Podcasts about conflict prevention

“Humans are not rational beings with emotions. In fact, we're just the opposite. We're emotionally based beings who can only think rationally when we feel that our identities, as we see them, are understood and valued by others.”Those words from neuroscientist Bob Deutch triggered a lightbulb moment in the mind of Tim Phillips, a veteran peacebuilder and educator.  Over the past twelve years, Phillips has worked with neuroscientists and psychologists to integrate brain science into research and practice at Beyond Conflict, the peacebuilding organization that he founded in 1991 and where he serves as CEO. In this conversation, we focus on Beyond Conflict's research on dehumanization. If you perceive another person or group as less than human, it's much easier to justify violence against that group or person. Dehumanizing rhetoric – like describing people as animals or vermin – is often a precursor to violence.  But Phillips says if we can identify signs of dehumanization early on, we can make changes to decrease the likelihood of violent conflict. Phillips and host Jamil Simon also discuss the difference between fear and disgust – both motivators of conflict that are each processed differently in the brain and require different interventions. Plus, how Beyond Conflict has applied this research to create media interventions in Nigeria and the United States. And, how journalists can utilize knowledge of how the brain works to reach more people and avoid incitement. This episode was originally published in April 2024.LEARN MOREWatch the video “America's Divided Mind” by Beyond ConflictRead key takeaways from Beyond Conflict's research on dehumanizationRead Beyond Conflict's Decoding Dehumanization policy brief Listen to our episode with psychologist Donna Hicks: “Dignity: A new way to look at conflict”Watch “How to Grow Peace Journalism” webinars from the George Washington University Media and Peacebuilding Project. Presentations from Making Peace Visible host Jamil Simon, education director Steven Youngblood, and  producer Andrea Muraskin in this video..  ABOUT THE SHOW The Making Peace Visible podcast is hosted by Jamil Simon and produced by Andrea Muraskin. Our associate producer is Faith McClure. Learn more at makingpeacevisible.orgSupport our work Connect on social:Instagram @makingpeacevisibleLinkedIn @makingpeacevisibleBluesky @makingpeacevisible.bsky.social We want to learn more about our listeners. Take this 3-minute survey to help us improve the show!

When your manufacturing organization is experiencing a crisis, the last thing you want to do is add more oil to the fire! But in a technical industry like manufacturing, many people don't have the skills they need to safely and effectively address a dangerous situation, like how to de-escalate a conflict or communicate a safety issue to their team. Carol Cambridge is here to help bring more safety to your organization! Carol is an authority on workplace violence, active shooter, and workplace conflict. She's also the founder of the Stay Safe Project, where she teaches others how to navigate fear and use their critical thinking skills to get through an emergency or crisis. In this episode on safety and crisis management in manufacturing, Carol breaks down why critical thinking plus such a big role in creating a safer workplace, and shares some insights manufacturing leaders can use to handle conflict, address threats, and create a safer workplace for all. 2:23 – In manufacturing, there can be a lack of critical thinking skills, and this plays a big role in crisis management  5:43 – When someone feels unsafe at work, they may be reluctant to report threats  8:22 – There is a different between “tattling” and “reporting” 15:41 – When a potential threat occurs, form a team to handle it, rather than simply leaving it to HR alone to address 18:54 – When you have clear communications and focus on making your employees feel safer, it creates a culture where people can report potential threats without fear 21:18 – Learn to recognize the behavioral signs that might indicate a potential for violence or distress  23:16 – When it comes to confliction resolution or handling heated conversations, timing is key Connect with Carol Cambridge Learn More About The Stay Safe Project Connect on LinkedIn

!!! Please note that this episode was recorded before M23 captured Bukavu, the second-largest city in eastern DRC.This week on The International Risk Podcast, Dominic Bowen sits down with Bram Verelst to examine the escalating conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the resurgence of the M23 rebellion. As the group captures key cities, including Goma, tensions are rising, with increasing concerns about Rwanda's involvement, the worsening humanitarian crisis, and the broader regional implications. In this episode, we explore the historical roots of the conflict, the role of international actors, and the challenges of finding a path to peace in one of Africa's most volatile regions.Bram Verelst is a Senior Researcher on Conflict Prevention, Management, and Peacebuilding in the Great Lakes Region at the Institute for Security Studies. With expertise in conflict dynamics and regional security, he previously worked as a political analyst for the Belgian Ministry of Defence and as a research fellow at Ghent University. He holds master's degrees in history (University of Antwerp) and conflict and development studies (Ghent University).The International Risk Podcast is a must-listen for senior executives, board members, and risk advisors. This weekly podcast dives deep into international relations, emerging risks, and strategic opportunities. Hosted by Dominic Bowen, Head of Strategic Advisory at one of Europe's top risk consulting firms, the podcast brings together global experts to share insights and actionable strategies.Dominic's 20+ years of experience managing complex operations in high-risk environments, combined with his role as a public speaker and university lecturer, make him uniquely positioned to guide these conversations. From conflict zones to corporate boardrooms, he explores the risks shaping our world and how organisations can navigate them.The International Risk Podcast – Reducing risk by increasing knowledge. Follow us on LinkedIn for all our great updates.Tell us what you liked!

Paul B. Stares, General John W. Vessey Senior Fellow for Conflict Prevention and Director of the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations, joins the podcast to discuss the results of CFR's 2025 Preventive Priorities Survey, which predicts more serious and more likely conflict contingencies than any other survey in its 17-year history.

In Episode 157, we are recasting our interview with Margueritte Aozasa, UCLA Women's Soccer Head Coach, former Stanford Women's Soccer Assistant Coach, and former Santa Clara University Defender/Midfielder, who talked with us about her incredible first season at UCLA, during which she became the first coach to win a National Championship in her first year as a head coach, what mission and personal “why” drives her to do what she does, building trust with her team, healthy conflict prevention and resolution, how her and her husband “coach” each other, what she was thinking in the final minutes of the National Championship game, whether college soccer has a place in professional and national team player development, and a whole lot of great leadership nuggets. No doubt you'll love this fun conversation with an incredible coach! Specifically, Margueritte discusses: ·      Her personal story, including how she grew her passion for soccer, coaching, and leadership, and how she got to be where she is today (5:40) ·      Her transition from Stanford assistant coach to UCLA head coach, and the lessons we can learn from her journey (9:29) ·      The importance of head coaches mentoring their assistants to flourish in their program and beyond (13:35) ·      Her personal why/mission statement and how she is living it out (18:43) ·      How she leads herself and pours into her players' leadership development as a head coach (20:49) ·      A couple defining moments in her life and how they impacted her development (24:00) ·      A few coaches that deeply impacted her life, what set them apart, and what life and leadership lessons we can learn from them (30:57) ·      How she keeps a team full of top players content and at their best when they aren't playing, or even making the travel squad (38:16) ·      How she builds trust between her and her staff and players, and among the players (42:15) ·      How to deal with conflict before it gets out of hand and starts impacting the players and team (45:42) ·      The highs and lows of the current state of soccer in the US (48:35) ·      The place for the college game in the development of players at the professional and national team levels (53:00) ·      What she was actually thinking during the final minute of regulation of the National Championship game last year (it just might surprise you) (1:01:28) ·      How she has used lessons learned from sports in her marriage and other relationships (1:05:50) ·      A couple great book recommendations (1:10:01) Resources and Links from this Episode ·      Margueritte on Twitter - @margaozasa ·      Uncut Video of the Episode ·      HSEL Facebook Group ·      Warrior Way Soccer ·      Coaching the Bigger Game Program ·      Phil's email for DISC Training ·      Net Gains: Inside the Beautiful Game's Analytics Revolution, by Ryan O'Hanlon ·      Quiet Leadership: Winning Hearts, Minds, and Matches, by Carlo Ancelotti

