Peace and Conflict
What are the six common misconceptions of conflict defining?
-Conflict is caused by a single factor -Conflict parties are (rational) unitary actors -Conflict is always visible (latent conflicts may lead to visible ones if they go unresolved) -Conflict is always undesirable (we need conflict to realise something is wrong) Conflict always needs to be settled Conflict always require "third-party intervention" (UN) (may lead to weak states being mistreated)
What are the conditions which make violent conflict more likely?
-Human rights are abused -Little/no democratic means of conflict resolutions -Not equal political representation/influence -Unequal distribution of resources, wealth, territories -Poverty -No rule of law -No functioning justice system -Government making illegitimate and arbitrary decisions
How can international law justify violence?
-In the UN charter, it authorises the Security council to "determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression" and to take military and non military action "to restore int. peace and security" -If a state has requested help (eg. no Security Council resolution was sought for US military actions against ISIS in Iraq as Iraq had asked for help) -R2P
What are the conditions which make violent conflict less likely?
-Respect for human rights (esp. for minorities) -Independent judicial systems that can resolve conflict fairly -Rule of law respected -Equality of opportunity for all -Equal distribution of wealth and resources -Democratic institutions -Equal and representative politics and participation
What are the two key factors determining what type of conflict something is?
-The nature of the groups involved (eg. nation states or non-state groups) -The contradiction that is the source of the conflict (eg. ideology, revolution, ,violent/organised crime, disputes) Since 1946 intrastate war represents the most common source of conflict, whilst interstate war has decreased
What is the realist approach to war? Aka Real Politic
-War is beyond morality -War is inevitable and an enduring feature ->Due to the dynamics of power politics and clashes of national interests -Not amoral, just an example of moral relativism (informed by ethical nationalism) -Only ever war or negative peace (absence of war but not what causes it) Violent power politics are explained through: 1. Classical realists emphasise state egoism, rivalry within and between political communities reflect human nature (self-seeking, competition and aggression) 2. Neo realists argue that due to anarchy, states have to rely on self help for security and this can only be assured through the acquisition of military power, esp. according to offensive realists this makes war very likely. This is also driven by states being power maximisers and security dilemma How can war be prevented? -International government (nobody wants this tho) -Balance of power -When chance of victory seems too low -Therefore states who wish to prevent war must prepare it as to deter others.
What are the benefits of nonviolent conflict?
1. Enhances domestic and international legitimacy which increases pressure on the target. 2. A regime's violence against nonviolent movements is likely to backfire against it -Can result in the breakdown of obedience among regime supporters and rally population against it -Can lead to international condemnation-> sanctions or aid for the movement 3. Appear more open to negotiations because they do not threaten lives -Public views nonviolent campaigns as physically nonthreatening, opposite for violent -When violent insurgents threaten the lives of regime members, they reduce the likelihood of loyalty shifts -As soon as a group turns violent, they recieve condemnation (as soon as BLM protests throw a rock, everybody hates them)
What is the Just War Theory?
A Just war is a war that in its purpose (jus ad bellum) and conduct (jus in bello) meets certain ethical standards and so is (allegedly morally justified) -Stands in between realism and pacificm, war is sometimes moral and justified (instead of always/never) -Some say ju ad bellum > jus in bello (ends justify the means)
Define positive peace
A deeper level of harmony in a society where not only there is an absence of conflict, but what caused it has been resolved sustainably. Wide definition -No visible violence and no deeper societal causes of conflict -Society is just and equal -Former enemies make peace and have equal stakes in society. Eg. 2012 Somalia where efforts to create sustainable peace led to the re-establishment of a representative parliament and an agreed national constitution. By giving the clans a voice in society->political equality. Efforts were made to reintegrate former militants into society. To work towards positive peace, in northern ireland they are trying to let everyone be part of the police force and the electorate. PEACEBUILDING
How does Smoker and Groff define peace?
A definition which realises that peace is a progressive concept
How can harmony be increased in order to reach positive peace?
A harmonious society is one where all citizens work together despite differences -Can be measured through opinion polls on public's attitudes towards minorities -Harmony may be forcibly increased by national processes such as Truth and Reconciliation Commissions which expose wrongdoings and promote forgiveness Eg. Truth and Reconciliation Commissions were established in Sierra Leone (2004), Liberia (2009) and Columbia (2015) Laws and constitutions were created to protect against discrimination and prejudice.
