Unit 4: Peace and Conflict Flashcards
define peace
peace is the absence of violence or conflict, sometimes underpinned by a deeper equity and harmony
negative peace
the absence of active, organised violence by both state and non-state actors
(may have been absent for years or recent)
* most useful in the first stage of conflict resolution (aim to stop immediate violence)
positive peace
defined in terms of harmony and wholeness; the absence not just of violence but the causes of violence.
* causes of conflict are neutralised
* society = just and equal
* “sustainable peace”
* former enemies make peace, and each has equal stake in society
realist POV - negative peace
- States are the key actors, and peace depends on maintaining a balance of power
- Priority is national security over peace
realist POV - positive peace
- unrealistic aim
- natural for states to comepete
- equal status among nation states is impossible and undesirable
liberal POV - negative peace
- desirable and realistic first objective
- acheived through diplomacy / negotiation with assistance of IGOs
- “a means to an end”
liberal POV - positive peace
- desired final state in all conflict situations
- realistic and achievable
- both sides will be willing to compromise on core interests
- both sides will be willing to reconcile and forgive
Johan Galtung, who is he?
Norwegian peace theorist (b.1930)
Galtungs 4 key components that influence the presence or absence of peace
- equity
- harmony
- violence
- trauma
- peace process should focus on increasing equity and harmony while reducing **violence and trauma **
Galtung’s key components that influence the presence or absence of peace 1)
equity
- society must operate on a basis of equality in order to have peace
- political equality: all adult citizens have the right to vote and participate in the political system
- economic equality: equal opportunities and access to resources
- equality before the law: every citizen is equal before the law, no citizen or institution is above the law
eg. newly created democratic institutions may be designed so that all political parties are involved in government through a system of power sharing
Galtung’s key components that influence the presence or absence of peace 2)
harmony
- hardest to measre of all the components of a peaceful society
- harmonious society = all citizens work together despite differences in race, ethnicity, class, case, trelgion, gender, sexual orientation or age
- after conflict -> hamrony may be increased through national processes which expose wrongdoing and promote forgiveness and reconcilliation
- can be measured trough opinion polls which reveal public attitudes and tolerance of minorities
Galtung’s key components that influence the presence or absence of peace 3)
violence
- physical or psychological harm
- caused either by physical force by groups in conflict OR by structures within society / government (ie. violence against women under Taliban in Afghanistan)
- causing injury, damage or death
Galtung’s key components that influence the presence or absence of peace 4)
trauma
- emotional shock following stress of conflict of violence
- can lead to long term distress and harm, bitterness and grievance between parties that were in conflict
- grievances that left unresolved are likely to cause a return to conflict
unipolarity
- one great power or hegemon exists which cannot be challenged militarily by anyother
- absolute power of the hegemon makes conflict less likely
- sceptics argue: while immediate power is unlikely, in the long term conflict may result as other powers seek to remove power from the hegemon
hegemon definition
a state so powerful that it dominates all other states in the system, global or regional
(global hegemons are extremely rare and are more likely to exist at regional, rather than global levels)
bipolarity
when two states are equally powerful, and the main competition is between these two powers and not others
- Cold war: US and Soviet Union were in direct bipolar competition with each other, but never fought each other directly
multipolarity
when many states are powerful and compete with each other
- many analysts agree that the current world states is multipolar: many powers are competing with each other and non-state groups are challenging nation states in armed conflict
- realists: more instability in a multipower order
- liberals: if many states have power, it increases te possibility of nation states working together in common interest (eg. work together through international organisations like the UN whose core goal is international peace)
democratic peace theory
some theorists suggest that democracy itself promotes peace (conflict between democratic states is rare)
- fairer balance of power and distribution of wealth / resources
- internal stability -> reduces potential sources of greivance & promotes dispute resolution through democratic means rather than violent menas
eg. in 2012 the national parilment was re-established in Somalia (insitution allows members to resolve disputes through dialogue, a format which didnt exist during the country’s civil war)
3 pathways to peace
- peace- making
- peace- keeping
- peace- building
3 pathways to peace: 1) peacemaking
stopping violent conflict and creating negative peace
- pause or end to immediate violence: commonly through negotiation
- pausing violence -> allows further mediation / negotation and the building of trust between both sides in a conflict
- original cause of conflict may not be resolved, but the pause enables stabilisation (eg. ceasefire or truce)
3 pathways to peace: 2) peacekeeping
sustaining negative peace to allow positive peace to be built
- ceasefire may lead to independent peacekeepers to be sent to the area
-> they ensure peace holds, allowing positive peace to be built
->priority = monitoring agreements made during the peacemaking process (armed forces from and international or regional body like UN, or by unarmed monitors from organisations like OSCE (Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe))
3 pathways to peace: 3) peacebuilding
building of sustainable, positive peace and long-term conflict resolution
- development assistance to improve health and education, address inequality and rebuild destroyed infrastructure (may also involve deeper reconciliation efforts like amnesties or trials for war criminals)
- many peacekeeping missions approved by UN have a mandate to carry out peacebuilding activies alongside traditional peacekeeping
Truth and Reconciliation Commissions
aim to expose the wrongdoing of all those involved in a conflict in a way that promotes forgiveness and understanding, rahter than punishment or blame
- accepting status quo (state of a situation as it is), agreeing and publicising accounts of the conflict, understanding opposing views, ultimately rebuilding relationshsips
South Africa, example of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions
- news and events were highly publicised and televised
- published detailed reports exposing wrongdoing and making recommendations for the future
- relied on religious cultures and strong belief of forgiveness:
South African commission was chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu -> hearings began with prayers - occurred once previous government left power and both nations were in conscious process of rebuilding
Peace through justice: ICC
- war criminals prosecuted
- established by the Rome Statue in 1998
- permanent international court for crimes against humanity
- as of now, International Criminal Court (ICC) has made 10 convictions, all for crimes committed in Africa
conflict defintion
disagreement and competition over power, ideas, identity, resources or territory.
