The State of Youth Participation in Kosovo's Peace Process

(1)

The State of Youth Participation in Kosovo’s

Peace Process

Tom Vrolijk

(11116684)

26 June 2020

Master Thesis

University of Amsterdam, Graduate School of Social Sciences

Conflict Resolution and Governance

Supervisor: Floris Vermeulen

Second reader: Dimitris Bouris

(2)

Acronyms

BPRG – Balkans Policy Research Group CBM – Community Building Mitrovica EU – European Union

EULEX – European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo NGO - Non-Governmental Organisation

RYCO – Regional Youth Cooperation Office SFCG – Search for Common Ground

UN – United Nations

UNMIK – United Nations Mission in Kosovo UNSC – United Nations Security Council

UNSCR – United Nations Security Council Resolution UNOY – United Network of Young Peacebuilders UYTF – United Youth Task Force

(3)

The positive role of youth in peace processes is becoming widely recognized as more (international) organisations, governments and scholars begin to unlock the potential of fostering meaningful youth participation in peace processes (Altiok, Grizelj, 2019; Berents, McEvoy-Levy, Coomaraswamy, 2015; Galtung, Fischer, 2013; McEvoy-Levy, 2007; McEvoy-Levy, 2006; Simpson, 2017; UNSCR 2250). Therefore, the lack of literature on youth participation is surprising, especially considering “the focus of so much conflict resolution theory and practice on fostering long-term, intergenerational change in attitudes and behaviour through social learning at the local level.” (Berents, McEvoy-Levy, 2015, p119). Youth is supposed to own the peace and carry it forward. To do so, they must be able to meaningfully participate in the peace process. Yet, they are often framed as victims or troublemakers, which has led to their grievances being ignored (Berents, McEvoy-Levy, 2015;McEvoy-Levy, 2006). In many cases the rhetoric of including youth and promoting local ownership is used as a liberal peace building technique, where youth is only included in order to tick off the required youth inclusion boxes. This can cause young people to feel excluded from meaningful civic and political participation, and thus has the potential to negatively affected the path towards positive peace (Galtung, Fischer, 2013; Simpson, 2017). However, young people have a huge potential to empower themselves, which they do by organising in diverse ways, utilizing both formal and informal methods. It is important for youth to have their own way of expression, one that they own, and one where they can express their voice, as this is the first step towards an inclusive and locally owned peace process (Simpson, 2017).

Kosovo, the nation with the youngest population in Europe, is therefore a very intriguing case study to explore with regards to youth participation in peace processes. Not only does Kosovo have a young and vibrant population, it has also only been 12 years since Kosovo unilaterally declared independence, and only 21 years since the war in Kosovo came to an ending, making it the youngest nation in Europe (Lampe, Allock, 2020). While Kosovo unilaterally declared independence in 2008, they are still not recognised by the EU, or by the UN, which limits the opportunities of many of the young people within Kosovo.

Furthermore, tensions between Kosovo’s majority population, ethnic Albanians, and the minority population ethnic Serbians, remain. Although the war in Kosovo has been over for 21 years, societal issues still greatly affect people’s lives, and many would consider that positive peace has not been achieved yet (Galtung, Fisher, 2013; Schwartz, 2010). Youth

(5)

within Kosovo are actively trying to deal with these societal issues by participating in the peace process in a wide variety of ways.

The purpose of a case study, such as Kosovo, is to explore how youth experience and deal with these challenges and opportunities in practice. The aim of this research is to explore the role of youth in the Kosovar peace process, and to answer the research question; ‘How is youth participating in Kosovo’s peace process?’ By taking a closer look at the specific methods of participation, it becomes clear which methods empower youth, which methods bring peace to society and which challenges youth face while participating. An analysis of these methods will show the potential of some of them, and perhaps where some of them are still lacking. It is important to listen to youth, and people working with youth, and to amplify their voices. This allows for the youth, peace and security field to develop, and eventually will aid youth in making the discourse of ‘youth as agents of change’ the dominant one. First, I will explore how youth in Kosovo is participating in the peace process, focussing on three common practices within Kosovo, namely community building, education and awareness and formal participation, after which the challenges they face with regards to participation will be pointed out. In Kosovo each of these three methods are commonly practiced and provide youth with a platform to formally or informally join the peace process. I want to find out, in terms of youth in peacebuilding in Kosovo, which methods are being utilized to empower youth, which methods fully include youth, which methods allow for local ownership and which methods contribute most to advancing the youth, peace and security agenda? Through interviews with people working closely with youth and youth themselves, a critical look at current methods of participation in Kosovo can be taken. It also highlights the obstacles and opportunities youth encounter during their participation in peace processes. By taking a closer look at the actual experiences, struggles and opportunities of local youth and local organisations in Kosovo, with regards to youth participation, a more detailed view of the current state of youth participation in Kosovo can be revealed.

Youth participation, especially in peace processes, has not been widely explored yet. Although there are many reports on specific programs, or suggestions for specific changes, there is a limited amount of knowledge on the positive role of youth in peace processes. The focus which is put on the negative role of youth in peace processes and ways that youth get involved in violence, or ways they disrupt the peace, is often not representative. The majority of young people never engage in violence (McEvoy-Levy, 2006). Unfortunately, the majority of young people, those that do not get involved in violence, are under researched. This was especially the case up until 2015, when the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250,

(6)

a ground-breaking resolution on youth, peace and security, offered a giant step towards meaningful youth participation. The Security Council resolution urged states and

organisations to give youth a greater voice in decision making at all levels in local, national, regional and international institutions and to aid them in developing mechanisms for the prevention and resolution of conflict (UNSCR, 2015). Moreover, the resolution offers

guidelines for civil society, states and the UN itself upon which policies and programmes can be developed. Important to note is that resolution 2250 was the first time that the positive role of youth in peace processes was officially recognised. This opened many opportunities for the youth, peace and security field, and stimulated research into the positive role of youth in peace building. ‘The Missing Peace’, a progress study conducted on behalf of the United Nations Security Council as a result of resolution 2250, researched what this positive role is, and consequently proposed concrete recommendations for the youth, peace and security community to work with youth in new ways (Simpson, 2017). Although the progress study on youth revealed much about the positive role of youth in peace processes globally, Simpson (2017) urged for more research into the role of youth in conflict and post-conflict zones. The recommendations in ‘The Missing Peace’ are divided into three mutually reinforcing

strategies; invest, include and partner. Each of these strategies need to be carefully considered when working with youth in peacebuilding in order to foster meaningful participation for youth. It is important for societies to fully harness the potential of young people as agents of change as they can be crucial for the development of peace. From ‘The Missing peace’ it becomes clear that certain some mechanisms allow for youth empowerment, youth voice and youth ownership over the peace process, if implemented correctly. These are presented throughout the report, and recommendations were made based upon those mechanisms. These recommendations come directly from youth themselves globally and are thus

representative of youth. The recommendations were condensed into these three strategies. In addition, these three strategies provide youth with meaningful participation, if implemented correctly, which makes them interesting to apply to the Kosovo case in order to find out more about the current state of youth participation in Kosovo. Invest, include and partner shall therefore be used as a framework through which the progress of youth participation in Kosovo’s peace process can be analysed. Moreover, it provides an opportunity to look beyond the question ‘How is youth participating in Kosovo’s peace process?’ and allows a look at which methods of participation in Kosovo empower youth, give them a voice and provide them with meaningful participation. It will not only look at what the NGO’s themselves do, or should do, but will also look at the responsibilities of international

(7)

organisations, governments, civil society and youth themselves. The framework provided by ‘The Missing Peace’ in combination with guidelines and reports on effective youth

participation published by NGO’s, the UN and other initiatives will be used to analyse the retrieved data on the current state of youth participation in Kosovo.