What is Galtung's conflict triangle?
A method for analysing conflict (can be filled in with info regarding irl conflicts) Three causes of conflict that act together: -Behaviour -Attitudes -Contradictions All must exist for it to be called a conflict, each reinforces each other, all must be stopped for peace
How can equality be increased in order to reach positive peace?
A society must operate on the basis of equality in order to have peace -Political equality (all adults can vote) -Economic equality /equal opportunities and access to resources) -Equality before the law Eg. New democratic institutions may be designed so that all political parties are involved in government (system of power sharing) In northern Ireland 1998 the republican and the unionist parties shared executive power. Also increased catholic representation in eg. police force
What is pacifism's view on war?
All war is morally wrong because -Killing is wrong-> grounds for conscientious objection to military service -"contingent pacifism", focuses on the long term benefits of non-violence, war doesn't solve anything, it breeds hatred and more Pacifism has been an important part of int politics because -"Legal pacifism" has provided support for supranational bodies like UN. Some even want a world government. Embraces the notion of positive peace(the absence of what causes war) - Has fuelled a growing peace movement (started with hippies: no nuclear, no Vietnam) Critics: -Pacifists enjoy the peace their country's military provides them without reciprocity - What about selfdefense? -How about humanitarian interventions?
What is cultural violence?
Cultural violence can be identified in the mindset, beliefs and values of a society. This often cases direct violence (eg. wife is your property? Doesn't matter if you hit her). Descriminative cultural norms may result in a government failing to protect the group when violence takes place. Responsibility is embedded within all societal levels and may be committed in private, families and public. Cultural violence is often: -Either government-driven (culture influencing governmental structures) or society-driven (grass-roots culture influencing society's behaviour) -Any aspect of a culture which is used to legitimise violence whether direct or structural -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 Eg. Quatar, women are not getting the same opportunities as the men. FGM in Egypt
How does international law and treaties govern the conduct during armed conflict?
Geneva and Hague Conventions: -Under int. humanitarian law Conduct armed conflicts eg protection of civilians, hospitals, the injured and POW treatment -All UN member states are subject to these and the Security council may act in response to breaches. (an example of customary int. law where laws are "a general oractice accepted as law" and exist independent of treaty law. States cannot opt out) Geneva Protocol: Treaty prohibiting the use of poisonous gases Ottawa Treaty: Prohibits the use of landmines by treaty Convention of Cluster MUnitions: Only applicable in int. law by signatories. Prohibits the use of cluster bombs
What are the types of armed conflict according to the "Correlates of War project"?
Inter-state (between states(governments) -Eg south sudan vs sudan 2012 Intra-state ( Between state government and internal opposition groups) -Most common Extra-state (between a state and a non-state actor outside of its territory) -Not happened since 1975, usually relating to decolonisation Internationalised internal conflict (State vs internal opposition groups with intervention from other states) -Maybe Ukraine current, at least its civil war Between non-state actors (armed forces which are not states) -Eg. Talibans, Kenyan tribes, paramilitary and revolutionary groups in Colombia
What are some wider definitions of peace (ie positive peace)?
Martin Luther King (later expanded by Galtung): Positive peace=justice. Absence of violence, both indirect and direct. Positive peace is the presence of social justice, eg. equal/egalitarian distribution of power and resources Feminist Peace: Also includes the removal of all forms of discrimination (focus on gender on exams) Cultural relativism Eg. Have Sweden achieved this? We do not have any laws against it (saudi arabia), but we haven't really achieved positive peace as women still earn less and suffer from domestic abuse. The inaction of the state. Holistic Gaia peace: Living in harmony with the environment and yourself.
What are the critical theories' approach to war?
Marxism -Origins of war can be traced back to the capitalist economic system (the pursuit of economic advantage) -Socialism will prevent against Feminism -Wars are fought between men and the realist idea of human nature and institutions are based on masculine ideas (eg aggression, self interest) -War stem from the warlike nature of the male sex or their patriarchal societies. -Natural peacefulness of women, womens' experience of the world encourages an emphasis on human connectedness and cooperation Social Constructionists Stress Cultural and ideological factors making war more likely. Either by portraying the int. environment as threatening or by giving a specific group a militaristic or expansionist image.
