ABSTRACT

Amidst a ‘local turn’ in peacebuilding, donors have seized on the idea of ‘localising’ peacebuilding programmes. Donors have sought to include actors who have local knowledge and connections in order to make interventions more context-sensitive. Yet programmes premised on the fractiousness of Muslim-Christian relations, as many in northern Nigeria are, are inevitably absorbed into over-arching narratives of global civilisational encounter. How does the local turn play out in this context of heightened international sensitivities? Drawing on the critical peacebuilding literature, this article analyses the origins of USAID’s push to localise its interfaith peace-building efforts in northern Nigeria, and the ambivalence of categorises like ‘local’ and ‘international’ in its subsequent partnership with the Kaduna-based Interfaith Mediation Centre on the TOLERANCE programme. While the categories of local and international are indeed contested and fluid, there are limits to how far local partners can successfully leverage these ideas in the context of unequal power relations.

摘要

在建设和平的“地方性转变”中，捐助者抓住了“本地化”建设和平方案的想法。捐助者寻求包括具有本地知识和联系的演员，以使干预措施对环境更加敏感。然而，以穆斯林和基督教之间关系的脆弱性为前提的计划，就像尼日利亚北部的许多计划一样，不可避免地会被吸收到全球文明遭遇的总体叙述中。在国际敏感性日益增强的背景下，当地人如何发挥作用？本文利用重要的建设和平文献，分析了美国国际开发署推动其在尼日利亚北部进行不同信仰间建设和平努力的努力的起源，随后与位于卡杜纳（Kaduna）的宗教间调解中心（TOFAANCE）计划的伙伴关系中，出现了“本地”和“国际”等类别的歧义。尽管本地和国际的类别确实存在争议和动荡，但在不平等的权力关系的背景下，本地合作伙伴可以成功利用这些思想的程度是有限的。