding a success as the conference in Oslo was.

Once again, the PCS Group is breaking new ground.

31

Who is the PCS Group?

Pablo Valverde

PCS Leader

pablo@peacesimulation.com

Astrid Staveng

Information Coordinator

astrid@peacesimulation.com

Sarah Fossen Sinnathamby

SLAW Coordinator

sarah@peacesimulation.com

Anton Eliston

Media and Communication Officer

anton@peacesimulation.com

32

Joakim Ulstein

Conference Chair

joakim.ulstein@gmail.com

Kirsten Meadow

Delegate Responsible

Kirsten.meadow@gmail.com

Mohamed Fawas

Sri Lanka Liaison

mffawas@yahoo.co.uk

Tiril Skarstein

Advisor

tiril.skarstein@gmail.com

Ida Kjeoy

Finance Officer

ida@peacesimulation.com

Rajee Sivam

IT Officer

ra_jee@hotmail.com

33

Appendix i:

Conference Program

34

Day Date Event Where

Sunday 25th Jan2009

Welcome Dinner with Peace ConferenceSimulation Group

Haraldsheim

Monday 26th Jan2009

Opening Ceremony

Seminar: Rules of Procedure with chairBB Lunch: Active listening techniques by TheNorwegian Peace AssociationPCS Simulation: SessionSocial Gathering with Pizza

Nobel Peace PriceInstituteUiO - BlindernUiO - Blindern

UiO - BlindernHaraldsheim

Tuesday 27th Jan2009

PCS Simulation: SessionBB Lunch: Experiences from previous peacenegotiations by Ministry of Foreign AffairsPCS Simulation: SessionDinner at Sri Lankan Embassy’s First Secretaryhouse

UiO- BlindernMinistry of ForeignAffairsUiO - BlindernUllern

Wednesday 28th Jan2009

PCS Simulation: SessionBB Lunch: Norwegian Democracy by TheNorwegian ParliamentPCS Simulation: Session

UiO – BlindernOslo - Stortinget

UiO– Blindern

Thursday 29th Jan2009

PCS Simulation: SessionBB Lunch: UN intervention in civil wars by theUN Association of NorwayCultural Evening with Bangra party

UiO – BlindernUiO– Blindern

UiO – Blindern

Friday 30th Jan2009

PCS Simulation: SessionFred på Blå: Debate and Concert

UiO– BlindernBlå

Saturday 31st Jan2009

Excursion to the Peace Price CentreSumming up Simulation ResultsClosing Ceremony at MS Invik

Oslo – Aker BryggeUiO – BlindernOslo

Sunday 1st Feb2009

Departure of Sri Lankan Delegates

Peace Conference Simulation 2009 Program

35

Appendix ii:

Passed Memorandum of

Understanding

36

We, Norway, Government of Sri Lanka, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam, Muslim Congress, United

National Party, Jathika Hela Urumaya, Tamil National Alliance, Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, Tamil

Makkal Viduthalai Puligal, India,UNHCR, ICRC and Sri Lanka Business Council,

In awareness of the intense suffering of the civilian population on Sri Lanka as a direct consequence of

the upsurge in violence,

Noting with concern the intensification in the use of violence from all sides of the conflict in the recent

months,

Recognising the fact that a peaceful settlement where all voices are heard, will provide the only

durable framework and the only sustainable solution to the conflict,

Commit to the following common understanding as a basis for discussions to resolve the current

strife:

1) Agree to temporarily halt all combat and armed hostilities for the duration of the discussions,26th-31st of January 2009.The ICRC will send a monitoring mission to make sure that the GOSL and LTTE respect andkeep the ceasefire. For this short period, a curfew will be imposed from 10pm-4am

2) Resolve to work together to produce a comprehensive peace treaty in the format, anddiscussed under the procedure, to be voted over in accordance to the principles stipulated inAnnex A,

Annex A Procedures for PCS

§ 1 General Procedures

As the basis for general procedures for the discussions the procedures of the UN General Assembly

will be used, and are held to bind all parties, with the exceptions and adaptions mentioned in the

following paragraphs. The UN General Assembly procedures include, but are not limited to, the rules

noted in § 2 through §5.