The goal of this thesis is to look at the positive role of youth in peacebuilding in Kosovo, and to answer the research question; How is youth participating in Kosovo’s peace process? Furthermore, I want to explore which methods of participation are effective at empowering youth and providing meaningful participation. Ultimately, this thesis hopes to contribute to our understanding of the positive of role of youth in peace processes, effective ways of youth participation, and ways youth in Kosovo cope with challenges and

opportunities they face while trying to participate in the peace process.

Literature Review

The purpose of this literature review is to provide a foundation for the youth, peace and security field, as well as identifying the current discourse in the field, allowing for a concrete analysis of the collected data. First the concept of youth shall be explored, as this concept is socially constructed and can have many differing interpretations. In the next part the discourse surrounding youth in conflict and post-conflict zones will be unravelled. This discourse is important as it defines the relationship between youth and the rest of civil society, government officials and citizens. In the following chapter the three strategies highlighted in ‘The Missing Peace’, invest, include and partner, will explained. These strategies will serve as a framework through which the data shall be analysed. This

framework will be constructed through a combination of ‘The Missing Peace’ and reports, suggestions and guidelines by civil society, NGO’s, governments and youth themselves. Furthermore, United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250 will be explained. Finally, background and context on Kosovo will be provided allowing for clear analysis.

Youth

Although youth is a concept everyone has heard of, and has their own perception of, defining it is not a simple task. The term ‘youth’ is a very contested term (McEvoy-Levy, 2006; McEvoy-Levy; 2011; Schwartz, 2010; Simpson, 2017). This contestation becomes clear when we look at the varying definitions organisations and governments use to define youth. The way youth is often framed in the west is in an age category. The UN for example, defines youth as being between the age of 24, while UNSCR 2250 uses the age range

(8)

18-29, allowing space for the transition between ‘child’ and ‘youth’ (Simpson, 2017). The EU, and consequently EULEX also apply the age range of 18-29 (UNOY Peacebuilders, 2019). The Kosovar law on empowerment and participation of youth defines youth as being between the age of 15 and 24, which is a narrow interpretation of the term youth, and has the potential to limit youth participation (Law No. 03/L-145, 2009). Youth can, however, also be

understood as community dependent or developing through a social dynamic (Schwartz, 2010). Therefore, it should not just be merely considered to be an age range, but also consider which activities they engage in, and what their relation is with their community. Furthermore, when we talk about youth, we talk about a diverse group of young people, each with their own background. Youth should not be seen as a homogenous group, but rather as a group with many subgroups. In conflict studies however, when referred to youth, often it refers to young men (Altiok, Grizelj, 2019). Interestingly, youth as an identity is not a fixed identity, such as ethnicity or race, but a transitional identity (Simpson, 2017). This makes it difficult to put a defined age restriction on the definition of youth, as it would mean the transition from ‘youth’ to ‘adult’ would happen overnight. Although creating a conceptualization of youth that will satisfy everyone’s perception of youth is nearly impossible, it is possible to create a definition which is suitable for the analysis this thesis. I chose to take a wide definition of youth, defining the age range between the age of 13 and 30. I chose such a wide age range in order to be inclusive of all that are participating, and consider themselves youth. In order to not limit the analysis of this thesis, I am willing to be flexible and go outside the age range where I see fit. Finally, the terms ‘young people’ and ‘youth’ are used interchangeably throughout this thesis.

Youth as Troublemakers or Peacemakers

Much of the literature and general discourse on youth in conflict, or in post-conflict zones, focusses on the weak, dangerous and non-empowered role of youth in peace processes (McEvoy-Levy, 2006; McEvoy-Levy, 2011; Schwartz, 2010; Simpson, 2017 UNOY

Peacebuilders, 2018). The usual discourse surrounding youth is that they are children in need of protection, that they are a developing asset or that they are a threat to security (McEvoy-Levy, 2006; McEvoy-(McEvoy-Levy, 2011). In contrast to this, youth can also be considered agents of change (McEvoy-Levy, 2011; UNOY Peacebuilders, 2018; Schwartz, 2010; Simpson, 2017). Although all these views of youth in post conflict zones are distinguishable, it is not the case that organizations and relevant actors act according to one of these views. Often a

(9)

overlapping in some ways, McEvoy-Levy argues there is one clear cut difference, namely viewing them as children, who are in need of protection, or youth who are not.” (McEvoy-Levy, 2011, Chapter 9, p. 364). Each of these views on youth’s role in post conflict societies has their own advantages and disadvantages. The view of children in need of protection stresses the importance of protecting their rights. This view, although supportive of the young generation, also makes use of the politicized nature of protecting these rights. McEvoy-Levy suggests that this politicized nature does more harm than good, as it allows for the protection of rights to become a political leverage tool (Berents, McEvoy-Levy, 2015; McEvoy-Levy, 2011). This approach ensures the ‘do no harm’ principle is respected, which is of vital importance to give youth the space to develop. Schwartz (2010) sees this as a right based approach to youth programming. In this view, the rights of the child are the priority to some extent, and the child is seen as need of protection or as a victim. Although it protects the rights of the child, it does not allow for empowerment of young people, or children. It is also much more noticeable when the rights of a child are not protected, compared to when they are protected. Due to this, children can act as passive agents of conflict reproduction. When they are victimized, they show the inhumanity of the ‘other’, while also serving as a

justification of defensive and reactionary actions (McEvoy-Levy, 2006). The following view, the view of youth as a developing asset, see’s youth as partners in the development of peace (McEvoy-Levy, 2011). Schwartz (2010) points to this as the economic approach, which moves away from the passive role of the child. However, according to McEvoy-Levy there are varying opinions on “how much genuine participation of youth actually occurs” in this approach. (McEvoy-Levy, 2011, Chapter 9, p. 365). This is argued because in the youth as an asset view, they can also be considered as a social and economic resource that can be

cultivated. This view focusses on the (re)integration of youth into the economic sphere (Schwartz, 2010). Nevertheless, this view does empower youth, and allows them to use their voice more than when youth is seen as a threat, or as a victim. While viewing youth as an asset provides more agency, it also provides the danger of youth being marginalized. In order for both to benefit youth can only be used as an asset in a partnership, where they benefit from the power dynamic as well. Next, the idea of youth as a threat to security is correlated to the ‘youth bulge’ theory (McEvoy-Levy, 2011; Schwartz, 2010). This theory suggests that when a population has a high percentage of young man, over 35%, that there is a higher likeliness that there will be an eruption of violence (McEvoy-Levy, 2011; Schwartz, 2010). According to youth bulge theory this violence is often driven by a lack of opportunities, such as high unemployment. When youth does not have access to economic opportunities, or to