J.P. Duffy welcomes Serena Lee, the new President and CEO of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR), for an engaging discussion about CPR's foundational principles, its unique origin as an organization dedicated to helping corporations, and the influential role it plays in the global arbitration community. Serena explains CPR's inner workings, delves into recent case statistics, and shares her vision for CPR's future. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello and welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our international arbitration practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started.  J.P.: Welcome back to the next episode of Arbitral Insights, in which we'll discuss the International Institute for Conflict Resolution, known in the legal community as CPR, with Serena Lee, who's CPR's new president and CEO. I'm J.P. Duffy. I'm an international arbitration partner based in New York that acts as both counsel and arbitrator and international arbitration seated around the world under a variety of governing laws and arbitral rules. I'm qualified in New York, England, and Wales, and the DIFC courts in Dubai, where I previously practiced. I also have the good fortune to be listed on the CPR arbitrator roster, which is called the Panel of Distinguished Neutrals. With me today, as I mentioned, is Serena K. Lee. Serena is a lawyer qualified in New York who previously practiced on the West Coast. Before joining CPR, Serena served as the Vice President of Operations for JAMS in San Francisco, where she managed three resolution centers, San Francisco, Santa Rosa, and Seattle, and oversaw approximately 85 neutrals. And before that, Serena was vice president with the AAA in the construction and commercial divisions, first in Seattle and then San Francisco. So as you can tell, Serena brings a wealth of experience and perspective to her new role and to the audience. And we're thrilled to have her because she's a very recent addition to CPR. She's going to give us some updates on everything that CPR has been up to and what she plans for CPR to do. Before we begin, let me just give some brief background information about CPR itself for those that aren't as familiar with it. CPR was established in 1977 in New York by James F. Henry to help businesses find better ways to resolve commercial disputes. CPR does this through the CPR Institute, which acts as a think tank and a thought leader, and through the CPR Institute's subsidiary, CPR Dispute Resolution Services, which provides dispute resolution and prevention services to users, including the administration of CPR's arbitration rules. CPR has a unique origin because it was established by in-house counsel from Fortune 100 companies to bring together corporate counsel and their law firm clients to collaborate on ways to reduce dispute resolution costs by finding alternatives to court litigation. Today, CPR has a membership community that comprises corporate counsel, law firms, academics, and neutrals. Over the decades, this unique membership community has produced a variety of thought leadership pieces, and innovative yet practical rules for arbitration and mediation, as well as the CPR pledge, which more than 4,000 companies and 1,500 law firms have signed to show their commitment to considering ADR for the speed resolution. So as you can tell, CPR, while it is an arbitral administrator, does a lot more and is relatively unique in the space in the way that it operates. So with that, let's turn to Serena a bit, because I want to hear from her about everything that CPR has been up to. Serena, welcome.  Serena: Thank you so much, JP. Pleasure to be here. Good. J.P.: Well, we're so glad you could join us. And I think, you know, one of the first things that our listeners would love to know is, how many cases did CPR administer in 2023?  Serena: Well, thanks for the questions, J.P., and you're right. I think often people are interested in the number of cases CPR administered. So CPR Dispute Resolution, our arbitral provider subsidiary, administers cases, including complex commercial arbitrations, and offers a number of related services such as mediation, fund holding, appointment services, and others. Our first rule set ever published was actually a non-administered arbitration, and we offer services to help parties through those ad hoc processes. So there's really not a straightforward answer to your question because it depends on how we dissect the data. Oftentimes, parties don't tell us if they are using CPR for their ad hoc arbitrations. Sometimes the parties will come to us for only parts of the services they're seeking, such as for fund holding or for appointment or for conflicts checks. So I don't have a specific number of how many cases CPR has administered based on the data I just shared with you. But I can tell you that CPR dispute resolution handles fewer cases each year than the AAA or JAMS. But because we're smaller, our team is oftentimes very high contact and responsive to questions. So I guess it's all good.  J.P.: That's a great answer. Now, it highlights a point, too, that I think is pretty interesting. What year, if I remember correctly, CPR introduced administered rules in sometime around 2010. Is that correct?  Serena: Close. 2013 was when our first set of administered arbitration weeks were located.  J.P.: Okay, so Serena, so the administer rules got introduced in 2013, and if I've understood you correctly, CPR still gets used relatively frequently by parties, or the CPR rules do, for non-administered cases.  Serena: Correct.  J.P.: What's the breakdown for administered cases between domestic and international cases?  Serena: The majority of the cases that we are aware of were domestic, but we also have received international cases. They're devoted to certain regions, such as in Canada and in Brazil, being maybe our two most prominent areas where we have received international matters.  J.P.: Interesting. And are there particular industries that feature more prominently in the cases than others?  Serena: Well, from the industries that we've seen in the past few years, that they are, as many providers also experience, they come from a wide variety of industries and sectors. Employment, healthcare and life sciences, energy, oil and gas, accounting and financial service are some of our largest caseloads. We also see franchise, insurance, technology, sports law, construction, professional fees. I'm rattling off some of the ones that come to mind. Of course, straight commercial matters as well. And we do see sometimes unfair competition matters come in as well.  J.P.: Interesting. So it's really a pretty broad range of disputes that CPR helps administer.  Serena: Correct.  J.P.: That's great. Now, how much of that is driven by CPR's membership? And it may be worth it when you answer that just to give a little bit of background on that and to explain how the CPR membership process works and maybe talk a bit about who some of the CPR members are. So to probably take this time to distinguish between the CPR Institute, which I'm going to refer to as the Institute, and CPR Dispute Services. So the Institute, of course, as you had mentioned, J.P., was started in 1977. And that is the think tank or the thought leadership portion of CPR and essentially why we exist. Now, CPR dispute resolution was created some three years ago to help parties who were interested in administered arbitrations or other ADR services to help administer those. So they were created as a subsidiary under the Institute to do so. There is a division between the Institute and the work that the Institute does and administration and dispute resolution services that CPR Dispute Resolution provides. Those who are interested in coming into the Institute as members of the thought leadership portion of CPR join as members and they can join as individuals, they can join as firms or as corporations. We have some of the largest organizations to the smallest companies in America who are interested in joining CPR Institute because they're interested in being part of the dialogue and workshopping ideas and solutions to issues they're seeing out in their business landscape. And law firms who also join as well as academics who want to contribute and also listen to what the businesses are asking for and what they're trying to resolve to make sure that the processes are efficient, that they're fair, that they are practical in a business context, and so forth. So I make mention of that because the Institute has very little to do with the case management. The only thing that the institute provides for CPR dispute resolution are the rules and the protocols are promulgated within the institute are then pushed over to the DR or the Dispute Services to issue out and to use. So those who file cases with dispute resolution services have no real interaction with the members. I hope that's clear.  J.P.: It is clear. Yeah. And I think there's a lot to unpack there that's really fascinating and different than a lot of other institutions. So let me just take that in pieces if I could. So the Institute has, that's what has the 4,000 members and the 1,500 law firm members. Is that right?  Serena: Yes.  J.P.: Okay. What are some examples of say fortune 500 companies, if you don't mind sharing that are members of the Institute?  Serena: Certainly, I mean, I can't name all 4,000, but if you actually just jump onto our website on the CPR Institute Board of Directors, you'll see some of the board members come from prominent companies such as Microsoft, Amgen, ConocoPhillips, I'm trying to think, Palo Alto Networks, and others. And the law firms, the biggest law firms in the country are part of the Institute. If you also look at our corporate leadership dinner brochure that's also online, you'll see some of the sponsors of the Institute listed, both corporate as well as law firm contributors.  J.P.: Well, that's really interesting, Serena. So if I'm understanding it correctly, those members that you mentioned of the Institute are the ones that are creating the rules pursuant to which cases may be administered. Is that right?  Serena: Well, it's a little bit more nuanced than that. The members can send associates and their in-house counsel and members of their in-house team to be part of committees within the CPR Institute, as well as law firms who also can comprise of neutrals and academics and attorneys from both maybe the more plaintiff's side and defense side. And they are the ones who workshop the protocols as well as the rules. So for instance, right now we are updating all of our rules as we do every five years and within the arbitration rules committee revision team, you'll see that there are members within all the groups I just mentioned, all the stakeholders who are involved at looking at the rules and discussing whether there should be updates.  J.P.: Got it. So really, at the end of the day, is it fair to say the rules are being pretty heavily influenced by both potential users and law firms? Serena: Yes, I would say that the rules and the protocols are created to maximize efficiency. Obviously, the businesses are in the business of not being in law pursuits, at least our corporate members aren't. And also to make sure that the arbitrators who may have some input into whether the rules can be refined or tweaked to promote efficiency or expediency. So I would say that the end users have a lot of say into the rules. And also the academics who are in the space of dispute resolution are part of the committee and part of the conversation to ensure that the rules and the protocols that we're issuing meet due process.  J.P.: That's really great. I mean, I think that's a really unique feature of CPR, that there's so much input from the actual users and the law firms that will likely be recommending it. It's a really unique feature that probably, if I understand it correctly, stems from the way that CPR was created. Is that correct?  Serena: It's exactly correct. Now, because I worked with the two other arbitral institutions, the largest ones in the U.S., I can say for certain that I find the rules and the refinements of the CPR rules to be different based on the feedback from the field.  J.P.: Interesting. Now that raises an interesting transition point, Serena, because you've been in this role, you haven't been in this role terribly long, right? When did you join CPR?  Serena: My first day of CPR was on April 1st. So it's just been four months.  J.P.: Wow. Okay. So still relatively fresh in the role. How have you found it so far?  Serena: It's been just very, very enriching, I think, for years after being, decades of being on the provider side, to finally work with the end users and to talk to the people who are drafting ADR clauses and trying to think on how to avoid disputes early on or to resolve disputes as quickly as they can when they arise in a way that's fair and economical and business friendly. Meaning for everyone, all the parties involved in disputes. I'm really enjoying the fact that I can share the other side of the equation, so to speak, feel as passionately and as dedicated in resolving disputes in a way that can minimize cost and damage to relationships. That's been really rewarding.  J.P.: I like that. You mentioned a way of minimizing damage to relationships, because it's something that I see a lot. I practice a lot in the life sciences space, and I find that arbitration in particular for those types of industries that have a lot of long-term collaborations like life sciences and some others can be really beneficial because it does allow parties to continue doing business together afterwards in a way that doesn't often happen with litigation. So that's a really interesting point to raise. And it sort of me to something else I wanted to just touch on too. Like, are there particular industries that you think CPR is better suited to than others?  Serena: I'm racking my brain because I frankly can't think of an industry that could not benefit from the structure of CPR dispute resolution. I suppose if the parties in a dispute are interested in preserving relationships and have a say in the rules that are being used to resolve their disputes, and they want to make sure that the rules are ones that they can be assured that they are efficient, then they should know that the rules and the process by which CPR Dispute Resolution follows are based on the end users from its creation. I also think that because we are not as big as the other arbitral providers, our case managers are very responsive and experienced, not that they aren't in the other providers, but because our caseloads are smaller, the case managers at CPR dispute resolution can talk through the variety of a la carte services that are available to parties. If they aren't interested in full-blown arbitration, there is something different that we can talk to them about. Our complete case platform is a very secure case management system that was built specifically for dispute resolution. And since we accept submission agreements and our roles were developed by task force of all the stakeholders we just talked about, I think that there isn't a industry or a group that I don't think wouldn't benefit from using CPR, dispute resolution service. I know that seems perhaps a bit self-serving to say, but I think that might be true given the fact that come from the other providers as well.  J.P.: Yeah, no, not self-serving at all. I mean, I think it's the best endorsement you can give. You know, it's a really broad statement that's reflective of how broad the Institute membership is and CPR's genesis. Well, now you've been in the role for four months, you mentioned. So let me ask you this, what would you like to accomplish for the remainder of 2024, given that we're sort of rolling in towards the end of the year?  Serena: Well, I'm very much looking forward to amplifying CPR's mission, our resources, and to involve incredible members here in the U.S. and internationally. We've been primarily focused in Europe, as I mentioned, in Brazil, and I imagine that in subsequent years we'll expand more broadly to other countries. We are actually right now testing a new membership concept to connect our members into areas where they live and they work. So to that end, what I've planned to do is to launch our inaugural regional chapter of CPR, something we've never done before, in Seattle in November. I chose a city that had very strong corporate support. As I mentioned, Microsoft has been a corporate member of CPR for many years, and one of the board members of CPR, John Palmer, is a huge proponent for CPR and its resources. And I also chose Seattle for its vibrant legal community that actively uses alternative dispute resolution.  J.P.: That's great. Now, tell the listeners a bit more about what you mean by the regional chapter.  Serena: Sure. So I'm hoping that these regional chapters can connect and provide those in the legal community with an opportunity to engage in the same thought leadership on a local level and also to consider CPR. In, I think, the ADR space sees our role as the conveners of conversations and discussions. So while we can have national and industry-specific conversations remotely in this day of post-COVID discussions, we also wanted to bring an in-person experience to the local chapters that we are starting. It will be a pilot for us in Seattle. And what I'm hoping that we can provide for a local chapter of CPR is an ability to bring all the local general councils of the large corporations based in that city, as well as the law firms, the law schools, as well as the neutrals who practice in that area to come together, again, to get to know each other in a way that is meaningful so that they may learn from each other to hear each other's perspective in real time. And then to broadcast or transmit their ideas from a regional chapter onto the national roster. There's no reason why the thought leadership can't originate from a regional chapter such as Seattle.  J.P.: That's great. Now, what are some of the other regions that you're envisioning regional chapters for?  Serena: That's hard to say. We have had a very, very strong presence in Houston for decades now. The energy, oil, and gas industries have been great supporters of CPR. I surmise this because they are a very small industry where there are lots of repeat players in the space. So because we're conveners, I think that we may look into Houston as our next regional chapter. And then I think I'll have to see. I think there has been an appetite in other areas such as Chicago. And of course, I'd love to be able to start a chapter in California.  J.P.: Right. Well, and obviously, California is such a large market. You could probably do one in Northern California and Southern California separately. But it remains to be seen, I guess, where you would want to go.  Serena: Correct. I'm also very interested in making sure that we are actively engaged with our members of arbitrators. Our panel of distinguished neutrals has about 600 members, and perhaps I'm showing my years of working with the providers, but I do think that the arbitrators, mediators, and other neutrals within our panel are a hugely important component within CPR, and I like to engage with them in more ways in the coming years. And I know that our law firms and our corporate members really appreciate the role of CPR as the conveners. So to have the opportunity to talk to neutrals and academics about thought leadership in the dispute resolution space is very important to them.  J.P.: That's great. Well, I think it's, you know, from my perspective as both someone who acts as both counsel and an arbitrator, I think it's really great when an institution does solicit the views of arbitrators because in so many ways they are the front lines of what's occurring, right? I mean, obviously end users have the biggest stake and should have the largest voice in my view because they are the people that are impacted by all this most. But certainly arbitrators do see, what works well, what may not work as well, areas that can be improved, things that might be made more efficient. So it's really important, in my view, to solicit the arbitrator's views. And that's a really great initiative.  Serena: Thank you. And I actually think that it's almost vital to ensure that everyone that's in the ecosystem of dispute resolution understand the needs and expectations of each other and to make sure that the rules and protocols that we are promulgating and asking our neutrals to use in their processes make sense and that there is buy-in. And if there isn't buy-in, if there is a way to iterate a better system, that we capture that feedback and to integrate innovations and refinements to process as we move forward into the future.  J.P.: That's great. I mean, absolutely. It's an inclusive environment that considers all the different stakeholders and all the different voices, always produces a better result. So wonderful to hear that that's something that you're considering. Now, that would be for 2024, which is a pretty ambitious agenda, it sounds like. What would you see or where would you like to see CPR in five years?  Serena: Yeah. Well, in five years' time, I, of course, hope to continue to build on an even stronger CPR institute that can work collaboratively with additional stakeholders to identify ways that parties can resolve their disputes more effectively. There's sometimes, I think, a sentiment in the legal community that the use of mediation and arbitration is now a mainstay tool in resolving disputes, in legal disputes. But I still strongly believe that mediation, as is being used now, is still more evaluative. It'd be great if the parties are open to a more transformative process. And I've seen over the years, unfortunately, arbitration being conducted more like litigation. And the benefits of arbitration, namely being more streamlined, quicker, and more cost-effective, and so forth, are being eroded by attorneys who are either not understanding the advantages of arbitration's more informal process, and also arbitrators who may not be willing to streamline the process. So my hope is that CPR can continue to help keep the dialogue of better dispute resolution process, open, engaging, and responsive to the expectations of the parties who go into mediation and arbitration. CPR dispute resolution services, which of course, as I mentioned, only issued out its administered rules in 2013, has shown steady growth year over year as more companies are either submitting their disputes to CPR dispute resolution or they're opting to write CPR rules into the contracts because they're comfortable with the rules and the process designed by the end users. So I'm hoping that we can continue to grow CPR dispute resolution services as well.  J.P.: It's a really important agenda to take on because there's absolutely a dialogue going on in the community right now that you're seeing on various platforms, particularly from arbitrators about, and some of the arbitrators that have been around for a little bit longer, about arbitration becoming too much like litigation, becoming too similar to court procedures, and becoming too burdensome to really achieve its purposes. And it's interesting to see that discussion arise because it sort of goes on hand in glove with, you know, the explosive growth of arbitration as an alternative process. And if it really becomes too much like court, then it's not really an alternative to court. It's just another sort of venue for promulgating those types of processes, which really defeats the purpose in some ways. So it's great to hear the CPR is taking that on and that you want to promote revisiting really what arbitration is about.  Serena: Correct. And I think that we must be vigilant and not rest on our laurels that we think that alternative dispute resolution is being used widely does not mean that it's being used as well as we probably hope or have promised parties at times.  J.P.: Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely right. The mere fact that somebody is doing something one way doesn't mean they're doing it right. That's a very, very, very good point. Right. Well, it sounds like if I'm doing my math correctly, in 2027, CPR as a body will have been around for 50 years. So it sounds like you've got a pretty good handle on where you want to see CPR when it hits its 50th anniversary. So that's pretty interesting.  Serena: That's right. We are actually excited to celebrate our 50th. I believe that the Federal Arbitration Act, I think, goes first in celebrating its 100th year anniversary in 2026, I believe.  J.P.: That's right.  Serena: So in 2027, we'll celebrate our 50th.  J.P.: Yeah, or maybe it's 1925. I can't remember, but there's certainly...  Serena: Oh, I think you might be right.  J.P.: I think they're certainly right around there. Either way. Well, good. Well, there's a lot of ground we've covered, and I think we could probably keep going all day. But it might make more sense to reserve my right to invite you back for a future update, because you've obviously got a lot that you intend to do, and it will be great to hear about how all that execution has gone on all these plans.  Serena: Well, JP, I'd love to come back. I really enjoyed our time together and this experience and opportunity to talk about CPR. And my new role has been welcomed. And I hope that in five years' time or maybe in two years' time, I can come back and report on our efforts to expand our regional chapters and to report back on other projects that we are working on currently.  J.P.: Absolutely. And I'll tell you right now, it'll be a lot sooner than two years time. It's certainly sooner than five years. I'm a little more impatient than that. So we won't wait that long, but thank you. It's been a real pleasure. That will conclude then our discussion of CPR. I want to thank Serena Lee for sharing her thoughts and vision for CPR. And I want to thank you, the listeners, for listening in. You should feel free to reach out to Reed Smith about today's podcast with any questions you might have. And you should feel free to reach out to Serena as well. I've had that discussion with her. I know she'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. We look forward to having you tune in for future episodes in this series. And we look forward to follow-ups with Serena in the future. So thank you very much.  Serena: Thanks, J.P.  Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's global international arbitration practice, email arbitralinsights@reedsmith.com. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Reed Smith LLP.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers. All rights reserved. Transcript is auto-generated.

There is great richness to be found in human connection - when we know how. To truly see others, to step into vulnerability and to find hidden reflections in ourselves.Maria Arpa is an absolute powerhouse of inspiration. From mediation to facilitation, she's made it her life's purpose to change the path of others for the better: working with people in extreme poverty, areas of knife crime, and social deprivation to overcome conflict, seek peaceful dialogue, and find connection they never knew possible.Guiding us through learnings from the streets of London, prisons and social neighbourhoods, all the way to the corporate corridors, this episode packs a powerful punch! It's an exploration of humanity, hope, and the healing of the self.Find out about:Maria's Dialogue Road Map method of communicationHow we can support groups to have vulnerable conversationsWhy what you see in others is a reflection of yourselfExpressing and recognising the language of needsWhy we must create specific spaces to change the systemDon't miss the next episode: subscribe to the show with your favourite podcast player.And download the free 1-page summary, so you can always have the key points of this episode to hand.Links:Watch the video recording of this episode on YouTube.Connect to Maria Arpa:LinkedInWebsiteSupport the show**Click here to navigate through all episodes via this interactive podcast map.**Are you inspired by our podcast guests and crave a taste of masterfully facilitated workshops? Join the NeverDoneBefore Facilitation Festival. **If you enjoy the show, consider a one-off donation and contribute to the ongoing costs of running the podcast.