§ 2 Proper decorum will be observed at all times

Everyone has to be polite and address other delegates and the Chair politely.

Proper forms of address include “Honorable Chair” and “Honorable Delegates”. This also

means that although you are allowed to leave the room at any time except during

substantive voting, you should never do so while someone else is speaking and you should

try to do so in a way that does not disturb others. If you need to communicate with other

delegates you can do so outside or through notes. If you need to send a note to another

delegation or to the Chair, put who the name of the delegation on it and raise your hand.

Someone will help you distribute it.

§ 3 The sessions will be led by the Chair

This means that the Chairperson determines who speaks when and for how long, but only in

the ways marked by the rules. In other words, the Chair has to acknowledge speakers, points

Memorandum of Understanding

37

and motions and ensure that rules are followed. The Chair can expel a delegate for half an hour after

three warnings if proper decorum is not observed.

§ 4 A quorum is necessary for sessions to start and for substantive voting to take place

This means that there must be at least one representative from each delegation present (not

counting observers) before sessions can start. It also means that when voting on things which

will be on the final documents, all delegations must be represented (again, observers can’t

vote so they don’t have to be there for voting to start). A rolecall will be carried out by the

chair every morning to ensure that a quorum is present. Absence due to disease and the like

will of course be taken into consideration.

§ 5 Substantive voting requires ¾ majority and quorum. Abstentions are permitted;

procedural voting requires a simple majority and does not require a quorum. Abstentions

are not permitted

This means that there are two kinds of voting procedures. If you are voting on how to

proceed, for example on whether you want to accept a motion to break for lunch, you only

need more positive votes than negative votes to pass the motion and you have to vote yes or

no. If you are voting on something of substance, for example whether you want to accept the

draft treaty in front of you as the final treaty, you need ¾ of the votes to be positive and

everyone must be present, but you can abstain (vote neither yes nor no). Observers can vote

in procedural voting, but not in substantive voting.

§ 6 Observers, vetos, and substantive voting

The following delegations have voting rights: Government of Sri Lanka, Liberation Tigers of Tamil

Ealam, Muslim Congress, United National Party, Jathika Hela Urumaya, Tamil National Alliance,

Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal.

The following delegations are obserers and have only proceedural vote and not substantial vote:Sri

Lanka Business Council, UNHCR, ICRC, India and Norway.

Recognising that the following delegations have de facto veto rights: Government of Sri Lanka,

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam,

§ 7 Motions and points

We will accept the following motions: point of personal privilidge, point of information, point of

parliamentary inquiry, and motions to enter moderated and unmoderated caucus, motion to

suspend the meeting (ie, for lunch), motion to extend debate time, motion to table current

discussion (ie, move to the next topic), motion to reintroduce tabled discussion, motion to move

directly into voting procedure on current discussion.

§ 8 Topic of discussion

A topic for discussion (these will be the Chapters in the final document) is set for each session.

Debate time on a topic can be cut short or extended with motions (for example through a motion to

table current discussion). The topics set are as follows in this order: For session 1 The question of a

ceasefire, session 2 Confidence building measures and discussing the disarmament of the

38

paramilitary groups, session 3: Political compromise, session 4 Political representation, session 5

Economic development, session 6 IDPs, session 7 Refugees

§ 9 Components of the Draft Treaty

The Draft Treaty will be divided into chapters corresponding to the topics of discussion. Under each

chapter there will be several concrete articles dealing with spesified issues that divide rights and

duties between the participants to the treaty. The articles, which constitute the contents of the

treaty, will be introduced in the form of working papers.

§ 10 Proposing articles in the form of working papers

Draft articles need a main submitter and 2 co-signatures for submission. Once submitted to the chair,

it will be introduced for discussion by the key-submittor through motion.

§ 11 Ammendments

Draft articles can be ammended. Ammendments can also be ammended.

§ 12 Including draft articles in a draft chapter

Draft articles are included in the the draft treaty by a substantive vote.

§ 13 Including draft chapter in the draft treaty

Draft chapters are adopted into the draft treaty by substantive vote.