(10)

political participation, they see violence as the most effective ways to make demands and engage the system (Schwartz, 2010). Although this view seriously marginalizes the positive role of youth, it does have the potential to lead to policy that targets the issues youth are dealing with, such as the lack of opportunities. This view usually does not give a voice to youth, and thus has far less potential to empower youth. When youth is seen as a threat to security, they have very little opportunities to positively contribute to the peace process (McEvoy-Levy, 2011). What the previous three views have in common is the idea that youth needs to be guided, controlled, manipulated and shaped (McEvoy-Levy, 2011). This idea limits the agency youth have over the peace process.

Viewing youth as agents of change on the other hand, does not assume control over youth, but gives youth the tools to empower themselves. Applying a youth agency lens allows for a different view of the role of youth in post conflict society. This view holds that youth have the capability to be agents of change independent of outside actors ((Berents, McEvoy-Levy, 2015; McEvoy-Levy, 2011; UNOY Peacebuilders, 2018). This does not mean however, that they cannot be supported by outside structures or organizations. In this

discourse youth is not a threat to security, but a promoter of peace. This shift from a position of violence and harm, to a position of nonviolence and peace, is an important transition to understand in order for youth to positively contribute according to McEvoy-Levy (McEvoy-Levy, 2011, Chapter 9, p. 169). According to Schwartz (2010), viewing youth as vital members of civil society, either as peacebuilders or as troublemakers, is the sociopolitical approach to youth. Utilizing the sociopolitical approach helps to rebuild war-torn society’s, through and by youth (Schwartz, 2010). This approach to youth gives young people access to the civil society and political initiatives, and provides them with opportunities, training and support for their active engagement and participation in peacebuilding, as well as general public life (UN Interagency Network on Youth Development, 2014). When youth get the opportunity to meaningfully participate and are given the space to come together with their peers it gives them strength and increases their life skills and self-confidence (O’Kane, Feinstein, Giertsen, 2009). Furthermore, McEvoy-Levy suggest that further research should be conducted in order to add persuasive power to the idea of youth as agents of peace, and perhaps this could become as compelling as the well-known ‘youth bulge’ theory (McEvoy-Levy, 2011). Yet, the view of youth as agents of change can also be criticized for being too ‘romantic’. Idealizing youth as the agents of change and underestimating the structural challenges and asymmetries of power between youth and political elites does not always sketch a realistic image. For example, there might be backlash by the elder generation and the

(11)

political elite who are invested in the status quo, or youth might foster expectations that are not met, causing discontent and disappointment, which could potentially lead to the

disruption of peace (McEvoy-Levy, 2011). While McEvoy-Levy (2011), amongst other authors, have identified these discourses surrounding youth in peacebuilding, she also advocates for more research to be conducted into the youth, peace and security field in order to confirm these discourses, and learn more about how they affect youth and how youth can use them to empower themselves.

Progress Report – The Missing Peace

McEvoy-Levy’s call was answered when ‘The Missing Peace’, the biggest and most inclusive study into youth, peace and security, was conducted after resolution 2250 was adopted (Simpson, 2017). The UN Secretary General appointed Simpson (2017) to conduct an independent progress study on the current positive contribution by youth in conflict resolution, peacebuilding and conflict prevention. This was done in order to recommend effective ways of implementing the resolution, as well as suggesting effective and new responses at local, national, regional and international levels to youth in peacebuilding. The progress study ‘The Missing Peace’ used an inclusive and participatory research approach, trying to reach as much youth a possible, including the youth that is less accessible, to get an as complete as possible oversight of the progress of youth in peacebuilding across the globe. In total the research involved 4230 young people from diverse backgrounds. While the formal recognition of the positive role of young men and young woman in peace processes through the UNSCR 2250 was of vital importance, it is of even greater importance that this recognition is put into practice. Where the UNSCR 2250 highlighted important steps needed for effective youth participation, the progress report provided recommendations on effective youth inclusion for the local, national and international levels (Simpson, 2017). Simpson urged for more research to be conducted into the role of youth in peace processes to find out more about effective ways of including them into the peace process. The framework of suggestions made at the end of the progress study has the purpose of aiding anyone working with youth and youth themselves in their effort for meaningful participation. Because these suggestions and recommendations for the inclusions and participation of youth are

representative of youth and because ‘The Missing Peace’ is such a landmark progress study, its contents shall be applied to the Kosovo case in order to find out which methods of

participation are most effective at empowering youth and providing meaningful participation. The following section will highlight the three strategies Simpson (2017) identifies in the

(12)

progress study, namely; invest, include and partner. This progress study is almost as important as the resolution itself, as it provides a guide for implementation and adaption of the UNSCR 2250. The progress study, in combination with the UNSCR 2250, can be used by nations, organizations, and individuals, in their support for youth empowerment and

participation.

Good Practice within Youth, Peace and Security – Framework

In order to allow me to clearly analyse the data I collected from NGO’s, youth and international organisations in Kosovo, a framework should be constructed through which the data is researched. The framework shall be divided into the three mutually reinforcing strategy’s as highlighted in ‘The Missing Peace’; include, invest and partner (Simpson, 2017). These three strategies can be identified in many of the suggestions and

recommendations highlighted in other reports as well, and therefore I consider this to be a fitting framework. From ‘The Missing Peace’ it becomes clear that some mechanisms allow for youth empowerment, youth voice and youth ownership in peace processes, if

implemented correctly (Simpson, 2017). They are highlighted and explored in the following chapter, forming the framework through which the collected data will be analysed.

Although there are many specific recommendations regarding youth participation in peace processes, there is one overarching requirement for the positive and meaningful inclusion of youth, namely, to recognise that young people are agents of change, and that they can play a positive role in facilitating peace (McEvoy-Levy, 2006; Schwartz, 2010). The rhetoric of youth as peacemakers must be the dominant rhetoric to foster positive relationships with and for youth. These recommendations are all centred around the discourse of youth as agents of change and go into detail what action youth, governments, NGO’s and civil society can and should take to allow for more effective and empowering youth participation.