Although workplace conflict is inevitable, it's crucial that conflicts are addressed proactively for a healthier work environment. While contributing factors may vary, they may include things such as miscommunication and personality clashes. It's no surprise that workplace conflict may have negative impact on productivity and team cohesion. This episode provides preventative strategies, conflict resolution techniques, and leadership involvement. Tune in to learn more.   Check out Stress-Free With Dr G on YouTubehttps://youtube.com/channel/UCxHq0osRest0BqQQRXfdjiQ The Stress Solution: Your Blueprint For Stress Management Masteryhttps://a.co/d/07xAdo7l

Brittany Brown, Acting Assistant to the Administrator of USAID's Bureau for Conflict Prevention and Stabilization, joins Mike Shanley to discuss the Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI). OTI has been an ongoing effort for 30 years, and Brittany shares some of their successes with working in other countries. Localization is a large aspect of the work that OTI is focused on, by working with local partners and change makers to ensure that everyone has a buy-in on the project a grant is funding. OTI partners with the National Security Council, State Department, and DOD in a variety of ways, and with someone from the OTI team on the Administration this year, they are seeing success with educating the government on impacts of certain decisions.   IN THIS EPISODE: [1:17] Brittany covers some of the key successes and lessons learned across 30 years of OTI.  [4:00] Brittany shares an example of the OTI's work in Libya.  [6:30] Brittany shares about the work that has been done in Columbia. [9:55] How does OTI work with local partners and what lessons can they share with other parts of USAID to best implement localization agendas and engage local partners? [18:22] Brittany explains how OTI engages with the National Security Council. [18:22] How does OTI work together with the State Department and DOD? [20:50] What are some of the innovations and challenges that OTI has come up with?  [23:00] Brittany shares what initiatives and strategies she is excited about looking forward to with OTI.  [28:22] Brittany talks about how impactful it is when everyone works together on a project.  KEY TAKEAWAYS:  [3:30] OTI goes to countries to create a collaborative model, where everyone has buy-in. It isn't only the U.S. Government that determines what they need, instead it is the country requesting what they need, and then everyone working together to make that happen.  [24:00] One of the reasons that OTI is an important organization is because they are limited and can be very targeted in the places they are engaging. They typically only have around 15 programs happening at any moment.  [27:26] None of us are as smart as all of us thinking together. There are a lot of creative ways that can help get things done better and differently than before, and those ideas will come with everyone working together.  QUOTES: [5:00] “We started asking the displaced people, what would it take for you to return? What is it, what do you need to return to Sirte, and then we immediately started doing the things they were asking for. So that meant we were just restoring regular services. It meant just government services, it meant sewage and trash collection, it meant running water, access to running water, it meant schools actually had to be functioning. It meant healthcare systems had to be stood up. We had to start cleaning up graffiti and signage that was left over from the ISIS occupation to make people feel like they actually had a future for themselves and their kids” - Brittany Brown [12:44] “We don't have the brilliant ideas. It's actually the people who live in these communities and understand the local context, the local dynamics about what is happening, and it's using systems that already exist in these countries.” - Brittany Brown [27:25] “I think government bureaucrats get a bad rap for not being innovative and creative in these different ways. Everytime I interact with anyone in this building at the state department, anywhere else, there are these big, brilliant change makers in government that are thinking about how we do things better. They also are very open to ideas from the outside.” - Brittany Brown RESOURCES: Aid Market Podcast Aid Market Podcast YouTube   BIOGRAPHY:  Brittany Brown serves as Deputy Assistant Administrator of USAID's Bureau for Conflict Prevention and Stabilization (CPS). She was appointed by the Biden-Harris Administration to also serve as the Director for the U.S. Agency for International Development's Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) in CPS. Prior to OTI, Brittany worked as the Chief of Staff at the International Crisis Group after more than a decade in the U.S. Government, working for a range of government agencies, including USAID, the U.S. Departments of Justice, State, and Defense, and both the Obama and Trump White Houses. She served on the staff of the National Security Council as the acting Senior Director for African Affairs under the Trump Administration, and as the National Security Council's Horn of Africa Director under President Obama. Brittany began her government career as a Presidential Management Fellow with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Before joining the U.S. Government, she worked with juvenile detainees and children in the foster care system. She also managed a GED program for women awaiting trial at Chicago's Cook County Jail. She holds a Bachelor's degree in political science and sociology from DePaul University in Chicago and a Master of Arts in Public Policy and Administration from Northwestern University.

“Humans are not rational beings with emotions. In fact, we're just the opposite. We're emotionally based beings who can only think rationally. When we feel that our identities, as we see them, are understood and valued by others.”Those words from neuroscientist Bob Deutch triggered a lightbulb moment in the mind of Tim Phillips, a veteran peacebuilder and educator. This is what the field of conflict resolution had been missing: a science-based understanding of how the human brain works in conflict situations.  Over the past twelve years, Phillips has worked with neuroscientists and psychologists to integrate brain science into research and practice at Beyond Conflict, the peacebuilding organization that he founded in 1991 and where he serves as CEO. In this conversation, we focus on Beyond Conflict's research on dehumanization. If you perceive another person or group as less than human, it's much easier to justify violence against that group or person. Dehumanizing rhetoric – like describing people as animals or vermin – is often a precursor to violence.  But Phillips says if we can identify signs of dehumanization early on, we can make changes to decrease the likelihood of violent conflict. Phillips and host Jamil Simon also discuss the difference between fear and disgust – both motivators of conflict that are each processed differently in the brain and require different interventions. Plus, how Beyond Conflict has applied this research to create media interventions in Nigeria and the United States. And, how journalists can utilize knowledge of how the brain works to reach more people and avoid incitement. LEARN MOREWatch the video “America's Divided Mind” by Beyond ConflictRead key takeaways from Beyond Conflict's research on dehumanizationRead Beyond Conflict's Decoding Dehumanization policy brief Listen to our episode with psychologist Donna Hicks: “Dignity: A new way to look at conflict”Watch “How to Grow Peace Journalism” webinars from the George Washington University Media and Peacebuilding Project. Presentations from Making Peace Visible host Jamil Simon, education director Steven Youngblood, and  producer Andrea Muraskin in this video..  ABOUT THE SHOWMaking Peace Visible is a project of War Stories Peace Stories. Making Peace Visible is hosted by Jamil Simon and produced by Andrea Muraskin, with help from Faith McClure. Learn more at warstoriespeacestories.org. We want to learn more about our listeners. Take this 3-minute survey to help us improve the show! Support this podcast and the War Stories Peace Stories project

Happy International Women's Day! CIArb North America Branch is thrilled to announce the upcoming quarterly podcast mini-series Arbitration Horizons: Tales from CIArb North America, by Chris Campbell, Esq., the host of the famous podcast, “Tales of The Tribunal," in collaboration with CIArb NAB. This eagerly anticipated program is set to showcase compelling conversations with distinguished member arbitrators from CIArb across North America, including Mexico and Canada. Our very first program in this quarterly series will host an interview with Chartered Arbitrator, Maureen Beyers, Esq. On March 08, 2024 @ 1 PM EST. Nationally recognized as a top arbitrator, since 1995 Maureen has served as an arbitrator and chairperson in hundreds of arbitrations throughout the United States, involving a variety of business disputes, many of which presented complex commercial issues. Maureen is a member of several ADR organizations including the American Arbitration Association's Large and Complex Case Panel, a Fellow and Chartered Arbitrator with the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution. She is also on the roster of National Arbitration and Mediation, and a Fellow of the College of Commercial Arbitrators.  Join us as we delve into the insightful narratives and experiences of these esteemed professionals, unraveling the intricacies of arbitration in the diverse and dynamic North American region. Get ready to explore the fascinating world of arbitration with Chris Campbell at the helm!  Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/40833847/admin/   Check out our website: TalesOfTheTribunal.com   For Feedback, comments or submissions contact TalesOfTheTribunal@Gmail.com None of the views shared today or any episode of Disputes Digest is presented as legal advice nor advice of any kind.  No compensation was provided to any organization or party for their inclusion on the show nor do any of the statements made represent any particular organization, legal position or view point.  All interviewees or organizations included appear on an arms-length basis and their appearance should not be construed as any bias or preferred affiliation with the host or host's employer.  All rights reserved.

Can business help peace? And can the processes by which peace comes into being help business? My social impact pioneer today – Tim Fort believes so. As one of the recent nominees for the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize (yes The Nobel Peace Prize) – Tim Fort is a prolific thinker and writer on all avenues of business and peace. Tim Fort has been nominated for the 2024 Nobel Peace Prize for his work in showing how ethical business behaviour can positively contribute to peace. He holds the Eveleigh Professorship in Business Ethics at the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University and is also an Affiliated Scholar at the Kroc Institute of International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame. Fort received the 2022 Distinguished Career Faculty Award from the Academy of Legal Studies in Business. He has written one hundred articles, reviews and chapters along with twelve books; he has edited many more. Two of his books have won the Best Book Award from the Academy of Management for Social Issues. Tim joins us to share very practical advice on how we can make peace and what business can learn from peacemakers. He then goes on to give us a sneak peak into his new book which he is co-authoring with Kristin Hahn, executive producer of Apple TV's "The Morning Show," explaining how shared cultural experiences can serve as common ground for people divided by social and political issues. Get ready to hear about the power of music, sharing a love of sports, and why going for a walk with your dog could resolve conflict. Links: -Cindy Schipani and Tim Fort's book: The role of business in fostering peaceful societies: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/role-of-business-in-fostering-peaceful-societies/39F381F211120B66293F33812A88C717 -Tim Fort, The Diplomat in the Corner Office: Corporate Foreign Policy https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=23129 -Tim Fort and Cindy Schipani, The Role of the Corporation in Fostering Sustainable Peace, 35 Vanderbilt Law Review 389 (2021). Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vjtl/vol35/iss2/1 -Terry Dworkin and Cindy Schipani, Gender Voice and Correlations with Peace+, 36 Vanderbilt Law Review 527 (2021). Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vjtl/vol36/iss2/6 -Tim Fort, Review by: William Frederick. Business Ethics Quarterly Vol. 20, No. 1, Behavioral Ethics: A New Empirical Perspective on Business -Ethics Research (Jan., 2010), pp. 134-137 (4 pages). Published By: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27755327 -Jane Nelson (2000). The Business of Peace: The Private Sector as a Partner in Conflict Prevention and Resolution. Available at: https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Business_of_Peace.html?id=hQwrJAAACAAJ -Samuel Moyn (2021). Humane: How the United States Abandoned Peace and Reinvented War. Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Humane-United-States-Abandoned-Reinvented/dp/0374173702 -Raymond Kelly (2000). Warless Societies and the Origin of War. Available at: https://press.umich.edu/Books/W/Warless-Societies-and-the-Origin-of-War -Constance Cook Glen, Timothy L. Fort (2022). Music, Business and Peacebuilding. Available at: https://www.routledge.com/Music-Business-and-Peacebuilding/Glen-Fort/p/book/9781032185989 -Tim Fort (2021). TED. What can the dog park teach us about bridging great societal divides?Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/tim_fort_what_can_the_dog_park_teach_us_about_bridging_great_societal_divides -Braver Angels. Available at: https://braverangels.org Sweet dreams for Rwanda: http://www.sweetdreamsrwanda.com -Follow Tim and Kristin's collaboration. Available at: https://www.facebook.com/iuhhc/photos/a.685177491572241/4845214892235126/?type=3 If you liked this podcast do join us at the Business Fights Poverty Global Equity Summit: https://businessfightspoverty.org/global-equity-summit (free tickets are available when you apply this promo code: GES24BFP

Arrington is a member of the American Arbitration Association's Rosters of Neutrals for arbitration and mediation of commercial, employment, complex, and class action disputes and for non binding arbitration. He has been named as a panel member of the Banking, Accounting and Financial Services, Employment and Tennessee Distinguished Panels of Neutrals with the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR) and is on the roster of arbitrations of the American Health Lawyers (AHLA). He has been approved as a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Dispute Resolution Arbitrator. He is listed with the Tennessee Supreme Court's Commission on Alternative Dispute Resolution as a Rule 31 General Civil Mediator. He is also a member of the panels of court approved arbitrators and mediators for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Mr. Arrington is AV-rated in Martindale-Hubbell, the highest rating awarded by this most widely-used directory of lawyers. He chairs the firm's Employment Law and  Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice groups. He has attended advanced mediation training from the National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals. He is also a member of the Tennessee Academy of Mediators and Arbitrators. Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-arrington-85358010/ Wilson Worley: https://wwmgs.com/

In a world where more and more people burrow deeper into the silos of their way of thinking, the separation from an understanding of another view, much less an appreciation, is shrinking. In a healthy society, the moderate middle continues to grow at the expense of fringes competing against each other in deepening the wells of hate and misunderstanding. As a consequence, the reality of each of us, of all of us, belonging to a common humanity gets lost. Three decades ago, it was pointed out by author and  professor of geopolitics, Prof. Nalapat that the cultural DNA of the people of India is a fusion of the Vedic, the Mughal and the Western, something that was termed “Indutva”. No strand can stand alone, and yet not just within countries but between countries, there are outlier states that believe they and they alone have the right to assume primacy, even dominance, over the rest. In the 1930s in Europe, such a state, because it remained unchallenged throughout that decade, ignited a world war. The 21st century must not witness a similar holocaust, and such an outcome is preventable only through the coming together of those committed to the equality of nations and to a free, open and inclusive Global Commons that includes the entirety of the Indo-Pacific. In his book, Cold War 2.0, Professor Madhav Das Nalapat presents both the danger as well as the deterrent. What happened in the 1930s must not be repeated in the 2030s. The time for prevention is now. This episode of BIC Talks is an extract from a lecture that took place inthe BIC premises in October 2023. Subscribe to the BIC Talks Podcast on your favourite podcast app! BIC Talks is available everywhere, including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Castbox, Overcast, Audible and Amazon Music.

3 big ideas discussed in this episode:  BIG IDEA #1: Deeper Connections: Master the Art of Curiosity to Foster Authentic Personal and Professional Relationships BIG IDEA #2: Mastering Authentic Relationships: Unveiling the Power of Clarity for Clear Communication, Conflict Prevention, and Meaningful Connections BIG IDEA #3: Unlocking Success: Mastering the Art of Building and Sustaining Authentic Personal and Professional Relationships through Confidence Enjoy the episode  Get the show notes for this episode at AskJeremyJones.com/podcast

Hannes Mueller is a tenured researcher at the Institute for Economic Analysis, a researcher center of the Spanish National Research Council. He also directs the master's program in Data Science for Decision Making at the Barcelona Graduate School of Economics. Most recently, his research focus has been on how conflict can be predicted using millions of newspaper articles – a project which drives the conflictforecast.org website. This research project has become a key resource for global work on conflict prevention and has led to collaborations with the Spanish Central Bank, the German Federal Foreign Office, the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, the UN, World Bank, and many others. This conversation was a tour de force and covered a lot of topics: from taxes and trust, to fiscal capacity as a dimension of state capacity, to fragility and the macroeconomic implications of violent conflict, to forecasting conflict using machine learning and implications for policy makers. Hannes gives us a live demonstration of conflictforecast.org and if you're interested in how AI can help us forecast conflict then this is the conversation for you! ***** Hannes Mueller Website: https://www.hannesfelixmueller.com Conflict forecast: https://conflictforecast.org LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hannes-mueller-research/ ***** Mihaela Carstei, Paul M. Bisca, and Johan Bjurman Bergman co-host F-World: The Fragility Podcast.  X: https://twitter.com/fworldpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fworldpodcast/ Website: https://f-world.org Music: "Tornado" by Wintergatan. This track can be downloaded for free at www.wintergatan.net. Video editing by: Alex Mitran - find Alex on Facebook (facebook.com/alexmmitran), X (x.com/alexmmitran), or LinkedIn (linkedin.com/in/alexmmitran) EPISODE RESOURCES Timothy Besley and Hannes Mueller. 2012. Estimating the Peace Dividend: The Impact of Violence on House Prices in Northern Ireland. American Economic Review. Timothy Besley, Hannes Mueller, Fiscal Capacity and State Fragility In: Macroeconomic Policy in Fragile States. Eds: Ralph Chami, Raphael Espinoza, and Peter Montiel, Oxford University Press (2021). International Monetary Fund. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198853091.003.0009 Hannes Mueller, Christopher Rauh, The Hard Problem of Prediction for Conflict Prevention, Journal of the European Economic Association, Volume 20, Issue 6, December 2022 Hannes Mueller, Christopher Rauh, & Alessandro Ruggieri. 2022. Dynamic Early Warning and Action Model, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2236. TIMESTAMPS (00:00:00) Introduction (00:01:17) Hannes's background (00:03:26) Shock therapy in Poland vs. Russia (00:05:42) How Hannes's interest in politics shapes his research (00:09:09) Institution formation, fragility, & fiscal capacity (00:16:05) Trust, taxation, & public services (00:22:06) What is fragility (00:29:32) Relationship between fragility & violent conflict (00:33:11) Macroeconomic implications of conflict (00:37:21) Does conflict always lead to fragility (00:41:21) Forecasting fragility vs causal understanding (00:43:42) Human factors & forecasting fragility (00:50:42) Prevention & forecasting (00:55:09) Why is conflict prediction a hard problem (00:58:19) Machine learning for conflict prevention (01:03:21) What is a good model for conflict prevention? (01:11:05) Text availability by language for training the model (01:15:54) Conflictforecast.org demo (01:25:31) What can you ask the model & what you shouldn't ask (01:37:47) How can the model inform policy action & prevention (01:44:36) How can conflictforecast.org augment human decision making (01:49:51) The role of stabilizing factors in cross country comparisons (01:54:22) Hannes's data wish list (02:01:26) Do LLMs like ChatGPT impact the model's performance (02:04:37) Is there a role for sentiment analysis (02:08:45) Future research goals (02:13:08) Institutional myopia (02:15:27) Should we bring back salons (02:19:15) Wrap-up