non-violent conflict examples
peaceful demonstrations
strikes
civil disobedience
political campaigns
diplomacy
violent conflict examples
terrorist attacks
civil war
interstate wate
insurgency or guerrilla war
genocide
factors that constitute a non-violent conflict
- a legitimate structure or process for dialogue is in place, and everyone is involved in using this
- democratic structures allow the population to be consulted. the results of these consultations are legitimate
- the parties involved in the dispute are dependent on each other and would be harmed if the dispute became violent
- violent solutions are against the core interests of all parties
factors that constitute a violent conflict
- lack of trust between both sides of the conflict
- no structure exists for the dispute to be resolved peacfully, through dialogue or democratic means
- grievance and trauma are sustaining, and deepening, the conflict
- violent approaches are seen as the only way to secure core interests
what factors does Galtung suggest encourage violent conflict?
attitudes, behaviours and contradictions
(all 3 factors must be present for a violent conflict to exist -> each factor reinforces the others, all need to be stopped for conflict to end -> if only 1 exists, then conflict may be likely to develop over time)
what does Galtungs conflict triangle look like/ what does it present?
manifest layer: obvious, evidence of violent conflict
latent level: deeper causes and conditions of conflict can be analysed
what conditions make conflict more likely?
- little or no democratic means of dispute resolution; minorities excluded from political representation
- wealth, territory or resources shared unequally and controlled by powerful elites
- poverty
- government is above the law, making arbitrary and illegitimate decisions
- judicial system is absent or interfered with, not independent or fair
- human rights are abused
what conditions make violent conflict less likely
- democratic institutions exist, with full political equality and pariticpation
- equal sharing of wealth and resources
- equality of opportunity for all
- government respects rule of law
- disputes can be resolved fairly through a fair and independent judicial system
- respect for human rights (especially of minorities)
what 2 factors does type of conflict depend on?
- the nature of the groups involved (eg. nation states or non-state groups)
- the contradition that caused the conflict (eg. ideology, revolution, violent organised crime, dispute over territory or resources)
interstate war definition
a war between two or more states
- has decreased since 1946 (part. since end of cold war)
- some years have seen none in the world
intrastate war definition
a war within a state (can be used synonymously with civil war)
- has increased since 1946
- now represents most common form of violent conflict
guerrilla war definition
‘little war’; an insurgency or peoples war, fought by irregular troops using tactics that are suited to the terrain and emphasise mobility and surprise, rather than superior firepower
‘old wars’ characteristics
based on interstate conflict
- principal groups involved were regular armed forces of nation states
- fought for ideology or geopolitical interests
- violence directed against and between national armed forces
- financed by states (taxation or outside support)
- emphasis on battles to capture territory
‘new wars’ characteristics
based on globalised conflicts between civilian and non-state groups
- principal groups are non-state groups, rebel groups and independent militia
- fought for identity - religious, ethnic, tribal
- violence directed against civilians
- financed by non-state groups exploiting local economies and by violent organised crime
- emphasis on controlling populations, displacing minorities
when did the main change from old to new wars occur?
end of Cold War
direct violence definition
when an individual or group is mentally or physically harmed through direct action
direct violence examples
assult, rape, murder, war, genocide/crimes against humanity (systemic direct violence is directed at an ethnic group, or individual in a position of power)
direct violence characteristics
- often straightforward to identify
- possible to investigate and establish who was responsible
- possible to measure
- possible to identify in such a way that those responsible can be held to account
structural violence definition
when a gov. or other forms of power functions in a way that results in physical, mental or other harm to individuals or groups
how can structural violence be inflicted?
through inequalities that deny people fundamental rights resulting in phsyical harm such as illness or death through hunger or diseases
when does a government commit structural violence?
