top of page
Writer's pictureSorina I. Crisan, PhD

How an International Peacebuilding Organization Works: Itonde Kakoma on Interpeace’s Role in Conflict Resolution & 30 Years of Global Impact

What is it like to lead an organization dedicated to peacebuilding in some of the world’s most conflict-ridden environments? In this insightful interview, Itonde Kakoma, President and CEO of Interpeace, reflects on his professional journey and shares his experiences guiding an organization committed to sustainable peacebuilding. With a focus on local ownership and collaboration, Interpeace has spent decades working in conflict-affected regions to support communities in creating lasting peace.


As Interpeace celebrates its 30th anniversary, Mr. Kakoma—now one year into his leadership role—provides a compelling exploration of the organization’s origins, mission, and impact. Founded in 1994 as the War-Torn Societies Project in the wake of the Cold War, Interpeace championed peacebuilding rooted in local engagement rather than external intervention. Operating from Geneva, a global hub for peace and diplomacy, the organization continues to navigate a world where conflicts—both internal and international—are at levels not seen since World War II.


In this conversation, Mr. Kakoma highlights Interpeace’s long-standing work in Somalia, where trust built over 30 years underpins locally driven reconciliation efforts, and in Rwanda, where the organization has played a critical role in intergenerational restoration after the genocide against the Tutsi. He shares his priorities as an "Ambassador for Peace," emphasizing the importance of leadership grounded in professionalism, foresight, and adaptability to address today’s complex global challenges.


Central to the discussion is the art of persuasion—a skill Kakoma considers fundamental to peacebuilding. Recounting a diplomatic encounter with a dictator, he illustrates how creating space for genuine dialogue can shift perspectives and open pathways to peace. For aspiring peacebuilders, Kakoma underscores the value of learning from diverse perspectives, fostering empathy, and maintaining a human-centered approach to advancing peace.



Mr. Itonde Kakoma, Persuasive Discourse Interview, Sorina Ioana Crisan Matthey de l'Endroit, PhD

Q1. Mr. Kakoma, as Interpeace marks its 30th anniversary, how would you describe its origins and unique mission in the field of peacebuilding? What distinguishes Interpeace from other organizations dedicated to similar causes?

 

Answer: I would describe Interpeace, first and foremost, as an international peacebuilding organization constituted under Swiss law. The timing of our conversation is truly meaningful, as we’re marking 30 years of Interpeace’s journey.

 

If we look back, our organization has evolved over these decades. Going back to 1994, Interpeace began as the War-Torn Societies Project, or W-A-R-T-O-R-N. We were founded as an initiative, a platform both for thinking and doing, within the United Nations system. The term ‘war-torn’ was very deliberate. It was 1994, a period marked by significant shifts in a post-Cold War environment. While some parts of the world entered a period of greater stability, others experienced considerable instability within states.

 

The war-torn aspect reflected the conditions of the 1990s, which saw widespread conflict and violence. Not by coincidence, as we mark 30 years, the people of Rwanda and, for that matter, the world, are also commemorating 30 years since the genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. That genocide is part of a cycle of widespread armed conflict in the Great Lakes region—conflict that led to crimes against humanity, including genocide. And this was not unique to Africa; at the time, similar upheavals were unfolding from Central America to Southeast Asia to the Balkans. That was the environment in which we were born.

 

Now, you asked about what makes us unique. I’d say it’s a birth rooted in a few fundamental principles, especially around ownership. Our commitment from the outset has been that sustainable peace will only be achieved if it is owned by the people, communities, societies, and states experiencing the complex issues we’re trying to address. It’s the opposite of an interventionist approach. And that, I think, remains central to how we work and aligns us with other like-minded organizations that don’t just talk about localization but put it into practice.

 

And, one final point—it’s significant that our founding was in Geneva and that we continue to be based here. Geneva has a tradition of hosting organizations dedicated to peace and serving as a place where people envision alternatives to conflict as a way of resolving differences. This isn’t just about one-off solutions; it’s about creating lasting institutions. I hope that Interpeace’s legacy is a contribution to that enduring vision, which Geneva has embodied in so many ways.