On today's episode, Dr. Mark Costes sits down with the accomplished Carol Bowser, J.D, a seasoned workplace conflict expert with a rich history in Employment Law. Transitioning from a legal career, Carol founded Conflict Management Strategies, driven by the belief that proactive conflict resolution yields higher satisfaction than traditional legal routes. Over her 20 years in the field, Carol has assisted a wide array of employers across various industries in navigating the intricate realm of workplace conflict, sharing invaluable insights on how individuals at all levels can enhance their conflict resolution skills. With her extensive knowledge and hands-on experience, Carol brings a wealth of practical strategies to the table, making this episode a must-listen for anyone looking to foster a harmonious work environment. In this insightful discussion, Dr. Mark Costes engages with Carol Bowser, delving into the heart of workplace conflicts and the methodologies of resolving them, particularly when parties harbor diverging viewpoints on justice or fairness within the organization. They explore the proactive measures that can be put in place to prevent conflicts, especially in environments with large employee groups. The discussion furthers into strategies for rapid resolution when disputes inevitably occur, aiming to foster a harmonious workplace environment. A notable point of discussion is the threshold at which mediated disputes escalate to legal cases, and what preventative steps could be taken to avert such escalation. This conversation is especially pertinent to dental office employers as they navigate through performance or cultural issues with employees belonging to protected categories. Carol provides valuable guidance on ensuring that any reprimanding or termination actions taken are within legal and ethical standards, reflecting her extensive experience in employment law and conflict management. This episode is a reservoir of knowledge for employers seeking to enhance their conflict resolution aptitudes while adhering to legal frameworks, ensuring a conducive and respectful work environment for all. To learn more about Carol Bowser and how to equip yourself or your organization with effective conflict management strategies, visit her website at www.conflictmanagementstrategies.com. EPISODE RESOURCES www.conflictmanagementstrategies.com https://www.truedentalsuccess.com Dental Success Network Subscribe to The Dentalpreneur Podcast

I am not there yet, I know that. I want to be able to have conversations with people, like my guest Frank, and actually get to the root of it. I want to be able to understand what makes people see the world so differently. I want to understand what makes one person think racism and the aftermath of slavery still loom large in our country, whereas another person thinks it is not much of an issue at all. It is hard though. Maybe it shouldn't be so hard, but I find myself trying to walk the line of curiosity and confrontation. Both are necessary at times, but I still find myself hesitant to push too hard. Maybe it is a good thing, because the only way to make progress on problems like these is through understanding not confrontation. Or maybe it is a bad thing, because the conversation could be so much more powerful if I didn't hedge so much. I appreciate Frank being on and sharing his views. Some people may not agree with them, some people may. I hope after listening though, if nothing else, there is a little more insight and understanding into his psyche and how he thinks. I also hope as I keep doing these shows, I find ways to have difficult conversations like this without shying away from the heart of the matter. More complete bio from Frank below- Frank Salvato is an experienced multi-media production specialist with a demonstrated history of working in the online print publication and communications industry both as a managing editor and a content creator. He is currently the primary writer and editor, as well as podcast host, at UndergroundUSA.com. The podcast is syndicated on iHeart Radio, Pandora, Audible, and anywhere podcasts are heard. He just released my new book, Nullification: The Case for Decentralizing the Federal Government, which reached number one on Amazon in the Political Leadership category in its first week. His writing has been recognized by the US House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention. I served as an Associate Editor for The Washington Dispatch in the 2000s and as Publisher and Managing Editor of The New Media Journal.

On The LatinNews Podcast this week, we ask Renata Segura, Deputy Director for Latin America and the Caribbean at the International Crisis Group and Diego Da Rín, Haiti expert at International Crisis Group, what is going on in Haiti? The prolongation of a series of corrupt governments has created an untenable situation consisting of three crises, economic, security and humanitarian.  How can the cycle be broken to provide for the people of Haiti?   Show Notes: • The current situation in Haiti? • The Haitian humanitarian crisis • Assassination of President Jovenel Moïse • Criminal militant groups   Renata Segura started her career as a reporter on Colombian TV and a nationally-distributed magazine, before working at the Jesuit-led NGO CINEP in Bogotá. She got her Ph.D. in political science from the New School for Social Research in New York in 2007. Between 2002 and 2019, Renata worked at the Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum, a program of the Social Science Research Council. Diego Da Rin is a social science researcher, journalist and consultant on Latin America and Caribbean for the International Crisis Group.