Include

Meaningful inclusion of youth is essential for youths feeling of ownership over the peace process to develop. The most relevant form of inclusion, and perhaps the most important for meaningful participation, is political inclusion. Meaningful political inclusion for youth entails being included in the formulation, design, implementation and evaluation of the policies and approaches that affect young people (Altiok, Grizelj, 2019; Simpson, 2017). If youth is excluded from political participation, or only superficially included, there is a higher likeliness of them turning to violence or protest and disrupting the peace process.

(13)

Moreover, this strive for participation by youth is not unconditional, as meaningful inclusion of youth is not defined by joining and being used as some form of tokenism or co-option, essentially being marginalised. Neither does youth gain meaningful inclusion if they are included into a corrupt, undemocratic or oppressive system (Simpson, 2017). Political inclusion of youth can only be fully achieved when young people are seen as “key

stakeholders in the design, implementation and monitoring of transitional justice processes, including truth-seeking, reparation and reconciliation programmes, institutional reform processes aimed at rebuilding civic trust and preventing repeat violations, criminal justice and accountability for past violations, and memory and memorialization programmes aimed at future generations.” (Simpson, 2017, p 120). Thus, in order to foster political inclusion of youth, allowing them to be key stakeholders, and allowing them to contribute in meaningful ways to national peacebuilding is of vital importance. Moreover, political inclusion of youth into peacebuilding practices should be based on restoring young people’s trust into the state institutions, while also restoring youth’s trust in politicians, elders, societal elites and many international actors (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019; Simpson, 2017). The motivation for gaining political power, as youth individual, or youth group, should be to amplify the voices of those they represent (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019). The emphasis here is to push for youth agenda’s, instead of personal agenda of that person or organisation. Furthermore, youth should be included in the decisions making process when it comes to policies that affect them directly (Simpson, 2017). This not only makes the policy and the process more representative of youth, but it has a high chance of making it more beneficial for youth. Allowing for youth ownership, agency and a youth voice during the formulation and implementation of youth policy should result in much more representative policies (Altiok, Grizelj, 2019; Simpson, 2017). If mechanisms that allow for political inclusion are in place, efforts should be made to make them more visible, in order to reach more youth (Simpson, 2017). Often, it is the youth that is already engaged in civil society whose voices are heard. Therefore, extra effort should be made to also reach the less accessible youth and allow for them to have a voice in the political processes as well. If the young people that are more reluctant to join are excluded, or no extra effort is put into including them, there is a high likeliness that they will disrupt the peace (Altiok, Grizelj, 2019; Simpson, 2017).

While political inclusion is key for meaningful participation, there are many other ways youth should be included for them to fully unlock their potential as peacebuilders. Close attention should be paid to education for example (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019; Simpson, 2017). Educating young people and children on peace building from an early age helps with

(14)

creating agents of change from a young age onward. Prejudices can only fade away if

miseducation and stigmas are not taught in school, or home. Therefore, it is important for the development of a peaceful society to pay close attention to education and awareness.

Educating youth about peace is a key strategy to prevent youth from turning to violence or exclusion. The curriculum should address societal issues, while also dealing with topics related to peace building (Simpson, 2017). However, for education to contribute to peace, and not disrupt it, opportunities and access to education should be equal amongst everyone within the society, while also being representative of each person. If education is not available to everyone, it has the potential to cause grievances. Only if education is inclusive of all can it be used as an optimized peacebuilding tool (Simpson, 2017).

When considering inclusion, the equal inclusion of both genders should always be realised (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019; Simpson, 2017). It is important for the representativeness and effectiveness of youth policy that young women are included in all levels of the process. This means in the informal process, but certainly also in the formal processes, both on the national as well as on the local level. For this to be achieved, gender norms that are grounded in unequal power dynamics should be deconstructed, and abolished (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019). The inclusion of youth in peace processes can mean a variety of things. When we look at the official suggestions given, it often entails political or formal inclusion. This sort of inclusion allows for ownership over the processes, especially if this inclusion is done in such a way that youth have agency and get the opportunity to meaningfully participate. Furthermore,

inclusion of youth is also including the youth agenda in the process. Looking at youth issues, preferably ones identified by youth, should be a common practice. For the total inclusion of youth in the peace process, youth should have ownership over the process and share in decision making.

Invest

One of the most important practices for the empowerment of youth in peace

processes, is to invest in the capacity, voices and leadership roles of young people (Simpson, 2017; UNOY Peacebuilders, SFCG, 2017). The most obvious way to invest in youth is through financial means. Although financial aid alone is not enough, it is the first key step to kick-starting youth initiatives. Unfortunately, it is also one of the biggest challenges for youth organisations worldwide, and often insufficient funding is the main cause for organisations to have limited outreach and impact (Simpson, 2017; UNOY Peacebuilders, SFCG, 2017). Simpson (2017) highlights some of the actions governments, donors, international financial

(15)

institutions, other international organizations and the private sector should take in order to show financial support for youth organizations, initiatives and movements focused on peace and security. One of the suggestions given is to increase the specific funding for the youth, peace and security field and to financially support facilitating youth participation, as well as youth-led and youth-focused civil society organizations (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019; Simpson, 2017; UNOY Peacebuilders, SFCG, 2017). Funds provided for youth and youth organisations should not be based on short term grants or small funding’s but should aim at increasing the capacity of the organisation itself for long term sustainable action (UNOY Peacebuilders, SFCG, 2017). Instead of funding a single project, fund the organisation and allow youth to allocate funds for their own projects. Through this process youth organisations can have more ownership over their own operations. This in turn may result in investment being made into diverse organisations allowing for sustenance of a diverse ecosystem of organisations, allowing for engagement with different youth constituencies and multiple approaches to peacebuilding (Simpson, 2017, p118). It is important to have diversity amongst NGO’s as this makes the NGO scene more accessible for all identities. Financial aid should not come without any guidance, and support should be given to build organisational capacity of the organisations itself. This will aid in increasing financial sustainability and impact of their work. However, funding should also not be applied top down as this removes youth agency and ownership over the process (UNOY, SFCG, 2017).