when it forcibly and counsciously limits human development or undermines well-being where fairer alternatives are possible
(eg. a government that hoards wealth within an elite and fails to spend gov. resoruces to protects its citizens from preventable diseases)
structural violence characteristics
- a conscious choice; the structure of the government causes physical or mental harm to others
- leads to preventable suffering not being prevented
- causes people to be harmed through lack of basic necessities, which may be given to others
- is widespread but often unchallenged and unacknowledged
- is harder to measure and say who is responsible for it
cultural violence definition
aspects of a culture that can be used to justify or legitimise direct or structural violence
cultural violence characteristics
- may be gov.-driven (culture influencing gov. structures) or society-driven (ordinary peoples culture influencing society’s behaviour)
- is any aspect of a culture that is used to legitimise violence in its direct or structural forms
- may be harder to eliminate as it is embedded in the mindset of a society and is linked to cultural or religious values that become seen as legitimate
pacifism definition
a commitment to peace and a rejection of war or violence in any circumstances
terrorism definition
UN attempted to define in 2015, still has not reached an agreement
possible definition: the threat of violence and the use of fear to coerce, persuade and gain public attention
how is it possible to define a particular group as a terrorist organisation?
the legitimacy of the group’s actions and objectives must be assessed
state terrorism
nation states that abuse their power may terrorise their populations through violence or threat of violence
sub-state terrorism
non-state terrorist groups like al-Qaeda have caried out attacks against national governments and civilians
-> operations represent insurgency which challenge the legitimacy of those in power
internationalised terrorism
- since 9/11, terrorist groups have become increasingly globalised (eg. al-Qaeda -> Paris attack 2015)
- key objective is to mobilise other militants to carry out similar acts + to terrorise communities through attacks on public places + to gain international attention
Jus ad bellum – Justice before going to war
- Just cause – War must address a serious wrong (e.g., self-defense, protecting human rights) and not based on material gain (in modern politics, agreeing on a just cause is likely a matter of perspective).
- Legitimate authority – Only recognized and lawful authorities: nation states are responsible to follow international law -> UN Security Council can declare war (Libya in 2011, UN Security Council authorised military action, agreeing ‘all necessary measures’ to protect civilians)
- Last resort – All peaceful alternatives (eg. diplomacy and negotiation) must have been attempted and exhausted.
- Probability of success – Any action taken must be proportionate to the initial act of aggression.
- Proportionality – The expected benefits of war must outweigh the harm caused.
What is the concept of the Responsibility to Protect?
An international norm that seeks to ensure that the international community never again fails to enable states to halt the mass atrocity crimes of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
The key messages of R2P
- States have a responsibility to protect populations under their jurisdiction from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
- The international community has a responsibility to help states to fulfil their responsibility to protect.
- When a state is ‘manifestly failing’ to protect its own populations then the international community has a responsibility to protect and may take collective action in a timely manner even to the point of using force as a last resort.
- Supporting UN in establishing an early warning capability.
request for help
military action is seen to be legitimate in international law if a nation state requests help from others
Jus in bello – Justice in the conduct of war
- Discrimination – Must distinguish between combatants and civilians; civilians must not be targeted.
- Proportionality – Use of force must be proportional to the objective; no excessive force or unnecessary suffering.
- No means malum in se (wrong in itself) – Certain weapons or tactics (e.g., torture, rape, chemical weapons) are always immoral.
The Geneva Conventions
govern the conduct of armed conflict
- A set of four international treaties that form the core of international humanitarian law (IHL).
- Aim: To limit suffering caused by war and protect those not actively involved in fighting.
- Apply in all armed conflicts, including those involving non-state actors (e.g., civil wars, insurgencies).
- Must be applied without discrimination.
Geneva Convetions: First Convention – Wounded and Sick on Land
- Protects wounded and sick soldiers on land during war.
- Also protects medical personnel and facilities (e.g. field hospitals, ambulances).
- Prohibits torture, ensures proper care and humane treatment.
- Red cross and red crescent = visible signs of protection
Geneva Convetions: Second Convention – Armed Forces at Sea
- Adapts the First Convention to naval warfare.
- Covers wounded, sick, and shipwrecked military personnel at sea.
- Also protects hospital ships and crews.
Geneva Conventions: Third Convention – Prisoners of War (POWs)
- POWs must be:
-> Treated humanely (no torture, no murder)
-> Given adequate food, water, clothing, shelter
-> Allowed to communicate with families
-> Released and repatriated after the conflict ends when International Committee of the Red Cross receives them
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) ensures compliance and visits POWs.
Geneva Conventions: Fourth Convention – Civilians in Conflict Zones
- Protects civilians under occupation or at the hands of an aggressor.
- Special protections for women and children.
- Obligates belligerents to:
-> Provide food and medical aid.
-> Allow ICRC to visit and monitor conditions.