Show notes and Transcript Tera Dahl joins Hearts of Oak, bringing her deep understanding of policy and her many years experience in the media.  She has worked on Capital Hill in Michele Bachmann's office in Congress, in the Trump administration in the White House and most recently at USAID.  Her Media expertise started with Breitbart and she now works with Real America Voice.  Immigration and foreign policy are two of her areas of unbridled knowledge and she shares with us her concerns that Green Card law-abiding immigrants are being faced with a choice.  Either they take the COVID shot or their application will not be processed. Green Card or your life.  But a different story for those entering illegally, they are not forced to take the jab. The Republicans need to be championing this issue and standing up for law and order and the right to choose what toxins go into your body.  Tera also shares her concerns at the out of control Fentanyl problem seen in many urban areas in the US.  We finish by asking why the US have abandoned their role of intervention abroad and retreated from everywhere....except Ukraine. Article in Gateway Pundit... 'It's Time for Republicans to Champion the Rights of Legal Law-Abiding immigrants and Stop the Green Card Jab Mandates' by Peter Mcilvenna https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/07/its-time-republicans-champion-rights-legal-law-abiding/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=its-time-republicans-champion-rights-legal-law-abiding Interview recorded 14.7.23 *Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast. Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20  To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more...  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/ Please subscribe, like and share! Transcript (Hearts of Oak) Hello Hearts of Oak and welcome to another interview coming up in a moment with Tera Dahl, who I've got to know over the last few months. She served with Michelle Bachmann as her Chief of Staff. She was also in the Trump administration, National Security Council, and she brings to us a wealth of knowledge of policy, but also from her media background, Breitbart and Real America Voice, and she joins us today to talk about immigration. This issue that legal immigrants must get a COVID jab. If you want your green card status to be finalised, you must go for medical check and have a COVID jab, despite the mandates all being lifted, despite illegals flooding over the border. And we talk about this issue, why it needs to be a key issue for MAGA and Trump. We talk about immigration being so politicised. Then we talk about other things like fentanyl, the drug issue that's happening in America, how it has blighted American society. And then we end up talking to Tera about her great expertise and understanding of geopolitical events. She's travelled to Afghanistan, Iraq, to many war-torn countries by herself with Michelle Bachmann, but also with USAID and she shares that understanding of geopolitical issues.  Tera Dahl, it is wonderful to have you with us today. Thank you so much for your time.  (Tera Dahl) Well, thank you so much for having me, Peter. It is great to be with you.  Not at all. For the viewers, Tera and I, I met Tera back when I was over at CNP, actually, on the East Coast. We had a nice catch up over lunch, connected by a mutual friend, but Tera, former Chief of Staff for Congresswoman, Michelle Bachmann, and she put us in touch with Michelle. We've had Michelle on twice, talking about education and about the WHO, and Tera is former Deputy Chief of Staff, National Security Council. I'm going to stop there because Tera, your brief is large and your background is vast. Could I, before we get into the topic on immigration and wider, can I ask you just to take a moment and introduce yourself. Yeah, absolutely. So I got into politics when I was in college. I started volunteering with Michelle Bachmann, who was a state senator at the time in Minnesota. She was my representative. I was at St. Cloud State University, and I heard her speak, and I just had tears rolled down my eyes. I didn't know if I was a Democrat. I didn't know if I was a Republican at that time, but I knew when I heard Michelle Bachmann speak that it resonated in my heart, and I wanted to support her candidacy for U.S. Congress. So I signed up as a volunteer and just started, you know, calling people, doing phone calls, doing door knocking, doing mailing. And then I eventually moved to D.C. when Michelle got elected and became, started very, just staff assistant, and worked my way up to senior advisor for Congressman Bachmann and really focusing on terrorism. She sat on the House Intel Committee, and so I did mostly the national security and the foreign policy for her. And that's really when I started getting involved with what was going on with the war on terrorism. I spent time over in Afghanistan. I spent time in Iraq with the American Red Cross serving our American troops during that period. Michelle was so amazing. She would let me leave for six months to go volunteer with the American Red Cross in Iraq, come back, work for her. Then I would go to Afghanistan and come back, and she would bring me back in again. So I just had opportunities to really, to see first-hand what was going on, on the ground over in the wars. In the war zones. And I also then, after leaving Michelle's office, I spent time during the Arab Spring under President Obama. And that's where I really, my eyes were very much open to just the false narratives that were coming out of the mainstream media. That's how I got involved with journalism. I never planned on writing. I happened to be overseas in Egypt during the counter revolution, when you had 30 million Egyptians go to the street and ask for new elections against the Muslim Brotherhood government, and so I happened to be on the ground during that time, and I saw how CNN was handling it, New York Times, Washington Post, and I said, this is not what, the reality on the ground is not what is being written by our mainstream media, and that was impacting policy. They were using the articles and the media coverage to be able to impact policy, and so that's how I got involved in journalism. I ended up going back to Northern Iraq during the in the war against ISIS. I spent time with the Libyans who were in exile in Egypt. I went to Syria, had gone to Nigeria. So I've just done a lot on the ground, which has really impacted how I have really pushed back then against really trying to write the truth, and countering that false narrative from the mainstream media. But then I went into the 2016 Trump campaign and National Security Council transition team. I went into the White House as General Kellogg's Deputy Chief of staff for the National Security Council. And eventually at the last year of the Trump administration, I was over at USAID as senior advisor in the Conflict Prevention and Stabilization Bureau and working on the women's security issues and the conflict prevention over at USAID. Tell us about USAID. That's fascinating and something I know very little about as a Brit. Tell us about that.  Well USAID I think has really started out as a good organization, a good concept, but I think what's really happened right now over at USAID, especially after working there, I've seen just a lot of the issues, a lot of the, way that we spend money is being misspent and it's not really in the national security or American interests. And so I could really go down USAID and foreign funding in general, and I think the big question to ask, and I think I would argue, is foreign funding constitutional? I think that's changed a lot. I think we're spending a lot of money on foreign funding that we should not be spending. And I think a big contrast is President Trump. President Trump has been very outspoken on that and very much using economic leverage for diplomacy, whereas I think right now we're giving a lot of money at USAID and it's going through USAID to people and areas that it's not being well spent for the betterment of America and I think what really happens with USAID is it's almost like you create a problem and then we give USAID more money to solve that problem that we've already created. So I think you could really get into the funds and how it's spent and there needs to be a lot of oversight at USAID and I guess if I could give an opinion on the foreign funding, I think we really need to dismantle USAID in general and put it under another agency and another department because the money isn't being well spent. And you're not really seeing the return on investment. If you give money, even a taxpayer dollar, that's taxpayer dollars, what's your return on that investment? I don't think you're seeing that. Well, we'll maybe touch on that in a little bit, but if I want to maybe start on immigration, I'd put a piece together basically with a number of mutual friends behind the scenes helping that, and it was this time for Republicans to champion the rights of legal law-abiding immigrants and stop the green card jab mandates. Maybe I can ask you what is the, we've had Jaeson Jones and you were amazing on connecting us with Jaeson and he was great talking about the southern border and the issues there. But immigration, I guess, how has immigration become so politicised and what is the situation at the moment? I think it really has become politicised and it's sad because what's happening is that you're actually under this Biden administration, they're weaponizing the, immigration system. And when I say that, I mean, they're using, they're bringing in all the illegal immigrants, and I believe they're doing it for their purposes, for votes. And instead of supporting legal immigration, this isn't about immigration. This is about legal immigration versus illegal immigration. And you wrote an excellent piece, Peter, on this. And the debate needs to be, especially with the Republicans, has to be on the illegal immigration versus legal immigration. I think we're not against immigration. No one's against immigration, but you have to go through the ports of entry and you have to do it the legal way. And I think that's what you're seeing right now under this administration is they're allowing hundreds of thousands, millions of illegal immigrants into the United States right now, which is look at the fentanyl that's causing over 100,000 deaths every single year. You're looking at the crime rate that has gone up. I feel like every community in the United States, I think is seeing and feeling the impact of the illegal immigration that is coming under the Biden administration. You're feeling it in neighbourhoods that you would never suspect you would see it in. You're seeing more crime, more people that are on drugs. I see it in my neighbourhood. I see it everywhere I go, the impact of the Biden administration's illegal immigration policies. And I think it's impacting, Not only are we losing thousands of Americans because of fentanyl, but our hospitals are being overrun, which is going to increase our health insurance and our access to healthcare. Our education system is being overrun. We're having to pay as American taxpayers for these illegal immigrants who are coming in illegally. And I think that's the big debate. And like you said, Peter, in your article, just to touch on that is, what's going on too is the vaccination requirements with the illegal immigrants that are coming in, there's no requirement for them to be vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine. They don't have to be. So you're having hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants coming in that are not vaccinated, and the Biden administration seems to be completely okay with that. Not only are they illegally entering the United States, but they're not being required to get a COVID-19 vaccine. But now compare that to what is happening with the legal immigrants who are trying to go through the process legally, who want to contribute to the United States, who want to better our society. And go through the process, and get the green card, and say the pledge, and assimilate into our nation. Not integrate, assimilate into America. And they're being required to get the COVID vaccine. They have to choose between health, as you greatly said in your piece, Peter, they have to choose between health and freedom. And they shouldn't have to do that. And I think that people are not realizing that. I don't think the Republicans, I don't think Congress, I don't think the American people realize, they think that the Biden administration removed that COVID-19 vaccine requirement, but they didn't. They lifted it almost everywhere else, but these, illegal immigrants who are coming into the United States, and you could say, well, why would they do that? What benefit would that be for the Biden administration to not allow illegal immigrants to be required to have the vaccine, but they're mandating it on the legal immigrants who are coming here and going through the process that no one else is doing. They could just run through the southern border and get in like all the other illegal immigrants, but they're going through it the right way. And they're being required to do the vaccine. Well, what benefit is that? Well, I would say because those legal immigrants go through a process where they have to know the constitution, they have to know American history, they have to know the Pledge of Allegiance. They want to be here. They understand what freedom is. They understand what America means. And they're doing this and it takes years and years in a very long process to get through, and they go through it and they appreciate America, probably will vote Republican. So you have legal immigrants who probably will be voting Republican, and they're required to get the vaccine, where the illegal immigrants, probably majority will vote Democrat. And I think that is ultimately why you're seeing this administration completely do treasonous acts and policy. I would say completely treasonous not obeying the law not abiding by the Constitution with their immigration policies, so it's an issue. That's not being highlighted I'm very grateful that you wrote that article Peter and I think a lot of people are not aware of that and it's an issue That we really need to drive to the forefront especially heading into the 2024 elections I think Republicans really need to take on the issue and really say this is about illegal immigration and legal immigration. Legal immigration and illegal immigration. That's what it is. And there's legal ways to come into the United States. You can go through the ports of entry and you can go through the process and get your green card. And that's the way that we need to be doing it. And we need to shut down any illegal ways to come into the United States. It's weird looking at it as a European, as a Brit. And we have absolutely failed in our integration via immigration across Europe. And we've seen the riots in France, which show that we have segregation and not any integration. And America's kind of prided itself on that integration of people coming from all over, under one flag, under one constitution, under one belief system, and then coming together as Americans. And we have never really had that in Europe. We have allowed separate communities to exist side by side as ghettos. It just goes against the whole American dream, really. Yeah, absolutely it does. And I know, like, let's look at France right now, what has just recently happened in France, and look at their immigration policies and what it's done to that country. You know, like, we have to have legal means to come into the United States, but we also have to protect our borders. And I think Europe is a perfect example. I did, when I was doing my master's degree at Regent University, I spent time over at Oxford University, and one of our classes was really studying the European immigration models and looking down each country and the different countries and their different policies. And the concept that we were really looking into is, are the immigrants assimilating into European cultures or are they integrating? And that's the key question. Are they assimilating? Are they adapting to the culture, the constitution? Are they abiding by the constitution? Are they becoming American? That's what, when you used to to come to the United States, it was you become American, right? You become that culture. You have to abide by that constitution. And we're not seeing that. And it was really interesting back in 2007 when I spent that time at Oxford University studying the integration versus assimilation of immigrants in Europe and seeing now where that trajectory has gone and the problems that you have in England, the problems that France is facing. Look at all the immigrants that are coming over in Italy just recently as well. And a lot of them, I think, are not Italian-looking people, if you've seen the videos. They're chanting Allah Akbar when they're coming off those boats, and if you've seen the videos. So it's a threat that we need to do. It's for your own countries. They have to be able to have a system, an immigration system, where you are assimilating into that country. And that's why, like, when you have legal immigration in the United States, you have to study the constitution. You have to pledge allegiance to the United States of America. You understand the country that you're coming into and you're saying, I am going to live under this constitution, right? You're gonna contribute to American society. And it's a vast difference between the illegal immigrants who are crossing on the Southern border into the United States and in Europe as well. So it's a huge issue for 2024. And I think you're seeing the candidates right now in the United States, like President Trump in 2016, that is what he ran on. He ran on the wall. He ran on building a wall. And at that time, a lot of people weren't even focusing on immigration. They were looking at the border as immigration and immigration only, and not through the lens of national security. And I would argue that we need to be looking at the immigration issue, not through legal and illegal immigration, but also it's a national security issue right now. We could have met up 15 years ago then, as you were around the corner in Oxford, but anyway, it's taken 15 more years. The issue of, because this should be a perfect issue for MAGA and Trump, but I separate that from the Republicans, because the Republicans are generally far away from MAGA as an institution, And we've had guests on before talking about Trump, I guess, redefining the Republican Party in his image of putting America first. But that America first policy, I guess is key. And it fits in perfectly with the immigration issue. And I think Trump last time talked a lot about the border, talked a lot about building the wall. But this issue of actually those who go through legally, because those who try and break into your country, those are the last people you want involved. Yet those who go through the process, who do things legally, who study what has to be done as a law-abiding citizen and go through those steps, those are exactly the people you want because you know they will fit into society, they will do what has to be done, they will care for their communities, they will actually care for their neighbours. Those are the people that actually kind of want to fit into that American dream. So this issue of legal immigrants getting a fair treatment is like a red meat issue really to MAGA and Trump.  Yeah absolutely and I don't think you're seeing the Republicans take hold of that narrative as they should be. That's why your article is very good because you're laying it out. And to be honest, this was a new issue to me too. I just took it for granted that when the Biden administration lifted all of the requirements on the COVID-19 vaccination, I assumed that would include all legal immigrants. And this was something that reading your article, it was new to me to be able to, that I didn't know that that was, that they were withholding green cards for those people that have probably taken years and years to be able to finally get that green card. It takes a lot of work, it takes a lot of time, and the process is not easy to get that green card. And when they finally can get it, now they're saying, the Biden administration is now saying you either have to get that COVID-19 vaccination or you don't get your green card. So, that's a big issue. It's a big issue for Republicans to take hold of that and to say that we should have to make these legal immigrants who have done the right thing by going through the legal process, it makes them a very small number, percentage of those who are coming illegally into the United States, you know, when they had the chance to come illegally with everybody else, but they're doing it the right way and they should be honoured and they should be to be able to get that green card 100% without any requirement to get that COVID-19 vaccine, especially when we're seeing all of the negative effects from the COVID-19 vaccine. I've seen people in my family, my loved ones, my relatives, who after the COVID vaccine, we lost them. And so if that was a situation where I had a loved one that had to choose between getting a green card and getting the vaccine, you can't make that decision. There's no way that you could force me, myself, to get that COVID-19 vaccine, just because of the health risk of that. So that is something I don't think Republicans understand. I don't think people realize that that is going on. So your piece was really good, Peter, to really highlight it because I think a lot of times just bringing things into transparency, when you shine a light on issues, it does so much more because then people understand what is going on. And I think this is an issue they were trying to just hide under the rug because they made it look like that it was lifted and it's not.  Well I pay credit to my ghost-writer but if I can ask how does that fit in with the with the Republicans, possibly RINO, you can touch on that, but having partial control of Capitol Hill. I'm assuming that immigration issues lie solidly with the White House. But please correct me. So what is the situation, how much noise and, well less noise, but how much movement can actual Republicans on Capitol Hill make on this issue of a fair treatment for legals as opposed to illegals?  I think Congress, you know, we have the three different branches of government, but our legislative branch is the most powerful branch because it's closest to the people, right? And it holds the power of the purse. And our founding fathers created a legislative branch that way to be the most influential and powerful because it is closest to the people. And that's why it does hold the power of the purse. And when you have the power of the purse, you can leverage that, and you can do a lot of, you have a lot of influence. For a perfect example, even when I was over at USAID, when we wanted to be able to cut some of the programs that were not benefiting any kind of American interest in any way. You know, we had to go, we got calls from the Senate, we got calls from the Congress, even though it was under a Republican Trump administration, Congress still had leverage, the Senate still had leverage, so I think even with immigration, even though it would be, we have Biden in the White House, there's a lot that Congress can do, I think for one thing, bring transparency to the issue, hold a hearing on it, hold a congressional hearing it, look into it, Look at all the identify all the cases right now where green cards for legal immigrants are being held up because of the vaccine requirement. That's something that Congress can definitely do. You can, have a subcommittee look into it immediately starting today to start making phone calls and start tracking all of the legal immigrants who are coming into the United States who are being required to get vaccines if they're being held up from their green cards. That is something they can do right now. That's a debate that's going on right now with the defence authorization bill. Congress is saying that you can't do a lot of the things that the Pentagon wants to do, but they're holding it up. So they have a lot of leverage right now. There's a lot of that's what's going on with the Pentagon too, with the vaccine requirements where the Pentagon had fired thousands of servicemen because they didn't get the vaccine. And now they're at a point where where they're pushing back and they're filing lawsuits saying that they were illegally, unconstitutionally let go from the military and they want to serve again. So that debate right now with their vaccine requirements is going on right now. So this is a great, just another example of the Biden administration overstepping their boundaries and overstepping what they can constitutionally do, which you've seen them do over and over. Every single day they're breaking the constitution, every single day they're breaking the law, but hold them accountable and push back and say, no, you can't do that. You don't have, you cannot require the COVID-19 vaccine for the legal immigrants. I think that is something they definitely can do. You mentioned fentanyl. Let me, I want to ask you about the the drug issue, a little bit off topic, but I was, I've never seen drug abuse as visible until I went to the U.S. last year, and that was predominantly in L.A., where sadly I don't think I'd ever want to go again on the west coast. And just people out of it, wandering through the streets, zombie-like status, people lying all over the pavements, needles everywhere. I've literally never seen anything like that in all my travels on nearly every European country many times. Tell us about this fentanyl issue because it does seem to be completely out of control. And we've had, maybe in the last year, we've had UK media doing large reports, large stories, not only in newspapers but on TV, actually reporting the literally out of control situation of drug abuse in the US. Is that a fair assessment, kind of, what are your thoughts as an American to the current situation. Yeah, I think you're seeing the impact, and you're seeing it every single area. You're hearing it from people who have lost loved ones. It's becoming way too common where somebody's son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister was killed by fentanyl, from fentanyl, and it's happening too often, and it's too close to home for most Americans. And you see it, even like I was saying. You're seeing the crime and the impact of the illegal immigration policies under the Biden administration in your local community. But a lot of that, like I've seen a change in my area where I live in Florida. I've seen a change just from last summer. We're seeing a lot of people on the streets that are on, you know, there are on drugs, they are hunched over and you can tell that and they are, you know, they're homeless, they're on drugs. You're seeing that and it's impacting people no matter where you live. Doesn't matter if you live in the most elite neighbourhood your area will be impacted by the increase of fentanyl in the United States and it's the largest number of death, more people die from fentanyl than any other thing between 18, and 34 years old in the United States I think it's around 34, 40 years and younger but that's the largest the cause of death for Americans in the United States. So it has to get, we have to be able to address it and I think there's a lot more that can be done, Ultimately, I know you had Jaeson Jones on here. He's the number one expert on the cartels on the southern border. You can't get anyone better than Jaeson Jones. But he talks a lot about the cartels and that's where you have to really be able to go after the cartels. Designate them as a foreign terrorist organization and get to the core underlining cause of what is allowing all this fentanyl to come into the United States and go after it and basically you know cut the snake's head off and that's where you're gonna see, be able to really address the fentanyl issue, but it has to be addressed. You never know who's going to be impacted, your closest friends. I know people close to me who lost a loved one because of fentanyl, and it is a big issue. And I'm surprised to hear that you saw that the most when you came to the United States. And that says a lot. And why is that? Is that a mixture of, you've got open borders, completely open borders, even in so-called Republican states. You have, I guess, lax punishments, and you have a number of states legalising drugs higher and higher level. I guess you've got lack of church involvement, and both of us are strong Christians, and the church really should be taking a role in some of these issues which damage society and they're not. Or is it just simply politicians engaged in other things, busy with more pressing issues for them than this? How has it slipped in to American society? Well, I think, number one, open borders. I mean, our borders are completely open. We have no operational control at the borders. It's basically run by the cartels. Operational control is by the cartels. So we definitely have to get control of our borders. That is number one. But number two, I'm glad you hit on, Peter, the role of the church, especially in American society, right? We have basically self-rule government, where we want a limited government that stays within their jurisdictions. And I'm always, as the American way, government's not going to solve your problems. Government needs to get out of the way. Government needs to be able to create kind of like a sidewalk. They need to be able to create space so that people can live freely and just protect that space. And so that's where like the role of the church comes in. You can never change. Government can't change people's hearts. Government is not going to be the solution for America. God is going to be the solution for America because only God can change the hearts of the American people. And that's what the founders believed. And that's why they created our system of government that way, is that the government is meant to protect the church, right? So that we can have that freedom of religion, and government will protect our freedom of worship. Wherever religion we choose, government is to protect that. That is a right that Americans have in the United States, and that government cannot interfere in that. And so that's where the role of the church does need to step in. Government can't fix it. Yes, we do need to secure our borders, absolutely. But on the other hand, exactly what you said, the church needs to step in, absolutely needs to step in, and we need to be able to have, if you look at our statistics for those that go to church and believe in God, it's sad, and we're seeing a decline in the United States of that. But I also believe that we're on the greatest verge of a revival as well. I really do think that as well, and that's what ultimately is going to solve the fentanyl problem. We can only do what we can do policy-wise, but ultimately God has to change our hearts too. Government is meant to create the situation so that we have the ability to be able to make those changes, the ability to be able to do what we can do and not interfere in that. So we do definitely need to have the Church step up into helping with programs for fentanyl and just getting to know God, getting to know the Lord, having a personal relationship with Him that's gonna transform your heart.  100% nothing beats a personal relationship with Jesus. That changes a lot.  No, absolutely.  Tera, can I just ask you personally, you've had, we've touched on, immigration, we've touched on the drugs issue and you, I guess, as someone who has been in Congress, served with a Congressman, your time in the White House, then you've also had in media with, certainly in the Breitbart days and more recently with Real America Voice. So you've got a perspective from the policy side but also from the media side. How do you with those two hats, how do you look at what's happening and what are the issues which you, as an American personally are most concerned about. I think that's really key points because those are the two key, It's policy and the media drives policy, And I really saw that as I mentioned earlier in the show Peter, the reason I even got into journalism was because I was on the ground in Egypt, during the counter revolution in 2013 when you had 30 million Egyptians go to the streets. to remove the Muslim Brotherhood from government and CNN covered the Muslim Brotherhood, the terrorists who were tied to Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations who were committing violence on the street. It was very similar to what happened with BLM here in the United States back in 2020 when you had CNN and you had mainstream media standing in front of burning buildings saying, You know, here's a BLM, you know, protest, but it's mostly peaceful when you had the building burning behind you. Well, that's what I saw when I was on the ground over in the Middle East during the Arab Spring. The mainstream media was completely lying and driving a false narrative. And that false narrative was impacting our policy. That's what the Pentagon watched. That's what members of Congress watched. That's what impacted the Obama administration. Then when they came out and they were going to cut aid to Egypt for removing a terrorist organization who was in power, who was terrorizing and destroying Egypt. And so I saw the impact that media has on our policy. So when I was coming from a policy field heading, you know, I had worked in Congress, I had been on the presidential campaign with Michelle Bachmann during the 2012 presidential election, and coming from that field I saw how much media matters. When you give a false narrative, that is what they use to make their policy. And another perfect example that I went through that same way where they use the media to impact their policy was the Mueller investigation. I worked in the White House. I came in the first day of day one. I worked at the National Security Council. And I remember watching, I was in my office and I remember watching CNN and they said they were launching the special counsel, the Mueller investigation, the special counsel on President Trump and his ties to Russia. And I remember thinking, you know, that Russia, like, you know, obviously that's not gonna have anything to do with me. There's no impact there." Well, I was wrong because the Mueller investigation actually, it really impacted anyone who served on the campaign, anyone who went into the transition team. And when we look back at that, how did the Mueller investigation start? The Mueller investigation started because they were leaking false narratives, false articles in the media. And then what happened? Well, the FBI was the one leaking those articles and then they launched an investigation using those articles. So what's happened today in our culture and Europe and England, all over CNN International, all mainstream media, and you have it just as bad as we have it. And thank you for doing what you do because you're a voice of truth against the mainstream media who's just projecting a false narrative, but that false narrative is actually a political arm of the Democratic Party. That's what's happening. The media has turned into the political arm of the Democratic Party. So they create a narrative, or they follow with a narrative. And so I really was able to see the impact that the mainstream media has on our policy. When I went overseas during the Arab Spring under the Obama administration, I was on the ground in Egypt when you had 30 million Egyptians come out to the streets to call for early elections against the Muslim Brotherhood regime and the Morsi regime, who were tied to Al-Qaeda, who were committing terrorist acts, who were persecuting Christians, who were making women wear the hijab and cut their hair and the Egyptians said we've had enough and well what I saw was CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, all reported completely on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood and they ignored the 30 million Egyptians who were in a line, who stood with American values, like they wanted to have freedom, they wanted to remove a terrorist organizations who we were still at war with, America was still at war with in Afghanistan and Iraq, we were still losing American troops to Al Qaeda-linked terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet the media was portraying it that it was a military coup, that was not the truth, and that impacted our policy, where then the Biden administration wanted to cut aid to Egypt. That was what was happening, and I saw it on the ground, and I thought that's when I started writing. That's when I started speaking out because I saw the impact that the media has and nobody else was on the ground. No journalists were there. I was the only journalist basically pushing back that was on the ground with real footage with the truth to say this isn't what's happening, this isn't the truth and that's going to impact our policy. And that's what really began my journey where I went from all these different Arab Spring countries to be able to really get on the ground and to be able to really see first-hand what was happening because I saw how important it was because I came from the policy field and I saw that they were watching CNN at the Pentagon, they were watching Al Jazeera at the Pentagon, and that was impacting their policy. And so what I did then after that, because I saw how much it matters for people to see first-hand and get the truth, we had delegations. We sponsored delegation after delegation after delegation that included members of the mainstream media, that included former generals, people that had a voice that they could see for themselves. You see it yourself, and then you go back and you say what you saw. But don't listen to The New York Times, don't listen to The Washington Post. You see it first-hand, because this is going to impact America's national security for, a very long time. And that was prior to the ISIS taking over in the ISIS caliphate that was prior to that the Islamic caliphate that happened in Iraq and Syria. So just imagine if what had happened, if people didn't push back from the Arab Spring. You would have had Egypt fall to the Islamist. You would have had Libya fall. You would have had Syria fall. Tunisia would have fallen So just think of how different that policy would have been had the mainstream media had their way, had the Obama administration had their way. But the point is, is that I've seen it first-hand, the impact, and when I worked for President Trump on the Trump campaign, then following that, my time on the ground with the Arab Spring, I saw the same actors coming against President Trump, and that was before fake news was fake news. So I was calling out fake news before any, before other people were labelling it fake news, and I saw how the New York Times would write about Trump. And I saw how Washington Post would write about Trump and CNN, and that was all new. Like at that time, people didn't quite realize how the media had really turned in to a political arm of the Democratic Party, right? It was, we didn't really tie that together, that it was so strong, because that really happened, I think, under the Obama administration, is when you just had this complete turnover to the Democratic Party. They just used the Democratic Party's talking points. You know, there's really no freedom or liberty within the mainstream media anymore. They basically just go off their political talking points. I think the DNC might just email them their talking points of the day and that's what they use because they all have the same points on every single show. And so that's where I saw like when when the same people were coming after Trump I thought yes he's the right guy, he's the right candidate, and this is the person that I want to support. And then we saw just how fake news completely into the Trump administration, I dealt with it over and over again, the fake news and just how they are, they're so, they're so manipulating the American public. But thank you for doing what you do because you are a voice of truth. And I'm sure that's a similar story with the need for having real, true media. It matters. Oh, it does, and we lack it. The US, I think over there, stateside, you've got much more established alternative media sources. We are still playing catch-up massively. But just to finish off, can I just ask you again on that international side, on that. You've got a grasp of geopolitics of the international side, and we may in the UK mock the Americans for never venturing beyond the borders of the US, not having passports, all of that. And yet, being the world's policeman, although we may mock it, I think in Europe, Europe relies on America being a strong voice of reason because the EU don't have the ability, don't have the capability, don't have the money, don't have the organizational ability, everything. They just don't have it. So the EU, Europe as a whole and the UK look to America for buying that stability and God forbid we have China take that role which looks like what is going to happen and watching the Afghanistan debacle, you kind of shake your head. Where does it leave the U.S. at the moment for being that voice of reason, that moral framework, that world's policeman in effect throughout the world? Well I think Afghanistan is a perfect example right now. I spent time in Afghanistan, I spent time out with the Marines in Helmand province. I've seen, I've have been at the bedside of our troops that have come back into the hospitals. So I've been there, I've seen it. And to see what happened in Afghanistan under this administration is completely treasonous. There was no reason that we needed to abruptly depart Afghanistan the way that we did. No, we should have kept Bagram. I think we basically gave Bagram over an airfield right to China. And it was a very strategic location, Bagram. It's by China. By Iran, it's by Afghanistan. It was a very strategic location for us to have that airfield. And that is something I know that under a Trump administration, that's the difference that you see between these administrations. So the Biden administration completely, that was, it was it was treasonous in my opinion to leave it after all the investment that the United States has done over 20 years and we basically handed it over to China, Russia and Iran. That's where we're seeing it and I think what's happening though is you really have a continuation of the Obama presidency right now in the Biden presidency. So they're continuing and this is according to Obama's own words when President Biden took office in a New York Times article, President Obama said that 90% of the people working for Biden are from his staff, are from his administration, and they're just continuing the policies from the Obama administration. And what you saw under the Obama administration was really a policy of leading from behind. We were showing weakness. We were emboldening our enemies and alienating our allies. And it was like that was the foreign policy that we saw under the Obama administration. And it's the same policies that are being under the Biden administration. And it's not a good time for America when we look at, I mean, it's a hopeful time because I think we're looking at 2024, we have the Republicans in Congress. I think we're seeing, there's a lot of hope. I think we have more religious freedom than we've ever had with some of these Supreme Court cases. Like we have a lot of amazing things happening in our country, but we have a lot of dangerous things as well, especially that's coming in from our southern border. And when you have a weak administration and you're portraying a sense of weakness, look at what happened when Russia invaded Ukraine. That happened immediately when the Biden administration took power. That never would have happened if the Biden administration didn't pull out of Afghanistan and portray a sense of weakness. That's what happened. They showed weakness. Russia took advantage of it and went into Ukraine. And now what are we looking at? We're probably looking at China invading Taiwan. And the next threat that we're going to look at, I believe, is China going to invade Taiwan. And that's going to critically impact the United States at home, it's gonna impact Europe, it's gonna impact the world. But I think that's the threat that we're facing right now, and we're looking at the threat coming in from the southern border. We've seen a 900% increase in Chinese nationals coming through the southern border. That's almost 10,000 Chinese nationals, and a majority of those, out of those almost 10,000, 8,200 of them are Chinese military-aged men. Coming through our southern border just in the last fiscal year. So that's about the last seven months where we used to see very low numbers. We used to be like around, I think, believe years prior, 100, 200, and now we're seeing almost 10,000 in this fiscal year already. And so the threat from China at our southern border is as a big... Cuba, let's look at Cuba, they're building a spy base right now in Cuba, 80 miles away from Florida, where I live right now. So we're seeing this emboldening China right now, and I just don't think that if you don't have a strong defence like Ronald Reagan, right, peace through strength, build a strong military so that you deter your adversaries. And that's not what we're doing, that's not what we're prioritizing. And so when I think when we look at Ukraine right now, you really have China wanting us to be involved in Ukraine because they're going through our supplies or using our resources so that when they can take our eye off the ball of them and focus on Ukraine, and then they'll have an opportunity to invade Taiwan. But it's all because the administration is portraying this sense of weakness. And you can't do that. America is the number one strongest nation in the world, and we cannot portray weakness because when we do, it impacts everybody. And that's where I think you're seeing these other allies, especially our Arab allies, are starting to look under the Obama administration, when we really abandoned them, we abandoned them and they're looking at China and they're looking at Russia. And so we're pushing our allies towards our enemies and that policy is just a trajectory in the wrong direction. And so I'm just really hoping for 2024 and really hoping that we have a new administration to steer us in the right direction. 100% and I got my Trump hat behind me so I've nailed my colours to the mast. Not that it matters, I'm not an American, so I don't have a right to vote. Tera, it's been wonderful having you on. I really appreciate your insights on all of these issues. And I've enjoyed watching you on Frank Gaffney, on War Room with Steve Bannon. Are you going to be on our screens more often then? Well, let's see, I'm not sure.  I hope so. Tera, thank you so much for being with us today. Thank you, Peter. God bless you.  