Secondly, investing in capacity building should not only apply to organisations, but also to youth themselves. Therefore, more attention should be paid to supporting and investing in young leaders. These young leaders are not only essential in NGO’s, but especially in community settings. Encouraging young leadership and becoming agents of change should start at home already. Youth leadership can have much more sustained impact if the foundations for their peacebuilding engagement, the family, is solid (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019; Simpson, 2017). Furthermore, it is important that young people get engaged and educated on peace and security from a young age to learn new skills and knowledge which make them more attractive for partnerships with NGO’s governments and international organisations, while at the same time giving them more opportunities to develop their own projects (Simpson, 2017; UNOY, SFCG, 2016). Furthermore, the enhancement of youth organisations’ capacities, the acknowledgement of youth leadership and the support for youth networks should be ensured. In order to ensure capacity being built for youth, programmes related to ‘youth, peace and security’ should be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated with and by young people themselves (Simpson, 2017; United Nations Interagency

(16)

Network on Youth Development, 2016b). Civil society, international organisations and governments themselves should prioritise capacity building within their organisation by engaging youth in the peace and security agenda and giving them a voice in the process. Moreover, capacity building programmes for youth on issues such as violence and conflict, peace and security, resilience, youth, gender, violent extremism and leadership should be developed (UNOY Peacebuilders, SFCG, 2017). Consequently, those policies become more representative and beneficial for youth. Finally, the work of young peacebuilders should be acknowledged and recognised as essential to the peace process for their actions to be recognised. Youth needs to have the possibility to use their own knowledge and apply it in practice. This allows them to develop their own capacity (Simpson, 2017).

When we talk about investing in youth, the multiple ways of investing highlighted in this paragraph, financially, organisational and individual, should all be considered. Although without financial investments youth and peace organisations have very limited potential, it is not enough to just invest money. Investing in youth can also mean investing in their capacity and leadership role. Capacity building, both on the level of the organisation, as well as on the level of the individual are key elements for fostering meaningful youth participation. Most importantly, by building capacity for youth, they develop into peacebuilders and agents of change of tomorrow.

Partner

Creating partnerships, especially intergenerational partnerships, are crucial for the positive and peaceful development of youth as agents of change (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019; Simpson, 2017; UN – Kosovo Youth Assembly, 2017). It is important for youth to partner with adults as this provides the opportunity to overcome to generational divides (Simpson, 2017). It also allows for young people to show their potential as agents of change, showing their skills and knowledge, thus replacing the negative image of youth. Eventually, youth could use these partnerships as training, education and a way forward (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019). Older generations might be reluctant to work with young agents of change, as they see them as a threat to their position, as a threat to security or as naïve idealist. Therefore, it is

important for youth to show their potential by contributing to the peace processes in a

positive way. These intergenerational partnerships do not only benefit young people, but also enhance the impact of the work of all people in the peacebuilding field (Simpson, 2017). It is important that during these partnerships’ youth are not marginalised. Youth leaders should

(17)

remain leaders, and care should be taken not to disempower them through intergenerational partnerships (Simpson, 2017).

Community building can assist in triggering partnerships, both intergenerational, as well as among youth or within civil society (Haider, 2009). Although intergenerational partnerships are key for the development and acceptance of youth as agents of change, it is also important for NGO’s and youth leaders to have trust-based relationships with diverse youth in divided communities (Simpson, 2017). Understanding the local conditions and building relationships of trust within the community is required for youth organisations to reach and work with less accessible youth and for their work to have impact for the entire community. Community building can aid in facilitating governance reform by developing space for youth to use their voice, consequently building capacity for them to carry on a range of activities related to peace and security as well as decision making (Haider, 2009). Furthermore, community building creates relationships of trust through social cohesion. It is important for youth in segregated communities to build trust within their community in order to form partnerships which they can use to push the youth agenda. Especially inter-ethnic community building has a big impact on partnerships being formed in communities where there were low levels of trust (Haider, 2009). Furthermore, youth can build capacity for themselves and the people in their community be engaging in shared activities and making use of each other’s resources. NGO’s and other local organisations should provide a platform for youth to build this trust and facilitate the trust building process, while also helping with building capacity for youth by providing them with the necessary tools. It is important to also reach out to the young people that are not as engaged within the community, or within the field of peace building, as they are often the ones that feel marginalised, and thus have the highest likeliness of disrupting the peace (Haider, 2009; Simpson, 2017; UNINAYD, 2016). NGO’s, and the civil society in general, should put extra effort into creating partnerships and collaborating amongst each other. It is through the collective partnerships within civil society that the youth, peace and security agenda get pushed forward.

Although forming partnerships with the government, or international organisations could be very beneficial for both parties, it is not always easy to form partnerships on a national level. Therefore, youth and youth organisations should focus on partnering with local governments, and with their local community, and work their way up from there (Simpson, 2017). Partnerships between youth and local governments can provide more agency over the local peace process from which youth can learn decision making skills. Moreover, these partnerships have the potential to empower youth on the local level by

(18)

giving them a space for formal participation. It is important that also on the local level youth policy and participation is representative, accountable and transparent (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019). Governing policies on youth can only be transparent, accountable and representative if youth is included in the “formulation, dissemination, and monitoring” of these policies (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019, p 28).

Some of the advantages of creating partnerships are that they enable youth

organizations to expand the influence, impact and scale of their operations, as well as their reach and visibility (Simpson, 2017). On a local level community building is key for the creation of partnerships. Both inter-ethnic and intergenerational partnerships are often

enhanced through social cohesion and community building. When looking at the larger scale, partnerships provide youth with the possibility to participate in national and international campaigns and projects, give them more legitimacy on the national and international level, and even allows them to feel more secure (Simpson, 2017). Furthermore, partnerships allow youth to trade information that they would not have had access to otherwise. “Partnerships in which there is meaningful dialogue and exchange of good practices, based on an equal balance of power between the partners, and in which youth-led organizations are able to acquire and assert their leadership and advocate for themselves, were viewed as particularly important.” (Simpson, 2017, p 55). Thus, allowing youth to both benefit from and contribute to partnerships is the most beneficial for the development of thriving partnerships, as this creates capacity for youth and consequently gives youth ownership over the process.

UNSCR 2250

When the United Nations unanimously adopted security council resolution 2250 on the 9th of December 2015, it was the first time that the positive role of young woman and young men in peace processes was officially recognized (UNSCR 2250, 2015). The security council resolution was a landmark resolution, affirming the important, constructive and positive contributions of youth in the maintenance and promotion of peace and security (Simpson, 2017; UNOY, SFCG, 2016). It also aims to identify conflict’s impact on young people’s lives and what must be done to mitigate its effects (Simpson, 2017; UNOY, SFCG, 2016). The resolution is divided into 5 pillars namely; participation, protection, prevention, partnerships, and disengagement and reintegration. Each of these pillars highlight actions that aid youth in peace processes and conflict resolution. Although many organisations, member states and relevant actors within civil society now realise the potential of young people as peacebuilders, this notion only really developed in the years after the UNSC adopted