 

Q2. Can you please describe your current role at Interpeace and provide us with some examples of your main work-related priorities, given that you lead an organization dedicated to peace at a time when the number of both internal and international conflicts is increasing globally?

 

Answer: I serve as President and Chief Executive Officer of Interpeace, based here at our headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. My role is continually evolving. Had we spoken ten months ago, I might have described it differently. Even five months ago, it would have been a slightly different conversation.

 

Today, my focus has taken on three clear priorities. First, I remind myself of the call put forward by our governing board when I was invited to take on the role of president and CEO. The role was publicly described as an Ambassador for Peace, which was not only an attractive framing but, I believe, a powerful expression of intent. It speaks to what we, as an organization—and perhaps the peacebuilding sector more broadly—aspire to embody. Being an ambassador for peace is particularly relevant now, given the escalating conflicts worldwide. Thirty years ago, our work focused largely on conflicts within states—internal armed conflicts—because those were the most prevalent at the time. Now, however, conflicts within states persist and are even on the rise, as indicated by the Global Peace Index. We’re facing the highest number of conflicts since the end of World War II. And it’s not only non-international armed conflicts; we are also seeing an increase in international armed conflicts, or wars between states. So, to invoke the role of an Ambassador for Peace—whether as an individual or as an organization—at such a challenging moment is no small calling, but I believe it’s a necessary one, and it captures the essence of what we strive to do.

 

Second, this role is quite practical. It’s about running an organization with intelligence, professionalism, and credibility, amid a rapidly changing global landscape. Part of what we’re seeing is a weakening of the very systems, funding mechanisms, and arguably even commitments to upholding norms that Interpeace was founded on and seeks to uphold. These shifts have significant consequences, not only for the peacebuilding sector as a whole, but also for Interpeace, an organization I am privileged to lead today.

 

And third, much of my time is spent understanding global trends. The objective is not to simply be passive subjects of these trends, but to be able to anticipate and to respond to them proactively, with the credibility and the professionalism that our mission demands.

 

Q3. Could you share two examples of Interpeace’s long-standing work that reflect its unique approach to peacebuilding? And how has your organization’s role evolved over the years, particularly in countries where you’ve been present for decades?

 

Answer: I’d be honored. The example I’d lift up is our long-standing presence and ongoing work in Somalia. In the last couple of months, we were privileged, and it’s public, to hold bilateral discussions with Somalia’s leadership, including the head of state, his team, and our own leadership. Our chair of the board, distinguished board members, and regional leaders were also present as we reflected on our work together. Interpeace has accompanied the Somali people over the entirety of our existence—30 years. And what fascinates me, Sorina, is that, even after three decades in Somalia, at the invitation of the Somali people and their respective authorities, the trust established over those years enables us to be, perhaps, even more relevant today.

 

How so? In supporting the necessary but fragile processes of reconciliation within Somalia, we bring humility to a context where, 30 years ago, robust state systems were largely absent. Now, these systems have come of age and are rightly assuming greater levels of sovereign responsibility. At the same time, Somali leadership has fostered the growth of robust civil society mechanisms. This means that the role of an external organization, even in an intermediary capacity, has to evolve—perhaps even diminish. Why? Because, as we discussed earlier, sustainable peace relies on ownership.

 

Our work in Somalia today remains deeply relevant, thanks to long-established trust, but it’s also evolving to recognize the considerable gains made. While challenges to stability remain, the growth of both state structures and non-governmental civil society within Somalia enables us to serve in new ways. We respond to requests to accompany reconciliation processes, all under the leadership of the Somali people. I think this example resonates in many other places where we work.

 

By comparison, I was honored to represent Interpeace at the invitation of the government of Rwanda for the 30th commemoration of the genocide against the Tutsi. I was profoundly moved by the trust we have built over two decades with the Rwandan people. This trust allows us to support what is, ultimately, an intergenerational process of restoration and reconciliation—at national, communal, and individual levels. In Rwanda, the proximity of the conflict—the neighborliness that defined it—means that to restore and reconcile requires an understanding of that proximity. Institutions must be built to prevent the recurrence of widespread armed conflict, and this work must account for the nearness of past violence.

