Theories of Peace Goal: to use the concept

Theories of Peace Goal: to use the concept

Theories of Peace Goal: to use the concept of the enemy to construct a theoretical framework for analyzing peace Peace: Creation and maintenance of relationship of proven value and worth Types of Peace Separate: Disentangle; Co-Existence Associate: Entangle; Partnerships Goal of Peace Restore: reestablish trust, value Build: create trust, value Tractable Conflicts I. Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts

Opponent: an adversary, rival Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Peaceful Outcome: win-win resolution II. Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Opponent: an oppressor Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationships Intractable Conflicts III. Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences Spring 2001 PEACE STUDIES FRAMEWORK TRACTABLE CONFLICT COMPONENTS OF PEACE 1

Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Opponent: an adversary, rival Peaceful Outcome: winwin resolution Justice: equity within competing relationships Security: institutional protection Non-violence: freedom from war 2 Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships

Opponent: an oppressor Justice: equality and fairness Security: power Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationship Non-violence: freedom from structural violence Rectifying Injustice: inequity Removing Threat: competing interests Means: democratic institution, conflict resolution processes Rectifying Injustice: exploitation

Removing Threat: exploitation Means: education, confrontation, conciliation, bargaining INTRACTABLE CONFLICT

3 COMPONENTS OF PEACE Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences Conflict Transformation: creation of we-ness trust (must transform the conflict into one that is tractable) Justice: rightness of my Injustice: interference goals and aspirations

in your pursue of your goals and aspirations Security: victory (eternal Threat: the presence of vigilance) the other Non-violence: expulsion of bad violence Means: good violence Transcenders: Establishing connects What is due the grandchildren of your enemy? What is due the grandchildren of your enemy? What is due the grandchildren of your enemy?

Transformers: Developing trust Foundations for We-ness Rectifying Injustice Basic Human Right Alleviating fear Confidencebuilding Renouncing violence Establishing consent

Chantal Mouffe: 1. The constitutive other and the impossibility of a world without antagonisms 2. Difference vs. Negating Identity 3. We/them -- Friend/enemy 4. Displacement of the enemy with the adversary. Tractable Conflicts I. Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts Opponent: an adversary, rival Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Peaceful Outcome: win-win resolution II. Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Opponent: an oppressor Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationships

Intractable Conflicts III. Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences Transcenders: If the enemy is someone who was potentially one of us and from whom we have been separated by violence, then the first task is to reestablish the human bonds that once connected us. Transformers: By definition, intractable conflicts cannot be resolved. Still, they can be transformed into tractable ones that are, in principle, capable of resolution. The only way to do this is to construct a context that includes the sacrificially expelled other. Tractable Conflicts I. Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts

Opponent: an adversary, rival Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Peaceful Outcome: win-win resolution II. Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Opponent: an oppressor Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationships Intractable Conflicts III. Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences Bouldings Definition of Peace: Peace as Not War: a setting in which conflict and excitement, debate and dialogue, drama and confrontation do not get out of hand and become destructive

Positive Aspects: 1. Condition of good management 2. Orderly resolution of conflict 3. Harmony associated with mature relationships Negative Aspects: 1. 2. 3. 4. Absence of turmoil Absence of tension Absence of conflict Absence of war Bouldings Approach 1. The goal is to make peace more probable and war less likely. 2. The concept of the causes of war is rejected because war and peace are multi-causal, subject to quite strong random influences, and sharp discontinuities at the breaking points. 3. The variable of war-peace system, particular the international

system, can be classified roughly by the way in which they contribute either to the strain or to the strength of the system. 4. Conflict activities are those in which we are conscious that an increase in our welfare may diminish the welfare of others or an increase in the welfare of others may diminish our welfare. 5. The difference between peace and war is mainly defined in terms of the taboo line the line that defines what we can do but refrain from doing from what we can do and do. Bouldings Paradigm All Non-conflict Human Peace Activity Conflict War