What are the arguments for "military power has become redundant in global politics"
Obsolesce of war: -Conflict is obsolete in many parts of the world because increase of democracy (democratic zones of peace), the detering of total war, international law making it non-legitimate, states have more pressing claims on their resources like public services Trade not war: -Globalisation has made war unthinkable because; through trade you can gain the resources you want, interdependence makes war too costly and economic interactions increases international understanding which counters nationalism. Unwinnable wars: -No longer able to predict winnings, asymmetrical wars do not automatically guarantee win (Vietnam) -> non military means seem more attractive
What is the difference between old wars and new wars?
Old wars: -Principal groups were armed forces from nation states -Fought for ideology or geopolitical interests -Violence directed against and between national armed forces -Financed by states (taxes or outside support) -Emphasis on battles to capture territory -Very structured, hierarchical, rules of war, chivalric New wars: -Principal groups are non-state groups, rebel groups and independent militia -Fought for identity (ethnic, tribal, religious, bc threat from globalisation) -Violence directed against civilians -Financed by non-state groups exploiting local economies and organised crime -Emphasis on controlling populations and displacing minorities -Less organised, line between civilians and military blurred (mercenaries, terrorism, mines, small quarrels), no rules -More barbaric (an entire people group might be the enemy, ok to rape and murder) -Often asymmetrical
What is the liberal approach to war?
Peace is natural but not inevitable War arises from: 1-State egoism in anarchy -Fixed by int. rule of law, supranational bodies 2. Economic nationalism, autarky and the quest for self sufficiency -Fixed by freetrade and economic interdependence 3. Authoritarian states (the regime relies on military for control-> political and military elites become fused-> glorification of the armed forces and patriotism -Fixed by Democratic peace theory
What is Galtung's peace formula?
Peace processes should focus on the dual task of increasing equity and harmony whilst decreasing violence and trauma
What are the steps in the pathway from conflict to peace?
Peacemaking: -Stopping/pausing conflict and creating negative peace usually through negotiations. A pause might allow for further mediation and enable stabilisation through ceasefires/truces. -A thriid party can come in if they have nat. interest (eg. nagorno-karabakh). May flare up if they leave. Eg. Colombia's largest right wing group FARC agreed to a series of ceasefires as it negotiated with the nation's government in 2015 Agreements between pro-Russian rebels and Ukrainian nationalist forces resulted in fragile ceasefires in 2015 Peacekeeping: Maintaining negative peace to allow positive peace to be built. As a ceasefire has been agreed, independent peacekeepers such as international UN/ regional AU armed forces or OSCE unarmed forces will monitor agreements. UN missions are always legitimised by Security Council resolutions. Even states who just emerged from conflict can send peacekeeping forces Eg. Sierra Leone to a AU mission in Somalia in 2012 Peacebuilding: The building of sustainable positive peace. Often involves development promotion to address inequalities, and rebuild infrastructure. Might involve reconciliation efforts. Might even be Nation Building where the entire structure of a nation-state is rebuilt. Often simultaneous with peace keeping missions if specific mandate from the UN. Eg. When peace building troops left Afghanistan in 2014, there had been an increase of 9% economic growth, 60% health care provisions and 2.5m more girls in school. However, considerable security problems still remained
What is the liberal view on positive and negative peace?
Positive peace: -The desired final state -Achievable and realistic -States will be willing to make big concessions on core interests and seek to reconcile and forgive Democratic Peace Theory Negative peace: -A desirable and first objective -Perhaps achieved through diplomacy, negotiation and with the help of an IGO -A means to an end NOT an end
What is the realist view on positive and negative peace?
Positive peace: -Unrealistic aim, it is natural for states to compete -Equal status between states in impossible and unwanted Negative peace: -The more natural state in an anarchical world order. Prioritises national security over peace for its own sake Depends on unipolarity (more peace), bipolarity (more peace, balance of power) or multipolarity (less peace bc insecurity) Security Dilemma, Balance of Power
What are Moore's five categories of conflict?