 

In Rwanda, under the leadership of the people through their government and national organizations, we have come to understand the importance of addressing the human mind, the psyche. If we can’t address the trauma of war, it will be difficult to imagine alternatives to violence as a means of resolving differences.

 

Q4. How do you define persuasion and what role does it play in Interpeace’s approach to peacebuilding?


Answer: I love this question, because if we are unable to persuade—convincing is something else entirely—but if we can’t persuade by making a compelling case for peace, then we fail in our core mission and mandate as an organization. To do this effectively, we can’t just talk about impact; we have to show it, highlight where it truly occurs. In doing so, even if only by decimal points, we start to shift the narrative.

 

Right now, we hear strong calls for increased investment in conflict, for states and people to shore up their reserves, often to defend themselves. But our job is also to persuade people that alternatives to conflict—non-violent ways of reaching a settlement—are not only possible but essential.

 

I’d love to share with you a story, Sorina, about the art of persuasion. I once had the honor of working closely with a former head of state who was meeting with a dictator—this was a country going through a particularly tumultuous period. I’ll never forget how he opened the conversation. He said, ‘I’m not here to convince you, but I may be able to persuade you.’ And then he laid out a few propositions, one by one, that created the space for a real conversation—an honest dialogue about alternatives to violence.

 

This dictator has since been ousted, and unsurprisingly, his country has spiraled into widespread armed conflict, with the capital in ruins due to the lack of investment beyond the few centers of power, mostly in the hands of armed men. But I’ll always remember that conversation because persuasion is as much about presenting a strong argument as it is about creating a genuine space to listen. It’s this space that can bring changes not only in someone else’s perception but also in our own sense of what is possible.

 

Q5. In hindsight, can you share a formative educational experience that helped prepare you for your current role in peacebuilding?

 

Answer: In my case, I think the most formative experience I had, has been the study of ancient languages that are no longer spoken. This experience has been incredibly valuable in entering the mystery of human interaction and meaning. The grayness, if you will, in interpreting languages that no longer have speakers opens up an entirely different way of considering truth. It challenges our ability to proclaim or rely on absolute understandings, which has taught me a lot about accepting mystery.

 

It’s been deeply valuable in helping me avoid getting stuck in thinking, ‘this is the only way, or that is the only way.’ Instead, I’ve come to appreciate the multiplicity of meanings that can emerge through interpretation—without diminishing truth itself in those interpretations. I think that’s the most important insight I would share here.

 

Q6. To conclude, what advice would you give to young professionals aiming for a career similar to yours?

 

Answer: I would say, study—get your immersion through university and so forth—but even more so, I’d emphasize going beyond formal studies. What I still benefit from is an early, perhaps still embodied, passion for the field. That passion drives me to approach reading and study differently, and to constantly work on honing my skills, not only through desk research but through continuous conversations with professionals I look up to.

 

This includes learning from people who are no longer with us—those who have left paper trails, documentaries, and rich legacies to immerse myself in. My advice would be to try and understand how individuals in the field of advancing peace have gone about their own journeys. But it’s not about mirroring or trying to follow the exact same path. On the contrary, it’s about appreciating the diversity of perspectives that each person brings to the table in peacebuilding. That diversity is essential because it brings a more human-centered approach to what we do.


Thank you for reading.


Remember to subscribe to our newsletter, to receive updates about upcoming interviews.



***


Mr. Itonde Kakoma. Interview by Dr. Sorina Ioana Crisan Matthey de l’Endroit. Persuasive Discourse.

President and CEO

Interpeace | Switzerland


*Note: This interview was recorded on August 27, 2024, and has been edited for clarity, ease of readability, and length.

 

**Illustrations by: The main article photo shown in this interview was taken by the interviewer in April 2024, while attending a talk that Mr. Kakoma gave during the 3rd International Cooperation Forum, in Basel, Switzerland. The profile photo is made available on the website of Interpeace.

Comments


bottom of page