Peace and War 1. War and Peace are not merely the absence of the other, but positively definable states of a system. 2. Example: awake and asleep; neither is simply the opposite of the other. 3. Peace and war can be represented as differing phases in a system. 4. A different system of acting and thinking characterizes the war and peace phases. Perception of Reality in War & Peace Peacetime 1. Good and Evil have many shades of gray. 2. The present is pretty much like other times. 3. Great forces (nature, God, civilization) are not particularly involved in our disputes. 4. After the present period, things will go on pretty much as they always have. 5. Life is complex with many problems to

be solved that have varying importance from day to day. 6. All people act pretty much the same and act from the same motives. 7. We can talk with those we disagree with. Wartime 1. Good and Evil are reduced to us and them with no bystanders. 2. The present has a special qualitya final battle of good and evil. 3. The great forces of the cosmos are for us against them. 4. When the war is over things will be vastly different. 5. There is only one problem with ultimate importance that must be solved 6. "We" and "They" are qualitatively different. They wish for power. We act in self defense and with respect for common decency. 7. They lie and are so evil that only force can settle the issues

Bouldings Paradigm All Non-conflict Human Peace Activity Conflict War Approaches to Conflict Reduction/De-escalation April 2003 Approaches to Conflict Reduction Conflict Management Good News: At the end of the day, you are alive.

Bad News: Whether you live through tomorrow is uncertain. 1) Goal: To prevent conflicts from escalating into total conflict. 2) Assumptions a) It is better to aim low and succeed than to aim high and fail. b) Many of the most achievable improvements in the situation accomplish little and put prior advancements in jeopardy. 3) Method: Create a hiatus in which neither side tries to destroy the other: Create live and let live attitude in the places where people interact by removing or managing the factors that cause threat (coexistence) a) Degree of integration b) Degree of imposition or coercion 4) Strategy a) Appeal to self-interest: ones own existence is dependent upon the existence of the other. b) Create moral anchors that allow both sides to see the human face of the other. c) Encourage alignment based upon interests other than sectarian identity.

d) Contain issues that could increase polarization. Conflict Resolution Good News: Many conflicts are non-zero sum. Bad News: Not all problems are non-zero sum. 1) Goal: Remove the resistances or obstacles to an overall resolution or settlement. 2) Assumption: The gap between the parties can be traversed with small steps. 3) Method: Fractionating the conflict into resolvable issues by based the various interests involved. a) Shared interests b) Different interests i) Different valuations iv) Different time preferences ii) Different expectations v) Different capabilities iii) Different attitudes about risk c) Opposing Interests 4) Strategy a) Logrolling

i) Creating a package linking less valued concessions to more valued gains. ii) Concessions that avoid losses are more effective than concession improve upon gains. b) Entrapment: Once people made a concession or agreement, they tend to act and think in ways that justify this move. a) Constructive ambiguity: If a conflict is likely to become less important in the future, then leave its resolution ambiguous. Conflict Transformation Good News: It produces the best (most rewarding and most enduring) solutions. Bad News: It is problem-solving in a reconciliation framework (we-ness). 1) Goal: Create new solutions that are beyond the scope of what immediately seems possible. 2) Assumption: We can agree about where we want to go. 3) Method: Turn the conflict into political (economic, social) problem that we acting together can solve. a) Conflict is irresolvable because: i) There are incompatible interests real or perceived.

ii) Parties are too angry to talk constructively. iii) There exist fundamental differences in values about the subject of the conflict or about process for resolving it. iv) The parties hold different versions of the truth about what already has or will happen in the future and about the facts involved. v) The parties have differing views of what their relationship is or should be. vi) There exist misunderstandings that are hard to sort out. b) The conflict becomes a complex riddle or puzzle that has to be solved mutually or cooperatively: c) Diagnosing the conflict by sorting out the various interests, values, preferences, realities, emotional investments, and so on: What do I want? What do they want? Do we fully understand each other needs, reason, beliefs, and Why do I want it? Why do they want feelings? it? What are the Is the conflict based upon various ways that What are the misunderstanding or a real conflict I can satisfy what

various ways that of interests, beliefs, preferences, or I want? they can satisfy values? what they want? What is the conflict really about? 4) Developing alternatives solutions to the problem: figuring out what it would take to work things out. a) Expanding the pie: i) Claiming vs. creating value b) Creating new compensation frameworks: i) Finding new ways to compensate a party for yielding on a issue c) Bridging: i) Identifying interests that can be satisfied by redesign the framework or context. Approaches to Conflict Reduction/De-escalation 1.

