The minimum aim of DRC programmes in terms of impact is to “do no harm”, i.e. to strive towards ensuring that the activities implemented at least have no negative impact on the conflict in question, nor on direct and indirect beneficiaries. At best, DRC programmes will strengthen existing reconciliation efforts through promoting confidence building between rivals.

“Do no harm” points to the fact that aid in some instances has been found to actually worsen conflicts:

It is important to seek to avoid these negative side-effects of programmes already at the planning stage. Instead, DRC shall strive to promote positive side-effects by supporting local capacities for peace. This entails analysing which groups are most motivated to end conflict (“connectors”) and how to support them in this process. And also, to identify capacities for war and how to decrease their role (through “dividers”).

Connectors: In all wars, there are people who interlink the fighting groups. These capacities for peace are often less visible than the fighting forces in the midst of a conflict. Capacities for peace can signify institutions as well as relations, attitudes and interests. Connectors are often women and older people, but this is definitely not always the case. Always consider the particular local context.

Dividers: Dividers create or maintain tensions in society. Dividers are capacities for war, which emphasises that not all the local capacities are worth strengthening. War capacities also cover both institutions, relations and values. Men and youth are often dividers because of the benefits it entails for them to fight or because they have acquired irreconcilable attitudes through years of conflict. In some settings, however, women, older people or religious leaders may just as well promote antagonistic attitudes.

If programme staff work with the idea of dividers vs. connectors, they will over time automatically view planning through these lenses.