(19)

resolution 2250. Due to the holistic focus on youth’s contribution to peacebuilding efforts, UNSCR 2250 significantly aided with creating the identity of youth as peacebuilders and agents of change (Cito Cirhigiri, 2019). Before the resolution was adopted however, an inter-agency working group was established to already promote these ideas (UNOY, SFCG, 2016). This working group was under the stewardship of the United Nations Inter-Agency Network of Youth Development and consisted of over 60 organisations from the UN, NGO’s, civil society and academia. This group of organisations, which was co-chaired by UNOY Peacebuilders and SFCM, two leading NGO’s in the youth, peace and security field,

developed the first guiding principles for the participation of youth in peacebuilding (UNOY, SFCG, 2016). These guiding principles helped actors already working in the youth, peace and security field and provided guidelines for “participative, inclusive and intergenerational peacebuilding strategies and programmes that systematically promote and ensure the participation of young people in challenging contexts of conflict where violence has often become the norm” (UNOY, SFCG, 2016, p13). Eventually, the work performed by this working group paved the way for the United Nation Security Council to adopt resolution 2250. The United Nations Security Council resolution 2250 not only stresses the important role of youth in conflict resolution, peacebuilding and conflict prevention, it also urges member states to increase active and inclusive representation of youth in decision-making at all levels. Since the resolutions adopted by the security council should be accepted and implemented by the United Nations Member States, and because it is legally binding according to chapter 7, article 39 of the UN charter, adopting this landmark resolution had significant impact on the youth, peace and security field all across the globe (UNOY, SFCG, 2017). Moreover, due to this resolution, national policy had to be adopted to align with this resolution. Although UNSCR 2250 was directed primarily at governments, it is important for the implementation of the resolution that partnerships are made with civil society (UNOY Peacebuilders, SFCG, 2016). While it is urged that Member-States to follow up the resolution and give youth the capacity and space to utilize the resolutions suggestions, this may not always be happening in practice. Implementing youth policy, so that it has a meaningful purpose for youth, is very difficult, and situational. That is why it is interesting to also look at the progress study, ‘The Missing Peace’, and use it as guidance for implementation. This report investigates the progress of youth in the peacebuilding and conflict resolution in the world in order to suggest more effective ways of giving youth meaningful participation, as well as to suggest effective responses as local, national, regional and international levels (Simpson, 2017).

(20)

Kosovo

Youth participation in peace processes is a highly relevant topic to explore however, in order to fully explore the many aspects to youth participation, a fitting case study should be chosen. Kosovo, as mentioned before, has the youngest population in Europe (Schwartz, 2010). Although it is not clear what the precise age range is, due to noncompliance in the population census by either Kosovar Serbian or Kosovar Albanian residents, it is expected that over 53% of the population is under the age of 25 (Lampe, Allock, 2020; Sassi,

Amighetti, 2018). Furthermore, Kosovo has an active civil society who are trying to increase youth participation, as well as trying to achieve positive peace. Kosovo is still in a state of negative peace. Although violence is almost nonexistent, deeply embedded societal issues remain (KCSS, 2020a; KCSS, 2020b). It has been 21 years since the war in Kosovo ended, and while giant steps towards a more inclusive and peaceful society have been made since then, the formal peace processes between Serbia and Kosovo has not been concluded. After the war Kosovo was put under UNSCR 1244. This resolution served as a solution to the war, without formally granting Kosovo independence (Lampe, Allock, 2020). This solution, although clever at the time, does limit opportunities for Kosovo to further develop. They are still not part of the UN or the EU and visa liberalization has not been granted yet. In 2008 Kosovo unilaterally declared independence, making them the youngest nation in Europe. Still, today tensions within Kosovo between the majority Albanian population, and the minority Serb population remain (KCSS, 2020a; KCSS, 2020b). Within Kosovo ethnic Serbian people often live in enclaves, causing the much of the population to be segregated. Where Serbs and Albanian do live in the same municipality, they often live separate lives. Yet, there are many stories of people building relationships and breaking the societal barriers. Especially young people are actively working towards a more peaceful and connected

society. Many organizations working on peace, and often with youth, are changing the rhetoric of mistrust, and are trying to create a community of trust. It is interesting to look at these organizations and individuals to find out how exactly they participate in this process. Especially since the young generation of Kosovo is actively trying to contribute to the peace process.

NGO’s in Kosovo’s peace process

Many NGO’s and international organizations within Kosovo are actively working on peace building with and for youth. Kosovo’s civil society has been active ever since the end of the war in 1999 (Schwartz, 2010). Due to a big part of Kosovo’s population being young,

(21)

it was assumed that there was a high likeliness of violence erupting, as youth bulge theory suggest (Schwartz, 2010). Therefore, right after the war, many NGO’s, international

organizations and regional security forces flooded into to Kosovo to control the destabilizing factor the young demographic presented (Schwartz, 2010). Moreover, civil society, especially NGO’s, were growing rapidly due to UNMIK’s presence in Kosovo. UNMIK was tasked with the functionalization of civil society, which also became the first areas to be regulated by law (Halili, 2018). Ever since, civil society has been growing and many organizations are now focusing on youth, peace and security. The flood of NGO’s coming into Kosovo after the war was able to use the momentum of youth civil participation and set up a lot of youth targeted programs for participation (Schwartz, 2010). Unfortunately, the rapidly growing NGO sector at the time ran into some challenges that would hamper the progress of NGO’s, and consequently youth, in Kosovo. The many new NGO’s and international actors caused the civil society environment to change and become more competitive. This resulted in NGO’s having to compete for funds of donors and international actors (Halili, 2018;

Schwartz, 2010). While the international actors took over the role of local actors with regards to providing critical community services during the aftermath of the war, once the initial international funding died down, the support for these services died down as well (Schwartz, 2010). Although this decline in NGO commitment served as a setback for youth

empowerment, the initially active NGO scene allowed many young people in Kosovo to participate in the reconstruction and peacebuilding process (Schwartz, 2010). Over the next years NGO’s, together with international organizations, remained dominating the civil society sector, and set up programs aimed at addressing youth’s needs (Halili, 2018; Schwartz, 2010). The Kosovar civil society is considered an essential pillar in the

development of Kosovo, as well as in the building of a healthy democracy, ever since the end of the war (Lumezi, 2019). After Kosovo unilaterally declared independence in 2008, the NGO sector remained crucial, assisting policy making and the drafting and revision of legislation, this is widely considered to have led to a greater level of institutional transparency (Halili, 2018). Currently, there are many NGO’s within Kosovo which focus on peace, youth. These NGO’s provide a space for youth to join the peace process mostly through informal practices such as community building, education and awareness.

(22)

Methodology Research Design

In order to find out more about how youth participate in Kosovo’s peace process, the challenges and opportunities youth face while trying to participate, specific ways of

achieving meaningful participation, and the current state of youth participation in Kosovo, I have conducted multiple semi structured interviews with local peace and youth organizations, an international organization and with youth themselves. Furthermore, I conducted a focus group interview with a group of young woman and man from the United Youth Task Force. Finally, I collected data through online research of reports and websites on youth, peace and security projects, conducted by organisations and individuals within Kosovo. Thus, the research design of this thesis is a combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection. The combination of these two data collection methods allows for a more detailed view on the state of youth participation in Kosovo’s peace process. Through the semi structured

interviews participants had the opportunity to voice their opinions, perceptions and personal insights on the topic of youth participation in Kosovo’s peace process, while simultaneously providing me with details of projects they are working on, information on the state of youth participation in Kosovo, challenges they face when trying to participate, and ways they deal with those challenges, thus providing me with plenty empirical data. The online research also served the purpose of providing me with a wider range of projects to draw data from and analyse accordingly. All the interviews, as well as the focus group interview, were conducted through video and voice calls.