Relationship (bad events can poison communication and relationships long way down the line) -The violence during the Sierra Leone Civil War still plays a big role in society. Data (Caused by disagreement over what actually happened during a conflict. Differing/inaccurate/propaganda/ideological motivated/inadequate data) Interest (percieved or actual competitive interests) -Fracking in UK, Arab-Israeli conflict over exclusive right to ownership of the land Structural (inequality) Value (different criteria for evaluation ideas'or behaviour, different ways of life, religion) -Supported by Huntington's "clash of civilisations"
Define negative peace
The absence of active and organised conflict. Narrow definition -It may be recent/temporary (eg. The ceasefire in the Minsk agreement in 2015 Ukraine) or over many years. -A first stage in conflict resolution where the goal is to stop immediate violence. -May be caused by a balance of forces (either global or nation) -Does not consider causes creating the violence -Even in a stable state such as the US it can be argued that it is not in negative peace due to racial tensions and violent clashes (eg in 2014 Ferguson, Missouri) -Sometimes peace can be achieved by a powerful state stepping in and telling them to stop PEACEMAKING and PEACEKEEPING
What are the phases of de-escalation of conflict? What are the ideal responses and give examples
Stage of conflict-Ideal response (Examples) Ceasefire-Peacekeeping (FARC agreed to a series of ceasefires as it took part of negotiations with the Colombian government in 2012 and 2015) Agreement-Elite peacemaking (Good Friday agreement in Northern Ireland 1998 agrees power sharing between the main political parties in a new assembly. Constitution was amended to revoke the Republic of Ireland's claim on Northern Ireland) Normalisation-Structural peacebuilding (The peace process in Somalia since 2012 has focused in negotiations between the government, Mogadishu and regional pro-government clans regarding the sharing of resources and incomes Reconciliation- Cultural/community peacebuilding (Truth and Reconciliation Commissions in Sierra Leone 1999 and S. Africa 1998. An international commission of Inquiry on Darfur, Sudan was established by the UN in 2015 concluded that the government of Sudan had not pursued a policy of genocide)
What are the phases of escalation of conflict? What are the ideal responses and give examples
Stage of conflict-Ideal response (Examples) Difference-Cultural/community peacebuilding (Southern Sudan Peace Commission est 2006 to promote peaceful coexistence among the area's people and develop an early warning system) Contradiction-Structural peacebuilding (After Arab spring 2011, egypt struggled est a new order peacefully as there were few political parties and bad representation. Western governments invested aid money in programs to build their society and political parties) Polarisation-Elite peacemaking (Israel-Palestine conflict, 2011 former British PM was appointed Special Envoy of the (EU, UN, Russia, US) Quartet->led elite peacemaking efforts with senior leaders on their behalves Violence-Peacekeeping (Majority of operations in the last 10 years have been in Africa. UN peacekeepers were sent to Rwanda, but the rules of engagement did not allow them to interfere directly to prevent genocide) War-War limitation (2008, AU Mission to Somalia were dispatched under UN mandate to conduct peacekepping operation, but instead they did peace enforcement; they fought against al-Shabaab to regain territory for the interim somali government)
What are the different kinds of terrorism?
State terrorism: Nation states abusing their power by terrorising the population (eg. Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party in Iraq attacked Kurdish and Shia minorities with chemical weapons) Sub-state terrorism: Attacks against both national governments and civilians in an insurgency to challenge the legitimacy of those in power (al-Quada, Boko Haram) Internationalised terrorism: Increasingly common. Used to mobilise other militants to carry out similar atacks and terrorise communities to attract international attention (eg. Paris attacks by ISIS inspired militants)
What are the underlying causes of internal conflict according to Michael Brown?
Structural factors: -Weak states -Intra-state security concerns -Ethnic geography Political factors: -discriminatory political institutions -Exclusionary national ideologies -Elite politics -Inter-group politics Economic/social factors: -Economic problems -Discriminatory economic systems -Modernisation Cultural/Perceptual factors: -Patterns of cultural discrimination -Problematic group histories
How can violence be justified?
Structure: Well she destroyed my honour International: R2P Personal: They deserved it, religion, ideology Propaganda: Portraying the other side as inhuman State: Being the state with a monopoly of violence (in the best interest of the state) -Rebel groups are usually not justified in their violence as it breaks the monopoly of violence, even if one might agree with their aims JUST WAR THEORY
Define peace
The absence of violent conflict. On a deeper layer it also involves the equity and harmony of a state/society/region. Can be either positive (long term causes of conflict solved sustainably) or negative (absence of violence).
Define violence
The physical or psychological harm that is inflicted on others. Anything which hinders others from reaching their full potential
Define non-violence
The practice of advocating one's own/others beliefs and standing up/exposing the system which is seen as unjust without harming the opponent.
Define conflict
When parties disagree about power, resources, territory and ideas. It includes both non-violent conflict which can promote social change and violent conflict which leads to destruction.
