Immediate crisis and humanitarian suffering dominate both media coverage and policy discussion of the Great Lakes region. While the scale of suffering and the severity of the threat to regional peace and security make this understandable, it also distorts internal and external understandings of regional risk, deepens suspicion between Great Lakes states, and deters investment. For too many observers, both in the region and outside it, conflict in the Great Lakes is viewed as ‘normal’ – and if progress is not seen as possible, a ‘beggar-my-neighbour’ zero-sum approach becomes the only rational response.
Further, perceptions of real and reputational risk deter investment from economic actors willing to invest in long-term prosperity and mutual benefit, leaving the region’s people and resources open to predation by unscrupulous operators seeking quick profits. International policy, too, is mired in fatigue and cynicism, with scarce resources going to short-term firefighting or diverted to other global priorities.
It is this vicious cycle of perception and action that the Great Lakes region needs to break. Perhaps the most critical medium- and long-term need is a recrafting of the narrative of the Great Lakes, to give Great Lakes leaders and communities the confidence to overcome mistrust and move from norms of zero-sum competition to enduring patterns of collaboration, and to change attitudes among policy-makers and investors.