I chose to conduct the individual interviews through a semi structured method as I believe this allowed for the most effective way of data collection to answer the research question; How is youth participating in Kosovo’s peace process? First, it allowed me to ask structured questions about the organisation’s projects, goals and method of execution, after which I could ask more open-ended questions, allowing the respondents to give their own interpretation and perceptions of the topic at hand. Furthermore, I have noticed that this method allows the respondent to become comfortable with the interview, and as the interview progresses, they would more open. The aim of this design is to be able to talk about a topic, and gain both empirical data, and opinions on that data. When talking to people working at NGO’s, I would structure the interviews in such a way where I would begin by asking the respondent about their organisation, the work they do, their goals, and the specifics on certain projects, after which I would ask them questions about their perceptions of the project, or of the context in which the project operates. The second part of the interview would often be

(23)

narrative based, and showed me the underlying challenges, opportunities and goals that the NGO, or the interviewee, is currently facing in Kosovo. I aimed to ask similar questions for each interviewee, as this would ease the analytical part of my thesis. Moreover, by asking similar questions, I could focus on common reoccurring themes.

As a second method of data collection I chose to carry out a focus group. I managed to gain contacts in United Youth Task Force, a prominent youth group within Kosovo with close ties to the UN, through the ‘snowballing’ method. I chose to carry out a focus group for this youth group specifically because it gave me access to multiple actively engaged, multi-ethnic young people from Kosovo at the same time. Moreover, a focus group has the advantage of allowing the researcher to look at group dynamics, gain a better understanding of

experiences, and explore specific themes (Bryman, 2012). Furthermore, for my research specifically, there were many advantages to conducting a focus group with United Youth Task Force. First, although I had spoken to many youth NGO’s, and NGO’s working with youth, I usually got to speak to the head of the organisation, or a representative, who usually were not youth themselves. Speaking to the United Youth Task Force allowed me to gather more diverse youth opinions on the current state of youth participation in Kosovo. The conversation was very productive and gave me the view of the participation from a youth lens.

In order to analyse the data, I obtained through both qualitative and quantitative research methods, I had to create a framework. The purpose of such a framework is to help me analyse the data I obtained in a structured fashion. I did not intend to create a grand theory on youth participation, but rather to create a comprehensive framework, allowing me to explore the current state of youth participation in Kosovo’s peace process, and use the literature in an explanatory way.

Participants

During the data collection phase I conducted a total of seven semi structured interviews with individuals. Among the respondents there were four representatives of diverse NGO’s across Kosovo, one respondent with years of experience within the youth, peace and security field in Kosovo, one respondent representing an international

organization, and one expert on youth, peace and security in Kosovo, who requested to remain anonymous. The focus group was carried out with an active multi-ethnic youth group within Kosovo. The combination of NGO’s provided me with interesting insights and

(24)

process. The selection of NGO’s was based upon two criteria, namely, the organization must work with youth or for youth, and the organization must have projects that aid the peace process in some way. I left the last criteria open on purpose, as everyone has their own perception of what peace is, and what contributing to the peace process entails exactly. Although this would be a very interesting topic to explore, it falls outside the scope of this thesis. More details on the data collection will be given in the next section.

The respondents I interviewed represented multiple NGO’s, namely; Youth Initiative for Human Rights, Kosovo Youth Assembly, Regional Youth Cooperation Office, and

Community Building Mitrovica. Furthermore, I interviewed a representative of the EULEX mission in Kosovo, an EU mission focusing on the rule of law within Kosovo. For the focus group, I interviewed members of the United Youth Task Force. I aimed to get a variety of organisations, with differing methods of participation, to get a more holistic view of the state of youth participation in Kosovo’s peace process.

Youth Initiative for Human Rights is a regional network of NGO’s, which started out as a single NGO and then grew out to a network. Youth Initiative for Human Rights Kosovo works towards social and institutional development through the promotion of human rights and rule of law, youth empowerment and dealing with the past.

Community Building Mitrovica is an NGO located in the north of Kosovo in the municipality of Mitrovica, which has been divided into the northern and southern part ever since the war. The overall aim of CBM is to facilitate contact and dialogue between citizens in the whole Mitrovica municipality.

“Youth Assembly of Kosovo” has been created to represent youth voice of Kosovo and create a better social environment for everyone. Key areas of the organization's activities concern the defence of young people rights in local and national level by offering a broad spectrum of actions and youth involvement initiatives.

Regional Youth Cooperation Office Kosovo is part is a regional network, aiming to promote the spirit of reconciliation and cooperation between the youth in the region through youth exchange programs. Regional Youth Cooperation Office is an independently

functioning institutional mechanism, founded by the Western Balkans 6 participants. United Youth Task Force is a network of young Kosovo peacebuilders from diverse communities, who overcame ethnic and religious boundaries to act together for more inclusive youth policies. They committed themselves to raise issues of Kosovo youth, develop solutions and undertake concrete actions in cooperation with the UN, international

(25)

organizations, Kosovo institutions and all relevant actors, with a view to become a sustainable, knowledgeable and legitimate entity representing Kosovo youth.

EULEX mission is the European Union rule of law mission in Kosovo, aimed at strengthening the Kosovo rule of law institutions. It was launched in 2008 as the largest civilian mission under the CSDP of the EU. EULEX Mission supports relevant rule of law institutions in Kosovo on their path towards increased effectiveness, sustainability, multi-ethnicity and accountability, free from political interference and in full compliance with EU best practices.

The goal of Balkans Policy Research group it to contribute to state consolidation, regional cooperation, peace and EU integration for Kosovo and the Western Balkans countries. It has become a leading non-governmental organisation (NGO) with substantial impact on key policy changes, positively affecting the stability and functioning of the institutions, regional cooperation and the promotion of EU-related reforms.

Due to the current pandemic regarding the COVID-19 outbreak data collection became more difficult compared to when I would have completed field work. Initially, I was going to visit Kosovo, and collect data on youth participation by talking to local youth, local organizations, and international organizations on the ground. Although I already had some contacts in Kosovo, prior to my intended date of arrival, my main strategy on collecting data was to use the ‘snowballing’ technique. This technique is based on the assumption that the more people I talk to; the more people I will get in contact with through those initial contacts. As many people in Kosovo want to get their voice out there, especially youth, I believe this technique would have provided me with enough data.