In Episode 121, Margueritte Aozasa, UCLA Women's Soccer Head Coach, former Stanford Women's Soccer Assistant Coach, and former Santa Clara University Defender/Midfielder, talks with Paul and Phil about her incredible first season at UCLA, during which she became the first coach to win a National Championship in her first year as a head coach, what mission and personal “why” drives her to do what she does, building trust with her team, healthy conflict prevention and resolution, how her and her husband “coach” each other, what she was thinking in the final minutes of the National Championship game, whether college soccer has a place in professional and national team player development, and a whole lot of great leadership nuggets. No doubt you'll love this fun conversation with an incredible coach! Specifically, Margueritte discusses: ·      Her personal story, including how she grew her passion for soccer, coaching, and leadership, and how she got to be where she is today (3:40) ·      Her transition from Stanford assistant coach to UCLA head coach, and the lessons we can learn from her journey (7:29) ·      The importance of head coaches mentoring their assistants to flourish in their program and beyond (11:35) ·      Her personal why/mission statement and how she is living it out (16:43) ·      How she leads herself and pours into her players' leadership development as a head coach (18:49) ·      A couple defining moments in her life and how they impacted her development (22:00) ·      A few coaches that deeply impacted her life, what set them apart, and what life and leadership lessons we can learn from them (28:57) ·      How she keeps a team full of top players content and at their best when they aren't playing, or even making the travel squad (36:16) ·      How she builds trust between her and her staff and players, and among the players (40:15) ·      How to deal with conflict before it gets out of hand and starts impacting the players and team (43:42) ·      The highs and lows of the current state of soccer in the US (46:35) ·      The place for the college game in the development of players at the professional and national team levels (51:00) ·      What she was actually thinking during the final minute of regulation of the National Championship game last year (it just might surprise you) (59:28) ·      How she has used lessons learned from sports in her marriage and other relationships (1:03:50) ·      A couple great book recommendations (1:06:01) Resources and Links from this Episode ·      Margueritte on Twitter - @margaozasa ·      Uncut Video of the Episode ·      HSEL Facebook Group ·      Warrior Way Soccer ·      Coaching the Bigger Game Program ·      Phil's email for DISC Training ·      Net Gain: Inside the Beautiful Game's Analytics Revolution, by Ryan O'Hanlon ·      Quiet Leadership: Winning Hearts, Minds, and Matches, by Carlo Ancelotti

Develop a culture of peace within your community or organization with Peacebuilding and Partners SARL (+41-767-938307)! Call them today or visit https://peacebuildingpartners.com to find out how they can help you with proven conflict-resolution strategies! Peacebuilding and Partners Sarl 14 Grand-Rue c/o Fidurolle SA, Rolle, Vaud 1180, Switzerland Website https://peacebuildingpartners.com Email office@peacebuildingpartners.com

Tatiana Carayannis and Thomas G. Weiss' book The "Third" United Nations: How a Knowledge Ecology Helps the UN Think (Oxford UP, 2021) is about the Third UN: the ecology of supportive non-state actors—intellectuals, scholars, consultants, think tanks, NGOs, the for-profit private sector, and the media—that interacts with the intergovernmental machinery of the First UN (member states) and the Second UN (staff members of international secretariats) to formulate and refine ideas and decision-making at key junctures in policy processes. Some advocate for particular ideas, others help analyze or operationalize their testing and implementation; many thus help the UN “think.” Dr. Tatiana Carayannis is director of the Social Science Research Council's Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (CPPF), Understanding Violent Conflict (UVC) program, and China-Africa Knowledge Project. Prof. Thomas G. Weiss is Presidential Professor of Political Science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Director Emeritus of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. Sally Sharif is Simons Foundation Canada Post-Doctoral Fellow at the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser University. She was previously a Political Affairs Analyst at the UN Headquarters. Her most recent co-authored paper is “Proto-insurgencies, State Repression, and Civil War Onset.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Tatiana Carayannis and Thomas G. Weiss' book The "Third" United Nations: How a Knowledge Ecology Helps the UN Think (Oxford UP, 2021) is about the Third UN: the ecology of supportive non-state actors—intellectuals, scholars, consultants, think tanks, NGOs, the for-profit private sector, and the media—that interacts with the intergovernmental machinery of the First UN (member states) and the Second UN (staff members of international secretariats) to formulate and refine ideas and decision-making at key junctures in policy processes. Some advocate for particular ideas, others help analyze or operationalize their testing and implementation; many thus help the UN “think.” Dr. Tatiana Carayannis is director of the Social Science Research Council's Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (CPPF), Understanding Violent Conflict (UVC) program, and China-Africa Knowledge Project. Prof. Thomas G. Weiss is Presidential Professor of Political Science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Director Emeritus of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. Sally Sharif is Simons Foundation Canada Post-Doctoral Fellow at the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser University. She was previously a Political Affairs Analyst at the UN Headquarters. Her most recent co-authored paper is “Proto-insurgencies, State Repression, and Civil War Onset.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Tatiana Carayannis and Thomas G. Weiss' book The "Third" United Nations: How a Knowledge Ecology Helps the UN Think (Oxford UP, 2021) is about the Third UN: the ecology of supportive non-state actors—intellectuals, scholars, consultants, think tanks, NGOs, the for-profit private sector, and the media—that interacts with the intergovernmental machinery of the First UN (member states) and the Second UN (staff members of international secretariats) to formulate and refine ideas and decision-making at key junctures in policy processes. Some advocate for particular ideas, others help analyze or operationalize their testing and implementation; many thus help the UN “think.” Dr. Tatiana Carayannis is director of the Social Science Research Council's Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (CPPF), Understanding Violent Conflict (UVC) program, and China-Africa Knowledge Project. Prof. Thomas G. Weiss is Presidential Professor of Political Science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Director Emeritus of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. Sally Sharif is Simons Foundation Canada Post-Doctoral Fellow at the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser University. She was previously a Political Affairs Analyst at the UN Headquarters. Her most recent co-authored paper is “Proto-insurgencies, State Repression, and Civil War Onset.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Tatiana Carayannis and Thomas G. Weiss' book The "Third" United Nations: How a Knowledge Ecology Helps the UN Think (Oxford UP, 2021) is about the Third UN: the ecology of supportive non-state actors—intellectuals, scholars, consultants, think tanks, NGOs, the for-profit private sector, and the media—that interacts with the intergovernmental machinery of the First UN (member states) and the Second UN (staff members of international secretariats) to formulate and refine ideas and decision-making at key junctures in policy processes. Some advocate for particular ideas, others help analyze or operationalize their testing and implementation; many thus help the UN “think.” Dr. Tatiana Carayannis is director of the Social Science Research Council's Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (CPPF), Understanding Violent Conflict (UVC) program, and China-Africa Knowledge Project. Prof. Thomas G. Weiss is Presidential Professor of Political Science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Director Emeritus of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. Sally Sharif is Simons Foundation Canada Post-Doctoral Fellow at the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser University. She was previously a Political Affairs Analyst at the UN Headquarters. Her most recent co-authored paper is “Proto-insurgencies, State Repression, and Civil War Onset.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Tatiana Carayannis and Thomas G. Weiss' book The "Third" United Nations: How a Knowledge Ecology Helps the UN Think (Oxford UP, 2021) is about the Third UN: the ecology of supportive non-state actors—intellectuals, scholars, consultants, think tanks, NGOs, the for-profit private sector, and the media—that interacts with the intergovernmental machinery of the First UN (member states) and the Second UN (staff members of international secretariats) to formulate and refine ideas and decision-making at key junctures in policy processes. Some advocate for particular ideas, others help analyze or operationalize their testing and implementation; many thus help the UN “think.” Dr. Tatiana Carayannis is director of the Social Science Research Council's Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (CPPF), Understanding Violent Conflict (UVC) program, and China-Africa Knowledge Project. Prof. Thomas G. Weiss is Presidential Professor of Political Science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Director Emeritus of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. Sally Sharif is Simons Foundation Canada Post-Doctoral Fellow at the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser University. She was previously a Political Affairs Analyst at the UN Headquarters. Her most recent co-authored paper is “Proto-insurgencies, State Repression, and Civil War Onset.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Tatiana Carayannis and Thomas G. Weiss' book The "Third" United Nations: How a Knowledge Ecology Helps the UN Think (Oxford UP, 2021) is about the Third UN: the ecology of supportive non-state actors—intellectuals, scholars, consultants, think tanks, NGOs, the for-profit private sector, and the media—that interacts with the intergovernmental machinery of the First UN (member states) and the Second UN (staff members of international secretariats) to formulate and refine ideas and decision-making at key junctures in policy processes. Some advocate for particular ideas, others help analyze or operationalize their testing and implementation; many thus help the UN “think.” Dr. Tatiana Carayannis is director of the Social Science Research Council's Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (CPPF), Understanding Violent Conflict (UVC) program, and China-Africa Knowledge Project. Prof. Thomas G. Weiss is Presidential Professor of Political Science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Director Emeritus of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies. Sally Sharif is Simons Foundation Canada Post-Doctoral Fellow at the School for International Studies at Simon Fraser University. She was previously a Political Affairs Analyst at the UN Headquarters. Her most recent co-authored paper is “Proto-insurgencies, State Repression, and Civil War Onset.” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this Dev Life edition of the Angular Plus Show Senior Engineer from Nx Dev Tools, Colum Ferry, joins the discussion to share ideas for how you can effectively prevent and resolve conflict on the job as a developer.LINKS:https://twitter.com/FerryColumhttps://dev.to/coly010https://colum-ferry.medium.com/The Blackstone Legacy - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BRDCPVXK?ref_=cm_sw_r_cp_ud_dp_88QQ0QWM20QP19CCMGBECONNECT WITH US:Colum Ferry - @FerryColumBrooke Avery - @jediBraveryPreston Lamb - @PrestonJLamb