§ 14 Draft Treaty readied for final signatures

The draft treaty is readied for signatures after a substantive vote. The final document will be voted

on during the Closing Plenary on Saturday morning.

39

Appendix iii:

Summary of the student’s impressions

40

Upon the completion of the project, participants at the simulation were asked to fill in an

evaluation of the conference for future reference. In total 16 evaluations were sent back to the

organisers. The responses were summarized by Kirsten Meadow, Delegate Services Officer, and

may be found below.

Summary of the delegates’ evaluations of the conference

What participants liked about the conference

The delegates enjoyed the set up of the seminar, the fact that it was a simulation and delegates

took their roles seriously and that the rules, procedures and chairing were carried out in a

professional manner. They appreciated learning more about the conflict in Sri Lanka as seen by

the different actors in the conflict, as well as increasing their knowledge of diplomacy and

negotiations. The delegates also appreciated that the simulation was supplemented with

educational lunches and visits to various attractions. Other elements, such as the social

atmosphere and making new friends, were also perceived as valuable outcomes by the

delegates.

What they would have liked to see different in the conference

The schedule was tight and some delegates would have liked to have had more time available.

Especially the delegates from Sri Lanka would have liked the opportunity to tour more of the city

and have more time to get to know people outside the simulation setting. A recurring complaint

is that not all delegates had a sufficient command of English, which complicated the debates.

There was also a wish to hold the conference during the summer.

Simulation

Educational outcome of the simulation

The delegates generally give the impression of having learned more about the situation in Sri

Lanka, its complexity, the mechanisms that keep the conflict going, the different views and

stakes behind each party’s standpoint and thus the obstacles to a peaceful solution. The

delegates saw the importance of dialogue and willingness to listen to the view points of the

opposition and the need to create a forum for mutual understanding in order to avoid dead-

locks.

Being forced to place oneself in “the others’ shoes” and argue their point of view was a useful

tool for increasing the delegates’ knowledge of the conflict. The fact that other countries were

represented in the negotiations gave the delegates insight into how the conflict is perceived by

the outside world.

An important factor was that there were Sri Lankan delegates from all three ethnic groups who

were given the chance to interact with each other and share their views on the conflict. For many

delegates this was the first time they were able to interact with people across ethnic boundaries.

This helped show that everyone suffers from the state of war in Sri Lanka and that the

grievances should be solved by political and not violent means.

Evaluation of the project by the students

41

How well prepared they felt

In general delegates felt prepared for their role. Writing positions papers and being paired up

with their partner(s) in advance and cooperating with them were the most useful. Some found it

hard to know what to focus on when preparing but ended up doing additional research when

needed, during the conference itself. The most difficult thing seems to have been understanding

rules of procedure which prevented some delegates from taking an active part in the discussions

at the beginning. The mock session was very helpful and some would have liked more of these

before the conference to be more prepared. Some found the rules of procedure in the handbook

somewhat insufficient.

What they would have done differently in retrospect

The following responses were generally given:

Focused more on understanding the conflict details rather than the overall picture. Read more books, had they known about all the good books written on the conflict. Focused on the MUN format rather than on dialogue method. Started preparations earlier and found more information about previous negotiations. Had more contact with their Norwegian/Sri Lankan counterparts before the conference

What they would have changed with the simulation

Delegates liked the set up of the simulation but the Model United Nations style was at times too

rigid, making the progress of the negotiations slow. Suggestions from the delegates include:

Divide the time into formal session and more free discussion time (as was done on thelast day).

Have all the delegates staying at the same place to have discussions outside of the formalsessions. This was the original idea, but many of the Norwegian students chose insteadto stay at home.

A one-day break in the middle of the seminar to have a “breather” Have a longer simulation with more delegates and require delegates to draft concrete

ideas in advance on paper. Do the MoU in advance to save time eg. by email Start the simulation from the ceasefire, or at least with a MoU, to get faster progression

into new topics. More expectations from the participants before the simulation started. For example,

asking them to write essays about the conflict, or making them read relevant articles. A majority voting system for quicker decision making.