Conflict Management 2. Conflict Resolution 3. Conflict Transformation Conflict Management Good news: At the end of the day, you are alive. Bad news: Whether you live through tomorrow is uncertain. Goal: To prevent conflicts from escalating into total conflict. Assumptions: 1. It is better to aim low and succeed than to aim high and fail. 2. Many of the most achievable improvements in the situation accomplish little and put prior advancements in jeopardy.

Method Create a hiatus in which neither side tries to destroy the other: Create live and let live attitude in the places where people interact by removing or managing the factors that cause threat (coexistence) Degree of integration Degree of imposition or coercion Strategy 1. Appeal to self-interest: ones own existence is dependent upon the existence of the other. 2. Create moral anchors that allow both sides to see the human face of the other. 3. Encourage alignment based upon interests other than sectarian identity. 4. Contain issues that could increase polarization.

Conflict Resolution Good news: Many conflicts are non-zero sum. Bad news: Not all problems are non-zero sum. Assumption: The gap between the parties can be transverse with small steps Goal: Remove the resistances or obstacles to an overall resolution or settlement. Method Fractionating the conflict into resolvable issues by based the various interests involved. Shared interests Different interests Different valuations Different expectations Different attitudes about risk Different time preferences Different capabilities Opposing Interests Strategy: 1.Logrolling:

Creating a package linking less valued concessions to more valued gains. Concessions that avoid losses are more effective than concession improve upon gains. 2.Entrapment: Once people made a concession or agreement, they tend to act and think in ways that justify this move. 3.Constructive ambiguity: If a conflict is likely to become less important in the future, then leave its resolution ambiguous. Conflict Transformation Good News: It produces the best (most rewarding and most enduring) solutions. Bad News: It is problem-solving in a reconciliation framework (we-ness). Goal: Create new solutions that go beyond the scope of what seems immediately possible. Assumption: We agree about where we want to go. Method: Turn the conflict into political (economic,

social) problem that we acting together can solve. Why is the conflict irresolvable? 1. There are incompatible interests real or perceived. 2. Parties are too angry to talk constructively. 3. There exist fundamental differences in values about the subject of the conflict or about process for resolving it. 4. The parties hold different versions of the truth about what already has or will happen in the future and about the facts involved. 5. The parties have differing views of what their relationship is or should be. 6. There exist misunderstandings that are hard to sort out. Method (continued) 2. The conflict becomes a complex riddle or puzzle that has to be solved mutually or cooperatively. 3. Diagnosing the conflict: sorting out the various: various interests, values, preferences, realities, emotional investments, and so on . What do I want? What do they want? Do we fully understand each other needs, reason, beliefs, and Why do I want it? Why do they want feelings?

it? What are the Is the conflict based upon various ways that What are the misunderstanding or a real conflict I can satisfy what various ways that of interests, beliefs, preferences, or I want? they can satisfy values? what they want? What is the conflict really about? Strategy: 1. Expanding the pie Claiming vs. creating value 2. Creating new compensation frameworks Finding new ways to compensate a party for yielding on a issue 3. Bridging

Identifying interests that can be satisfied by redesigning the framework or context Peace/War System Stable War Strain Unstable War Unstable Peace Stable Peace Strength Peace/War System Strain Strength:

Structural Variables: 1. Images of the past 2. Professionalization of conflict Structural Variables: 1. Memories of the past 2. Professionalization: mediators, etc. Dynamic Variables: 1. Arms Race 2. Differential Growth a. Population b. Economic Dynamic Variables: 1. Travel and communication 2. Web of economic interdependencecrosscutting European Union