TalkLP Host Amber Bradley sits down with RLPSA Keynote speaker Ryan Dowd, Chief Empathy Officer for Homeless Training Center.com to discuss Ryan's expert advice on dealing with the homeless at your organization.  Listen to this episode, sponsored by NAVCO, to gather some insight on the issue of homelessness and the best way to truly de-escalate situations....(spoiler alert: it starts with empathy).  Take a listen to also hear how the various make-up of the homeless population and why that matters when training your people PLUS the biggest mistake organizations make when dealing with the homeless (it's not what you think)! To learn more about NAVCO and it's many proactive solutions visit here!

Jill Morrison, Chair of the Human Rights Committee of the International Law Community, interviews Ramou Jallow, a national security LLM candidate at Georgetown University Law Center. They will explore strategies for conflict prevention and the impact of the pandemic on peace and security. Please note, the positions and opinions expressed by the speakers are strictly their own, and do not necessarily represent the views of their employers, nor those of the D.C. Bar, its Board of Governors or co-sponsoring Communities and organizations. Thank You to Our Sponsor! LawPay: Time is limited, but your success doesn't have to be. At LawPay, we are committed to helping you succeed while making the most of your valuable time. Try our simple secure online payment solution today, and you'll pay no monthly fee for a whole year! Learn more at lawpay.com/dcbar.

This episode focuses on global conflict prevention and resolution and we are joined by Comfort Ero, President and CEO of the International Crisis Group. The International Crisis Group provides independent analysis and advice on how to prevent, resolve and better manage deadly conflict, combining field research, analysis and engagement with policymakers across the world in order to effect change in crisis situations. Thank you for downloading this episode of the Do One Better Podcast. Visit our Knowledge Hub at Lidji.org for information on nearly 200 case studies and interviews with remarkable leaders in philanthropy, sustainability and social entrepreneurship.   

Sarah Cliffe is the director of New York University's Center on International Cooperation (CIC). Prior to that, she held several leadership positions at the World Bank and United Nations. Sarah pioneered the work on fragile and conflict-affected states at the World Bank, serving also as the Special Representative for the 2011 World Development Report on Conflict, Security, and Development. At the UN, she spearheaded efforts to help countries build civilian capacities to strengthen peacebuilding and post-conflict transitions. Sarah's vast experience ranges from countries as diverse as Afghanistan, Rwanda, South Africa, Indonesia, and Timor-Leste. She began her career in the United Kingdom and has degrees from Cambridge University and Columbia University. This episode is full of big questions and insightful answers from the very beginning.  To start, we speak to Sarah about her formative years, and how her early impressions of fragility and conflict were actually shaped by her upbringing in a mining town in Wales at a time of social upheaval in the United Kingdom. She also shares her perspectives on what communities at risk in the UK, South Africa, and Rwanda had in common – and why some were more resilient. Our conversation then turns more conceptual, as we take a look at how the insights of her work at the World Bank on conflict, security, and development can help us understand today's global fragility trends. We then explore in depth the big challenges on the world stage ahead of the UN's General Assembly meetings in September. How are the growing tensions between the US, Russia, and China affecting global governance, especially the UN? How has Russia's invasion of Ukraine divided the international community and what are the perspectives of developing countries? What factors have influenced responses to refugees from Ukraine and beyond? How is the future of multilateralism intertwined with domestic politics? And are there any silver linings to geopolitical fragmentation and the new Cold War between the US and China? We conclude on a high note, talking about reasons to be hopeful – listen to the episode to hear Sarah share many more insights into geopolitics, fragility, and the future of global governance.  We conclude on a high note, talking about hope and how history can give us reasons to be hopeful. Listen to the episode to hear Sarah share many more insights into geopolitics, fragility, and the future of global governance.  *****Sarah CliffeTwitter: https://twitter.com/sarah_cliffeThe Center on International Cooperation (CIC) at New York University: https://cic.nyu.edu/people/sarah-cliffe*****Mihaela Carstei, Paul M. Bisca, and Johan Bjurman Bergman co-host F-World: The Fragility Podcast. Twitter: https://twitter.com/fworldpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/fworldpodcast/Website: https://f-world.orgMusic: "Tornado" by Wintergatan. Many thanks to Wintergartan for allowing us to use their wonderful music! This track can be downloaded for free at www.wintergatan.net. *****EPISODE RESOURCES: World Bank. 2005. Low-Income Countries Under Stress: Update. Washington, DC: World Bank, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/458871468328174684/pdf/34789.pdfWorld Bank. 2011. World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/4389Sarah Cliffe and Karina Gerlach. Development Competition is Heating Up: China's Global Development Initiative, the G7 Partnership for Infrastructure, and the Global Alliance on Food Security. New York: Center on International Cooperation, July 22, 2022, https://cic.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/development_competition_is_heating_up_july_2022.pdfSarah Cliffe et all. How to Maintain International Unity on Ukraine (Part II). New York: Center on International Cooperation, May 31, 2022, https://cic.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/what_needs_to_be_done_to_maintain_international_unity_on_ukraine_part_ii.pdfSarah Cliffe et all. Recent UN Votes on Ukraine: What Needs to be Done to Maintain International Unity (Part I). New York: Center on International Cooperation, April 4, 2022, https://cic.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/what_needs_to_be_done_to_maintain_international_unity_on_ukraine_april_2022.pdfGeneral Assembly of the United Nations, High-Level Meetings of the 77th Session, https://www.un.org/en/ga/77/meetings/United Nations, Our Common Agenda: Report of the Secretary-General, New York: United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/assets/pdf/Common_Agenda_Report_English.pdf*****TIMESTAMPS:00:00:00 Introduction00:01:12 Growing up in Wales, working in South Africa, Rwanda after the genocide 00:04:31 Fragility & conflict in the UK, then and now 00:07:33 Trade unions as community leaders in the UK & South Africa00:10:19 Conflict vs. contestation: What stressors exacerbate violence? 00:14:53 Conflict, security, & development (World Development Report 2011)00:21:22 Fragility drivers: External stressors, group-based inequality, technology & identity 00:27:55 Geopolitical fragmentation, UN General Assembly Meetings 00:33:09 Multilateralism and domestic politics in a changing world order 00:37:05 Reforming the UN in a time of crisis 00:41:18 Russia's invasion of Ukraine, maintaining the credibility of the UN00:48:12 Ukraine, Iraq & the accountability of great powers 00:55:00 Responses to refugees: Ukraine, Syria, Libya 01:00:19 Refugees, identity, & double standards 01:05:50 Geopolitical fragmentation & conflict risks01:09:12 US vs. China: Is a new Cold War a bad thing? 01:14:18 Free speech & joy as proxies for good governance  01:17:47 History as a reason for hope   01:19:59 Wrap-up 

Ever since its adoption in October 2000, the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda has emerged as the landmark global framework promoting women's participation in conflict resolution and achieving sustainable peace. Through its four pillars, participation, conflict prevention, protection, and relief and recovery, the WPS agenda aims to provide a holistic approach to international security. Since the adoption of the agenda, 103 countries have adopted National Action Plans (NAPs) to enhance women's participation in the security domain at a domestic level. Regional Action Plans (RAPs) have also emerged as an effort to collaboratively implement the WPS agenda. However, despite the domestic and regional efforts to implement the WPS agenda, there are normative and institutional constraints that impede the full realisation of the agenda. In this episode of Interpreting India, Soumita Basu joins Shibani Mehta to discuss how the WPS agenda has evolved since its adoption in 2000. What is its significance, and how does it operate to achieve its goal of ensuring equitable gender participation in peace-building? How is the agenda being interpreted by countries with different contextual and political settings? And finally, what steps should India undertake to advance its approach toward the WPS agenda?  --Episode ContributorsSoumita Basu is an associate professor at the Department of International Relations at the South Asian University. She holds a PhD in International Politics from University of Wales, Aberystwyth. She has worked extensively on feminist international relations and the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security. Her recent publications include New Directions in Women, Peace and Security. She has also contributed to Gendered Dimensions of the United Nations Security Council: Some Notes in View of India's Eighth Term (2021-22)'and Routledge Handbook of Feminist Peace Research.Shibani Mehta is a research analyst with the Security Studies Program at Carnegie India. Her research focuses on India's security and foreign policies.--

USIP, the Simon Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and the U.S. State Department hosted a discussion of the newly released U.S. Strategy to Anticipate, Prevent and Respond to Atrocities — as well as a look at the work the Atrocity Prevention Task Force has done over the past year as documented through its 2022 report to Congress as part of the Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act. Speakers Welcoming Remarks Lise GrandePresident and CEO, U.S. Institute of Peace Naomi KikolerDirector, Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum Theodora Klayman Holocaust Survivor Merrick B. GarlandAttorney General of the United States of America Panel 1: Institutionalizing Atrocity Prevention Nidhi BouriActing Senior Director, Development, Global Health and Humanitarian Response, U.S. National Security Council Robert J. FaucherPrincipal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, U.S. Department of State Robert JenkinsAssistant to the Administrator, Bureau for Conflict Prevention and Stabilization, USAID Michelle Strucke Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Global Partnerships, U.S. Department of Defense Ambassador Beth Van SchaackAmbassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of State Naomi Kikoler, moderatorDirector, Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum Panel 2: Operationalizing Atrocity Prevention Toby BradleyDeputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State Scott BusbyPrincipal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Department of State Katrina FotovatSenior Official, Office of Global Women’s Issues, U.S. Department of State Allison Lombardo Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Organization Affairs, U.S. Department of State Rosarie TucciDirector, Center for Democracy, Human Rights and Governance, U.S. Agency for International Development David W. Yang, moderator Vice President, Center of Thematic Excellence and Gandhi-King Global Academy, U.S. Institute of Peace

Gulalai Ismail is a Pashtun human rights activist from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. She is the chairperson of Aware Girls, a global ambassador for Humanists International, and a supporter of the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM). She speaks on the subject of promoting peace and women's empowerment at conferences internationally, and is the recipient of the International Humanist of the Year Award, the Chirac Prize for Conflict Prevention, and the Anna Politkovskaya Award. Gulalai comes on the podcast to discuss PTM, Pashtun Rights, the Philosophy of Non-Violence, Separatism, Fata's inclusion, Identity based resistance, patriarchy and identities. Does Non-Violence work? What are the issues of people on the periphery? Why did people support Drone attacks? Find out this and more on this week's episode of The Pakistan Experience. The Pakistan Experience is an independently produced podcast looking to tell stories about Pakistan through conversations. Please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thepakistanexperience And Please stay in touch: https://twitter.com/ThePakistanExp1 https://www.facebook.com/thepakistanexperience https://instagram.com/thepakistanexpeperience The podcast is hosted by comedian and writer, Shehzad Ghias Shaikh. Shehzad is a Fulbright scholar with a Masters in Theatre from Brooklyn College. He is also one of the foremost Stand-up comedians in Pakistan and frequently writes for numerous publications. Instagram.com/shehzadghiasshaikh Facebook.com/Shehzadghias/ Twitter.com/shehzad89 Chapters: 0:00 The Philosophy of Non-Violence 5:00 Dealing with Militancy and Militant Organizations 19:00 FATA's inclusion in KP 24:00 People on the periphery and Identity based resistance 39:30 Sub-Identities and the National Identity 44:45 Separatism and Borders 1:00:50 Imran Khan called for Gulalai's release 1:05:30 Masters in International Human Rights 1:09:30 Pashtun Culture and Patriarchy 1:15:30 Patriarchy in PTM 1:18:30 Dealing with Grief 1:19:30 Afghan Taliban and the Shackles of Slavery 1:20:50 Child Marriages 1:22:50 Trans Issues in KP 1:24:30 Pashtun Politics and Women Empowerment 1:26:00 Ashraf Ghani's Government 1:27:10 Drone Attacks 1:31:40 PTM and Anti-military politics 1:38:00 Closing Remarks

“We can't afford not to invest in prevention and peacebuilding” – that's the view of newly-minted UN Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, Elizabeth Spehar. In an interview with UN News, she gave the example of the effectiveness of the Peacebuilding Fund in the Gambia, where UN agencies have supported nationwide consultations on truth and reconciliation. One beneficiary testified that Gambians “now aspire to live in peace in this country.” Ms. Spehar spoke at length to Liz Scaffidi, about the critical importance of building peace and her role in making that happen.

