Perception, Why Can’t We See What Is There To Be Seen In Peace Deal?
By David Lony Majak
August 19, 2014, in the process of perception links people to their environment and is critical to accurate understanding of the world about us and how we perceived South Sudan Peace deal in Addis Ababa, this has been a coincident talks for almost (8) eight months now since the crisis erupted in mid-December15, 2013. Therefore; accurate intelligence analysis obviously requires accurate perception which relates to the peace implication in capital of Ethiopia Addis Ababa and this has shown that some stakeholders and the mediation teams played a greater games in the process. So many peace talks have resumed with several round table negotiations but nothing possible yet from the mediating team headed by Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the IGAD board.
In actual analysis with simple judgments; the two warring parties can never be wrong all of them nor be right all of them, if one side is not doing the right things; then the IGAD body should take some authoritative measures to take decision in order to let the two south Sudan warring parties accept some other conditions unwillingly for the sake of peace to does return in the country. According to a psychology analysis of political no choice; it is like the two warring parties leaded by Gen: Salva Kiir, the incumbent president and his former vice president Dr. Guandit Machar who is known to be the braved elephant in the bush All are not wrong or right in just a common sense of understanding the Peace negotiations in Addis Ababa.
People tended to think of perception as a passive process and wishing peace deal to take place in shortest time possible but IGAD body and its mediation team has a hugged hand in the delayment of peace agreement, it’s becoming a source of daily income to them. Perception is demonstrably an active rather than a passive process regarding the ongoing peace talks in Addis Ababa; it constructs rather than records as a part of symptoms of peace deal negotiation. People misunderstood the current peace negotiations in Addis Ababa that it cannot be one day work since there are so many interested parties involved.
We tend to perceive what we expect to perceive in order to see peace back.
The general reviewed of this principle is that it takes more information, more time, and more unambiguous information as facts of necessity, to recognize an unexpected phenomenon than an expected one. One classic examples; about peace deal in Addis Ababa, the capital city of Ethiopia has demonstrated the influence of expectations on perception used when playing cards by warring parties and the mediation teams involved in south Sudan crisis. In different scenario, some expectations tell analysts, subconsciously, what to look for, what is important, and how to interpret what is seen as a results of south Sudan’s crisis and how many interested parties interfered with our internal policy and with direct intervention over different issues. These patterns form a mind-set that predisposes analysts to think in certain ways. In a psychology of intelligence analysis; South Sudan is considered to be an open source of collection by the neighboring countries and some international community’s who thinks we cannot do without them by all means.
The notions! That is an unreachable ideal of the peace process. There is no such thing as “the facts of the case.” There is only a very selective subset of the overall mass of data to which one has been subjected that one takes as facts and judges to be irrelevant to the question at issue on one way or another, and had proved IGAD mediators to be peace lobbers but not seen themselves as a solution to the problem pending on the tables in Addis Ababa.
South Sudanese Politicians’ mind-sets tend to be quick to form but resistant to change.
Some factors in principles have shown that part of a longer series of progressively modified drawn the intention of peace observers and the suffering ordinary civilians in south Sudan which have no choice. It is very clearly that men are biased in favor of continuing to see a man long after an objective observer (for example, an observer who has seen only a single picture) recognizes that the man is now a woman because he is in the bush for sometime; this is how Intergovernmental Authority on Development-IGAD mediators and other peace facilitators behaved toward the peace deal process in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia instead to find the immediate solution to the South Sudanese problems. The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) body is also seen as a phenomenon to East African countries and help them solved difficult issues, crisis and problems which is its major roles to play before other international bodies may intervene in for the solution. This IGAD body has a tendency to assimilate new unambiguous information concerning south Sudan crisis, the more confident the actor is of the validity of his judgments, and the greater his commitment to the established view. This proved that there is a kind of immaturity demonstrated by IGAD authority in Addis Ababa regarding the peace process. May God bless the suffering innocent south Sudanese civilians who have nowhere to go but hoping for the nation.
The author can be reached on firstname.lastname@example.org