European Coal and Steel Community Treaty of Paris, April 18, 1951 1. Coal and steel were the fundamental building blocks of industry. 2. The heavy industries of the Ruhr had been the traditional basis for German power. Three times in the previous seventy years, France and Germany had fought over the coal reserves of Alsace-Lorraine. 3. Integrating the coal and steel industry would ensure that Germany and France developed common interests that would help prevent military and economy rivalry. Vision of Jean Monnet & Robert Schuman To sneak up on peace Functionalism: upgrading common interests Functional spillover Technical spillover Political spillover Principal Objectives: 1. Establish European citizenship 2. Ensure freedom, security, and justice 3. Promote economic and social progress

4. Assert Europes role in the world Three Pillars: Pillar 1: primarily economic (EC & EMU) Pillar 2: joint action in foreign and security affairs Pillar 3: justice and home affairs Original Six Countries: France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands Today: 15 member states; 13 candidate countries Institutions: The European Commission The Council of the Union The European Parliament The Court of Justice The Court of Auditors Tractable Conflicts I. Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts Opponent: an adversary, rival Type of Conflict: conflict of interests

Peaceful Outcome: win-win resolution II. Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Opponent: an oppressor Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationships Intractable Conflicts III. Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences Curles Approach 1. The most useful categories for thinking about peace are peaceful and unpeaceful relationships. 2. The goal is to transform unpeaceful relationship into peaceful relationship. 3. Conflict occurs when one side desires something that can be obtained only at the expense of what another side desires. His view is objectivist and concerns incompatible interests.

4. The key variables are (1) balanced and unbalanced and (2) high and low levels of awareness. 5. Exploitative imbalance is a particular prevalent form of unpeaceful relationship and is his principal concern. Curles Paradigm Unbalanced, low awareness Unbalanced, Education high awareness Balanced, Confrontation high awareness Conciliation Bargaining No conflict Development Curle's Paradigm

Unpeaceful Relationship Unstable Dynamic Negotiation: Conciliation Bargaining Sustainable Peace Unbalanced Balanced Static Peaceful Relationships 1. Education/Conscientization Latent Conflict Low Awareness

Confronatation Overt Conflict High Awareness Curles Paradigm Unbalanced, low awareness Unbalanced, Education high awareness Balanced, Confrontation high awareness Conciliation Bargaining No conflict Development

Paulo Freire: Pedagogy of the Oppressed 1. The purpose of education is to empower people to be the creators of their own history. 2. The method is dialogical. No one is absolutely ignorant. 3. Identification of generative themes that give rise to limit situations. 4. Exploration of untested feasibility. 5. Dialogue is the exercise of freedom. Curles Paradigm Unbalanced, low awareness Unbalanced, Education high awareness Balanced, Confrontatio n high awareness

Conciliation Bargaining No conflict Development Confrontation I. Non-ViolenceA Response to Violence Criteria for Effectiveness 1. Active force against force 2. Effective against violence II. Source of Power: Role of Consent How do you think about your power? III. Methods of Struggle A. Non-Violence Protest & Persuasion B. Non-Cooperation 1. Social 2. Economic 3. Political C. Non-Violent Intervention IV. Mechanism of Change A. Conversion B. Accommodation

C. Coercion Tractable Conflicts I. Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts Opponent: an adversary, rival Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Peaceful Outcome: win-win resolution II. Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Opponent: an oppressor Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationships Intractable Conflicts III. Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences Spring 2001

PEACE STUDIES FRAMEWORK TRACTABLE CONFLICT COMPONENTS OF PEACE 1 Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Opponent: an adversary, rival Peaceful Outcome: winwin resolution Justice: equity within competing relationships Security: institutional protection Non-violence: freedom from war

2 Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Opponent: an oppressor Justice: equality and fairness Security: power Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationship Non-violence: freedom from structural violence Rectifying Injustice: inequity Removing Threat:

competing interests Means: democratic institution, conflict resolution processes Rectifying Injustice: exploitation Removing Threat: exploitation Means: education, confrontation, conciliation, bargaining

INTRACTABLE CONFLICT 3 COMPONENTS OF PEACE Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences

Conflict Transformation: creation of we-ness trust (must transform the conflict into one that is tractable) Justice: rightness of my Injustice: interference goals and aspirations in your pursue of your goals and aspirations Security: victory (eternal Threat: the presence of vigilance) the other Non-violence: expulsion of bad violence Means: good violence Transcenders: Establishing connects What is due the grandchildren of your enemy?