Once the outbreak of the coronavirus happened, and it became clear I would not be going to Kosovo anymore, I had to make some changes to my research design, as well as to my planned methods on data collection. Because I had been to Kosovo before, and due to my previous education, I had several contacts in Kosovo, or contacts that had worked or

researched in Kosovo. I began by sending emails to the people I knew. These people helped me a lot, first by sending me sources, and secondly by giving me contact information of people within Kosovo. This is where the first issues regarding data collection would be revealed. Not only I am affected by the coronavirus, but everyone in the entire world, including Kosovo. Many organizations were in the transition period, where they themselves did not know what next week would bring. This made it very difficult arranging dates and times to have interviews or getting answers at all. Many of the replies to my emails would either be to inform me that the current pandemic hampered their work, and that at the

(26)

moment they did not have the time or resources for interviews, or to inform me that they would be willing to do the interview, but in the future. As the dust settled a bit around the initial crisis, I began to get more positive replies, and the first couple of interviews were quickly realized. Although I had sent out many emails after the initial two interviews were completed, getting replies was still difficult. Many organizations were busy trying to cope with the COVID situation. I began to use alternative methods of trying to reach people within the organizations, such as sending emails to individuals, instead of to the organization itself, and reaching out through social media. Through this method I managed to get in contact with some more people and organizations, which ended up being of major importance as I

arranged multiple interviews through this method.

Limitations

One of the limitations of my research is the lack of diversity among NGO’s, and interviewee’s. Although I did get to speak to a wide variety of different NGO’s, regarding the work they do, I did not get to speak to any NGO’s located in a Kosovar Serbian municipality. Since my research is focused on youth in the peace process in Kosovo, which entails both Kosovar Serbs and Kosovar Albanians, as well as multiple minority groups within Kosovo, I feel it should include voices from each of these communities, which it does not entirely. Although I did speak to Milos, who is ethnic Serbian and works for the NGO Community Building Mitrovica, this NGO is located in the south side of Mitrovica, where the majority population is ethnic Albanian. The reason why I barely got to speak with ethnic Serbian people during my research is because I could not get on contact with many NGO’ on the Serbian side. Of all the NGO’s I contacted; the majority were run by Kosovar Albanians. Nonetheless NGO’s in the Kosovar Serbian part were relatively unresponsive. For further research I would suggest contacting more NGO’s in Kosovar Serbian municipalities, and trying to reach out through Kosovar Serbian youth themselves. Being able to physically go there and talk to the people in person will certainly help in reaching out to Serbian NGO’s. Another limitation in the data collection is the lack of youth voices that are not as engaged in the peace process already. While it is difficult to talk to youth that is not engaged in

peacebuilding about peacebuilding, it does reveal a more realistic image of the general youth participation in the Kosovar peace process. Not being able to physically go to Kosovo certainly enhanced this limitation.

Another limitation to my research is the lack of youth voices. The reason why I did not get to speak to as much youth as I would have liked, is because I did not get the

(27)

opportunity to travel to Kosovo and meet youth in person. I often only got to speak to people higher up in organizations, or people who are qualified to speak on behalves of the

organization. It is interesting to note that, although I am researching youth organizations, or organizations that work with youth, youth would usually not be dominating leadership positions. Like mentioned before, although I did make use of the ‘snowballing’ technique, this technique did not provide me with enough youth to talk to.

Due to these limitations, the generalisability and representativeness of my research results is narrow. As I mainly interviewed Kosovar Albanian NGO’s and individuals, the representation of Kosovar Serbian youth is not accounted for. Furthermore, the lack of actual youth, and of youth that is not already engaged gives a false image of Youth participation in Kosovo. This, however, does not mean that the collected data does not represent a significant amount of youth within Kosovo. Since I spoke to notable individuals working at relevant institutions and organizations on youth peacebuilding, the data I collected still forms a

window into what is happening in practice on the ground. Furthermore, exploring the positive role of youth in peacebuilding is important to understand in what ways youth can participate in, and contribute to the peace process. Therefore, the analysis and presentation of this data is still highly relevant for the youth, peace and security field.

Ethics

As I conducted interviews with youth on sensitive topics such as peace, identity, and participation, I felt the obligation to make sure that the interviewees were comfortable with the discussed topic. Therefore, during the interviews, I always made sure to not ask questions that might harm the interviewee in any way, nor did I ask questions that might be too

sensitive. For the purpose of my research I did not need to ask sensitive questions, as I am not looking into reconciliation, but at participation. These two lines cut very close as I am

researching participation in peace processes, which is why I needed to be extra careful with the formulation of my questions. Moreover, I made sure to explain the purpose of my

research, and why I am doing this at the start of the interview. I always asked the interviewee if they agreed to the interview being recorded and ensured that the recordings would only be used for the purpose of this research. I also gave the respondents the option to stay

anonymous, as this would allow some to speak more freely, and would sometimes result in an overall higher quality interview. One interviewee preferred this option and will thus stay anonymous. Once I had explained my research, and the interview was about to begin, I started the recording, and notified the interviewee. The recordings, as well as the transcripts

(28)

were stored in my personal device after initial recordings, thereafter they were stored on a protected cloud server.

Results and Analysis Data Presentation

The following chapter will present the findings that emerged from the collected data on youth participation in Kosovo’s peace process, after which they will be analysed accordingly. This chapter is divided into two parts. The first part will present the collected data and explore the research question; How is Youth Participating in Kosovo’s Peace Process? In this section formal and informal methods will be explored. Most of the data that will be analysed in this section was collected through interviews or through a focus group. While the limited number of respondents I spoke to limits the generalizability of the analysis, it does provide insights into the work, challenges and obstacles of individuals and organisations within Kosovo. Nonetheless, the analysis is only based of the views of several respondents, and online sources. The claims made in the following chapters should thus not be considered to represent the entirety of Kosovo.

This section will be divided into four parts, community building, education and awareness, formal participation and challenges. These were the most prevailing methods of participation I encountered in Kosovo that were available and utilised by youth. Each of these methods provide youth with different avenues for participation, yet they all approach

participation differently. The next chapter will therefore explore the collected data on each of these methods to find out exactly how youth in Kosovo is participating in the peace process. The first part will explore community building as a way of participating in the peace process, the second will look at how youth is participating in or organising awareness and educational activities, after that formal youth participation will be examined and finally a closer look at challenges with regards to participation will be taken.

In the second section, the collected data will be analysed to get a better overview of the current state of youth participation in Kosovo. Current methods to participation, and the challenges associated with participation will be analysed according to the framework of

include, invest and partner. This will be done to find out which methods empower youth; which methods allow for ownership over the process, and how? This framework allows for a critical look at the current way’s youth are participating in the peace process after which specific suggestions for youth in Kosovo shall be made.

The State of Youth Participation in Kosovo's Peace Process