What they found the most rewarding about the simulation

The delegates truly appreciated spending one week getting to know other students from

different countries and ethnic backgrounds and sharing their thoughts. Having students directly

affected by the conflict in the simulation made the experience powerful for the Norwegian

delegates, while the Sri Lankan delegates appreciated seeing Norwegian students engaged in

understanding and solving a conflict that was not their own.

Being able to take on the role of a party they themselves did not belong to and defend this view

was apparently a trying and rewarding experience. Through this they claim to have gained

valuable knowledge about Sri Lanka, the conflict, negotiations, UN procedures, the essence of

diplomacy, the ability to see things from others’ perspectives, strategies for leading discussions

42

and improving their public speaking skills, the ability to empathize with “others’” situation and

treat opponents with dignity and respect .

How the simulation affected their perspective on the conflict

The simulations seem to have both challenged some of the delegates’ previous perspectives as

well as strengthened others. They generally have a deeper understanding of the different parties

involved, how complex the conflict is and how important a deep understanding of the situation

is in order to find a solution. Learning more about the different causes of the conflict, and the

difference between what caused it and what is sustaining it, resulted in some delegates

developing a different understanding of the conflict than previously held.

Overall it does not look like the delegates have changed their political opinions as a result of the

simulation, but that the simulation has contributed to creating awareness of the importance of

engaging in dialogue with the various parties and how negotiations can be carried out. The belief

in a peaceful solution to the conflict seems to have been strengthened.

How the negotiations were perceived in terms of:

Realism – how true the students were to their roleThe delegates seem impressed with each other as far as acting out their roles is concerned.

The main criticism regarding reality is that in the simulation the delegates were much more

willing to negotiate, compromise and understand each other than the parties are in reality.

The delegates were true to the position held by their party but not to the stubbornness of

their party. Thus the outcome of the simulation was not realistic as there were unrealistic

compromises made.

Chairing and rulesThe delegates are impressed with the chair and feel that the rules worked well although they

were a bit restrictive at first.

Others

There should have been more note runners

Has their understanding of the role they represented changed over the last 6 months?

This is varied but in general the changes are related to knowing much more about the role they

represented, both positive and negative.

Social Activities

Overall the activities were all a success and highly appreciated by the delegates.

• Opening Ceremony at the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Institute (Monday)

This was a special place to open the conference and the atmosphere was nice with motivating

speeches.

• Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Tuesday)

Delegates were impressed to meet the top-negotiator and found the talk very interesting. There

could have been more time for questions (or opened for questions earlier since there was no

more time).

43

• The Norwegian Parliament (Wednesday)

The tour and information given was interesting and the educational lunch was very nice.

Delegates appreciated being received so well and the privilege of visiting a Parliament.

• Norwegian Peace Centre (Wednesday)

Delegates appreciated meeting Norwegian Tamil students and exchanging ideas with them.

• UN Association of Norway (Thursday)

For political science students this was repetitive, while others, especially the Sri Lankan

students, found it interesting and appreciated learning about how the international society

works.

• Cultural Evening- Bhangra party (Thursday)

Delegates really had a fun time and appreciated the organisers’ efforts. Some of the Sri Lankans

would have liked to contribute to the cultural aspect (perform something) and this was not

arranged for.

• Tour of Nobel Peace Centre (Saturday)

Delegates loved the guided tour.

• Closing Ceremony on MS Innvik (Habor)

It was in general seen as a perfect ending. A nice and formal closing of the simulation as well as a

nice and social ending of the conference.

Logistics and comfort

People found the hostel pleasant, though some found the rooms with four people a bit cramped.

The transportations to and from the conference activities was time-consuming but other than

this public transportation was appreciated. Having more of the organizers staying at the hostel

could have improved communication when getting people from A to B. Weather conditions with

slush and icy roads also slowed down the delegates not used to walking in these conditions. A

suggestion was to have more of the simulation at the hostel to reduce time spent on travel.

People were in general happy with the food though some would have liked more Sri Lankan food

on the menu and others would have preferred more Norwegian food. (Both these requests were

from Sri Lankan delegates.)

44

Appendix iv:

PCS Finance

45

PCS Finance

46

47

The Peace Conference Simulation Group- Sri Lanka

NorMUN - University of Oslo

January 2008 – January 2009