What is due the grandchildren of your enemy? What is due the grandchildren of your enemy? Transformers: Developing trust Foundations for We-ness Rectifying Injustice Basic Human Right Alleviating fear Confidencebuilding

Renouncing violence Establishing consent Components of Peace Justice Just War Theory, International Law, Arms Control Security Realist Political Theory Non-violence Pacifism Basic Human Rights Physical security Subsistence Effective participation Free physical movement Tractable Conflicts

I. Peace: mediated, resolved conflicts Opponent: an adversary, rival Type of Conflict: conflict of interests Peaceful Outcome: win-win resolution II. Peace: fair, just, & cooperative relationships Opponent: an oppressor Type of Conflict: unbalanced relationships Peaceful Outcome: mutually beneficial relationships Intractable Conflicts III. Peace: defeat of the enemy Enemy: antithesis of peace Type of Conflict: protracted, intractable differences Outcome: irreconcilable differences

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Web Platforms - European Bioinformatics Institute

    Web Platforms - European Bioinformatics Institute

    - Multiple sequence alignment (for instance Clustal Omega) How to use the EBI Search RESTful APIExample 4: get cross-references. Example 4: get list of cross-references. Goal: get UniProt entries with a cross-reference to OMIM id 105400 — same goal as...
  • The Effect of Sense Manipulation on Postural Stability

    The Effect of Sense Manipulation on Postural Stability

    Vestibular System: Without this system you would not have an appropriate sense of gravity or bodily orientation. Somatosensory System: Without this system you would not be able to feel, you would not have reflexes, it is the quickest system to...
  • Course Introduction CET1600C  Cisco Networking Fundamentals Professor Yousif

    Course Introduction CET1600C Cisco Networking Fundamentals Professor Yousif

    Course Information CET1600C - Network Fundamentals / Introduction to Cisco Networking Fundamentals Concepts, Terminology, OSI Model, IP Addressing, Subnetting, Ethernet, LANs, Protocols, Packets, Frames, Data Communications "Survey of Telecommunication and Data communications technology fundamentals, Local Area Networks, Wide Area Networks...
  • Chapter Nine: Charlemagne and the Rise of Medieval Culture

    Chapter Nine: Charlemagne and the Rise of Medieval Culture

    The Rise of Medieval Culture Culture and Values, 8th. Ed. Cunningham and Reich and Fichner-Rathus * * * * * * * * * * * 8.9 The four evangelists and their symbols, Palatine School at Aachen, early 9th century....
  • Fairy Tales - Union High School

    Fairy Tales - Union High School

    Common elements of fractured fairy tales. Irony- the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning; an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected. Parody- a humorous or...
  • LECTURE & PROCESSUS COGNITIFS Une approche psycholinguistique ...

    LECTURE & PROCESSUS COGNITIFS Une approche psycholinguistique ...

    Apprentissage répondant Expérience : Substituer un stimulus inconditionnel (viande) engendrant une réponse inconditionnelle (salivation) un stimulus conditionnel (son) qui provoque à son tour par apprentissage associatif la réponse réflexe. Le comportement obtenu est dit alors répondant.
  • The cardiovascular system

    The cardiovascular system

    Cardiac Output (CO) amount of blood pumped out by each ventricle in 1 min. Stroke Volume (SV) = vol of blood pumped out by 1 ventricle with each beat. correleates with force of ventricular contraction. CO = HR x SV...
  • Rodney Fort's Sports Economics

    Rodney Fort's Sports Economics

    NHL by far the least profitable. Leagues differ in the variability of profit. NFL team profits are by far the most even. ... Making the playoffs is a vital source of revenue. Revenue from Broadcast Rights. TV became the largest...