“We can't afford not to invest in prevention and peacebuilding” – that's the view of newly-minted UN Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, Elizabeth Spehar. In an interview with UN News, she gave the example of the effectiveness of the Peacebuilding Fund in the Gambia, where UN agencies have supported nationwide consultations on truth and reconciliation. One beneficiary testified that Gambians “now aspire to live in peace in this country.” Ms. Spehar spoke at length to Liz Scaffidi, about the critical importance of building peace and her role in making that happen.

When thinking about self-awareness and preventing negative conflict, let's focus on the habits we have, the most obvious patterns we adopt, the knee-jerk reactions (which can have a dangerous capacity for making us appear to be or actually be jerks). We can benefit from taking a moment – or two – to reflect on what is increasing the likelihood of negative conflict unnecessarily. Do you have comments or suggestions about a topic or guest? An idea or question about conflict management or conflict resolution? Let me know at jb@dovetailresolutions.com! And you can learn more about me and my work as a mediator and a Certified CINERGY® Conflict Coach at www.dovetailresolutions.com and https://www.linkedin.com/in/janebeddall/.Enjoy the show for free on your favorite podcast app or on the podcast website: https://craftingsolutionstoconflict.com/And you can follow us on Twitter @conflictsolving. 

In this podcast, I address practical tips and strategies for avoiding, preventing, and resolving conflict. Stay blessed! Audio Download

QUESTION PRESENTED:Whether 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), which permits litigants to invoke the authority of United States courts to render assistance in gathering evidence for use in “a foreign or international tribunal,” encompasses private commercial arbitral tribunals, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th and 6th Circuits have held, or excludes such tribunals, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 2nd, 5th and 7th Circuits have held.Date Proceedings and Orders Sep 10 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due October 14, 2021)Oct 14 2021 | Brief of respondent Luxshare, Ltd. in opposition filed.Oct 15 2021 | Application (21A80) for a stay, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.Oct 15 2021 | Response to application (21A80) requested by Justice Kavanaugh, due Thursday, October 21, by 4 p.m.Oct 21 2021 | Response to application from respondent Luxshare, Ltd. filed.Oct 22 2021 | Reply of applicants ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al. filed.Oct 27 2021 | Application (21A80) referred to the Court.Oct 27 2021 | Application (21A80) granted by the Court. The application for stay presented to Justice Kavanaugh and by him referred to the Court is granted, and it is ordered that the order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, entered August 17, 2021, is stayed pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.Nov 01 2021 | Reply of petitioners ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)Nov 02 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/19/2021.Nov 08 2021 | Supplemental brief of petitioners ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)Nov 15 2021 | Rescheduled.Nov 16 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/3/2021.Dec 06 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/10/2021.Dec 10 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment GRANTED. The motion of International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, Inc. for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae in No. 21-518 is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 21-518 is granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.Dec 10 2021 | Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-401. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-401. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”Jan 13 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al.Jan 13 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Luxshare, Ltd.Jan 13 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, AlixPartners, LLP and Mr. Simon FreakleyJan 24 2022 | Joint appendix filed (in 21-401). (Statement of costs filed)Jan 24 2022 | Brief of petitioners ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al. filed (in 21-401).Jan 24 2022 | Joint appendix filed (in 21-518).Jan 24 2022 | Brief of petitioners AlixPartners, LLP and Mr. Simon Freakley filed (in 21-518).Jan 26 2022 | Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.Jan 28 2022 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, March 23, 2022. VIDED.Jan 28 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Dr. Xu Guojian, Li Hongji, Zhu Yongrui, Tang Qingyang, and Dr. Zhang Guanglei filed (in 21-401).Jan 31 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. VIDED.Jan 31 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of International Arbitration Center in Tokyo in support of neither party filed (in 21-401).Jan 31 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Halliburton Company filed (in 21-401).Jan 31 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States; Business Roundtable filed (in 21-401).Jan 31 2022 | Brief amici curiae of The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce and the United States Council for International Business supporting neither party filed (in 21-401).Jan 31 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Institute of International Bankers filed. VIDED.Jan 31 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Professor Yanbai Andrea Wang supporting neither party filed. VIDED.Feb 03 2022 | Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, The Fund for Protection of Investors' Rights in Foreign StatesFeb 04 2022 | Joint motion of the parties for divided argument and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed. VIDED.Feb 04 2022 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed. VIDED.Feb 11 2022 | CIRCIULATEDFeb 23 2022 | Brief of respondent Luxshare, Ltd. filed (in 21-401). (Distributed)Feb 23 2022 | Brief of respondent The Fund for Protection of Investors' Rights in Foreign States filed (in 21-518). (Distributed)Feb 28 2022 | Joint motion for divided argument and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed by the parties GRANTED. VIDED.Feb 28 2022 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED. VIDED.Mar 01 2022 | Brief amici curiae of Professors Tamar Meshel, Crina Baltag, Fabien Gélinas, and Janet Walker filed (in 21-401). (Distributed)Mar 01 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Ashish Virmani filed (in 21-401). (Distributed)Mar 02 2022 | Brief amici curiae of George A. Bermann, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)Mar 02 2022 | Brief amicus curiae of Federal Arbitration, Inc. filed (in 21-401). (Distributed)Mar 11 2022 | Reply of petitioners AlixPartners, LLP and Mr. Simon Freakley filed (in 518). (Distributed)Mar 11 2022 | Reply of petitioners ZF Automotive US, Inc., et al. filed (in 21-401). (Distributed)Mar 23 2022 | Argued. For petitioners in 21-401: Roman Martinez, Washington, D. C. For petitioners in 21-518: Joseph T. Baio, New York, N. Y. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting petitioners: Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent in 21-401: Andrew R. Davies, New York, N. Y. For respondent in 21-518: Alexander A. Yanos, New York, N. Y. VIDED.★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

In 1996, the columnist Thomas Friedman said that no two countries that both had McDonald's had fought a war against each other since each got its McDonald's. Unfortunately, that theory, known as the Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention, hasn't aged well. Indeed, economics and trade may still matter in many parts of the world, but when it comes to analyzing the situation in Ukraine and understanding Vladimir Putin's motives, the Western playbook may not be of much use anymore. In this episode of In Search of Green Marbles, G3 speaks with Weiss's deputy CIO, Mike Edwards, to learn how he's analyzing this very tense situation that has the world, and the financial markets in particular, on edge.Resources:Nord Stream 2Germany's former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder to join Gazprom board Trump Administration lifts sanctions on aluminum giant RusalThe Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) at a GlanceDisclosures:This podcast and associated content (collectively, the “Post”) are provided to you by Weiss Multi-Strategy Advisers LLC (“Weiss”). The views expressed in the Post are for informational purposes only and are subject to change without notice. Information in this Post has been developed internally and is based on market conditions as of the date of the recording from sources believed to be reliable. Nothing in this Post should be construed as investment, legal, tax, or other advice and should not be viewed as a recommendation to purchase or sell any security or adopt any investment strategy. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. You should consult your own advisers regarding business, legal, tax, or other matters concerning investments. Weiss has no control over information at any external site hyperlinked in this Post. Weiss makes no representation concerning and is not responsible for the quality, content, nature, or reliability of any hyperlinked site and has included hyperlinks only as a convenience. The inclusion of any external hyperlink does not imply any endorsement, investigation, verification, or ongoing monitoring by Weiss of any information in any hyperlinked site. In no event shall Weiss be responsible for your use of a hyperlinked site. This is not intended to be an offer or solicitation of any security. Please visit www.gweiss.com to review related disclosures and learn more about Weiss.

On January 26, USIP and the Alliance for Peacebuilding hosted a plenary panel discussion to address the relationship among climate change, conflict and fragility, and consider strategies for the international community to address the peace and security implications of these issues as well as the ongoing pandemic. Speakers Ambassador Frederic Gateretse-Ngoga, introductory remarks Head of Conflict Prevention and Early Warning Division, African Union Commission Polly Byers CEO, Karuna Center for Peacebuilding Gillian Caldwell Agency Climate Change Coordinator and Deputy Assistant Administrator, USAID Patrick Youssef Regional Director, Africa, International Committee of the Red Cross Andrew Revkin, moderator Director, Initiative on Communication Innovation and Impact, The Earth Institute, Columbia University   For more information about this event, please visit: https://www.usip.org/events/peacecon10  

PeaceCon@10: COVID, Climate, and Conflict: Rising to the Challenges of a Disrupted World, explored how the peacebuilding field can address these pressing short and long-term challenges to achieve a more peaceful and secure world. On January 26, following a series of breakout sessions hosted by the Alliance for Peacebuilding, participants re-joined USIP for a fireside chat with closing keynote speaker Robert Jenkins of USAID. Speakers Robert Jenkins Assistant to the Administrator, Bureau for Conflict Prevention and Stabilization, USAID Lise Grande,  President & CEO, U.S. Institute of Peace Liz Hume, moderator Executive Director, Alliance for Peacebuilding   For more information about this event, please visit: https://www.usip.org/events/peacecon10  

CAN YOU CALM OR DE-ESCALATE AN INDIVIDUAL IN 90 SECONDS? TUNE IN IF YOU WANT TO LEARN HOW. On this episode we are joined by Doug Noll, of Noll Associates. After spending many years as a powerhouse trial attorney, Doug shifted focus to peacemaking and helping resolve the unresolvable through mediation, arbitration, and facilitation. Doug also founded Prison of Peace in 2009 training inmates serving life sentences to be peacemakers and mediators. Learn more about Doug's intriguing journey as we discuss: How to be a peacemaker Emotional validation Reflective listening Listening others into existence For places to listen, places to connect on social media, to be a guest, collaborate with or sponsor DTE visit: https://linktr.ee/DisruptTheEveryday Visit Doug's site for Disrupt The Everyday listeners: https://dougnoll.com/podcast/disrupttheeveryday/  More About Doug Doug Noll speaks about and teaches people how to solve difficult, intractable, and highly emotional problems. He  was a business and commercial trial lawyer for 22 years before turning to leadership development, problem-solving, and peacemaking. He is a Senior Consultant with Mobius Executive Leadership and maintains a high-level mediation and arbitration practice. For his innovative work, Doug Noll has been voted as one of the Best Lawyers in America since 2005, by US News & World Report and has been recognized since 2006 as a Northern California Super Lawyer. He is listed in the Who's Who of International Commercial Mediators. He has been honored as Lawyer of the Year in 2014 by Best Lawyers in America. In 2014, Doug was honored as a Purpose Prize Fellow by Encore.org. In 2018, Doug was named the Distinguished Neutral of the Year by The National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals. Along with his colleague Laurel Kaufer, Doug Noll was named California Attorney of the Year in 2012 for their pro bono Prison of Peace project. Doug Noll is the author of the book De-Escalate: How to Calm an Angry Person in 90 Seconds or Less (Simon & Schuster, September 2017), which was the winner of the Book Excellence Award for 2017. In addition, Doug Noll is the author of Elusive Peace: How Modern Diplomatic Strategies Could Better Resolve World Conflicts (Prometheus Books, April 2011), winner of the Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR) International Peace and Justice Book Award for 2011, Sex, Politics & Religion at the Office: The New Competitive Advantage (Auberry Press 2006), with John Boogaert, and Peacemaking: Practicing at the Intersection of Law and Human Conflict (Cascadia 2002) and, numerous articles on peacemaking, restorative justice, conflict resolution and mediation, and is a mediator trainer, lecturer, and continuing education panelist. Doug Noll is an adjunct faculty member of the Pepperdine School of Law Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution and teaches The Psychology of Conflict Communication and Decision Making in Conflict. Doug Noll makes his home in the foothills above Clovis, California with his wife Aleya.

In 2015, USCIRF for the first time recommended the Central African Republic (CAR) be designated by the State Department a Country of Particular Concern for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom following years of sectarian violence that erupted after a 2013 coup. As the violence against religious minority communities subsided in subsequent years, in 2020, USCIRF recommended CAR be placed on the State Department's Special Watchlist, a step in the right direction. While concerns for religious freedom in CAR remain, there has been further notable progress during the past year. In its most recent 2021 Annual Report, USCIRF did not recommend CAR be included on the State Department's Special Watchlist or be designated a Country of Particular Concern. Today we will learn more about what prompted the decision to remove CAR from the Special Watchlist recommendation, what progress has been made, and what challenges remain for religious freedom and religious minorities in CAR. Joining us to provide insight into the situation is USCIRF Policy Analyst for West and Central Africa, Madeline Vellturo, and Dr. Gino Vlavonou, a Consulting Program Officer with the Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum at the Social Science Research Council. USCIRF Recently released a Country Update on CAR Read our 2021 Annual Report

Bill and Phil discuss the flurry of news surrounding presidential pardons, explore the often uncomfortable relationship between Covid and sports, think through a recent critique of the infamous Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention by Thomas Friedman, and ponder the tactic of Taiwanese politicians who threw pig guts in parliament last week.

You dedicated a great deal of time and hard work to succeed and I suspect that you're REALLY good at your job! You love what you do and you adore who you work with and appreciate the professional partners you collaborate with to exceed expectations. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, something goes awry and you are faced with a conflict that you need to resolve. Well, you are not alone. We can safely say that it has happened to each and every one of us at one time or another. Throughout her career, this week's guest has witnessed (and help resolve) her fair share of conflict. Using her considerable education and on-the-job-experience, Jennifer Trotter has keenly identified that most (if not all) conflicts can be prevented with exceptional communication skills. And, in the event of a miscommunication there are some proven tactics you can employ so you can resolve it quickly and without further incident. Here are just a few tidbits from this week's conversation: -Just because you know learn to identify the miscommunication and employ the communication strategies does not make it easy. - Choose your battles. Sometimes it is better to let go of an off comment, misunderstanding and potential conflict if situational and with little to no potential for future challenge. Something that seems to happen repeatedly or is acute enough to cause real friction needs to be addressed. - Prevent conflict at every opportunity. If it is a persistent challenge you MUST fix it to prevent it from continuing to cause pain and friction. This means you need to be paying attention so you can identify these challenges and take corrective action. - When friction develops take action as soon as you possibly can. Utilize your communication skills and ensure you select the best communication method. As an example, use calm and patience and and do it over the phone rather than via email or text. - Even when there is a challenge that is on the verge of becoming a potential conflict resist the urge to over apologize. Take responsibility and then move immediately into the solution - Don't assume the worst case scenario when someone is asking questions, looking for clarification or just needs a little extra help. - In many cases we have to take a long hard look at ourselves to determine if we are in some way creating or amplifying these challenges. Admittedly not always an easy process but the payoff when we do is HUGE. You can stay in business and LOVE what you do and with whom you work with day in and day out for a VERY long time! Jennifer shows us that strong communication and prevention techniques can ensure that conflicts won't steal or diminish our joy. Resources: http://lipservicemakeup.com http://instagram/lipservicemakeup http://thejentrotter.com http://instagram.com/thejentrotter