What is terrorism and how is a group defined as a terrorist group?
The threat of violence and the use of fear to coerce, persuade and gain public attention Debated how to define a terrorist group, some questions used are: -Does the group have any non-violent alternatives? -Is there a legitimate grievance that makes the threat and use of violence necessary. Morally, is this ever justifiable? -Are civilians deliberately targeted to create a climate of fear so that governments will feel obliged to respond.
How can trauma be decreased in order to reach positive peace?
Trauma is the emotional shock following violence which can lead to long term distress, harm and grievance between parties. This makes a return to conflict more likely. -May be reduced by retributive or restorative justice ->Truth and reconciliation acts and prosecuting war criminals Eg. The ICC is shit at this, it takes too long and war criminals get released and granted amnesty
What and why is non-violent conflict?
When... -A legitimate structure or process for dialog is in place and everyone involved is using it -Democratic institutions allow the population to be consulted and the results of this is considered legitimate -Parties are dependent on each other and would be harmed if the situation became violent -Violent solutions are against the interest of all parties Eg. -Peaceful demonstrations, strikes, civil disobedience, diplomacy, political campaigns -Iran nuclear weapons program, EU and the Eurozone crisis, Scottish independence
Do the different kinds of power structures in the world promote peace or conflict?
Unipolarity: +According to the Hegemonic Stability Theory, the absolute power and dominance of a hegemon makes conflict less likely. -In the long term however, it might promote violence when competitors try to challenge the Hegemon. True global hegemons are rare tho. Bipolarity: +During the cold war the US and the USSR never directly fought (due to the MUF) -During the cold war there were prolonged proxy wars Multipolarity: +If many states have power, it increases the chance of them working together with a common interest, eg through the UN whose goal is global peace. (liberal) -More instability in a multipolar order (eg groups like Boko haram challenge states) (Realism) Democratic peace theory: +Democracy itself promotes peace, since there is a fairer balance between power and distribution of wealth and resources. Internal stability decreases grievances. Previous success promotes dispute resolution though democratic rather than violent means. Eg. 2012 Somalia when the national parliament was reestablished it allowed dispute solutions through dialog. Democracy introduction is a vital part of peace building. -No guarantee of democratic stability, lengthy campaigns in the middle east instituted democracy but these are continually threatened by violent insurgent attacks. The security dilemma You know
How can violence be decreased in order to reach positive peace?
Violece is physical or phsychological harm. Either caused by group conflict or by intitutional structures -Violence may be reduced if both sides agree to a ceasefire Eg. The Minsk Protocol (ceasefire) was agreed by both parties involved in the conflicts in eastern Ukraine. It was monitored by the IGO Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). In 2005 the Irish republican army had decommissioned "the totality of weapons" which involves putting weapons in a position where they can no longer be used
What is postmodern war?
War characterised by a revolution in military affairs (new high tech weapons). AKA cyber/virtual/computer war -Aims to keep weapon development to a maximum and actual conflict to a minimum -Aims to increase precision and devastation, whilst keeping (its own) casualties to a minimum -"'no casualty' warfare (airial strikes) leads to only deaths on one side (eg. kosovo 1999) -US lead in high tech weapons have secured its place as a hegemon and promotes bandwagoning by other states Limitations: -Arial attacks aren't enough -US "shock and awe" attack on Bagdad in the early Iraq war might have led to the fall of Saddam Hussain but did not prevent the counter-insurgency war
What are the principles of jus in bello?
Wars must be conducted with: Discrimination: Force must only be conducted towards military targets. Civilian deaths are only acceptable as collateral damage (unavoidable/accidental victims of deliberate attacks on legitimate targets) Proportionality: No more force than is needed to achieve an acceptable military outcome should be used, and it should be proportional to the provoking cause Humanity: Force must not be directed against enemy personnel if they are captured, wounded or under control. Formalised as 'laws of war'
What are the principles of jus ad bellum?
Wars must have: Right authority: Those starting violent conflict should have legitimate authority to do so eg. through the Security council and int. law. (The legality of the Iraq war in 2003 has been questioned since it was launched without authorisation by the Security council. Action in Libya 2011 was authorised by the security council agreeing "all necessary measures" to protect civilians) -But can only democracies be legitimate? Just cause: The objective must be to restore peace, not material gain. Different based on perspectives. Probability of Success: Must be achievable -But sometimes may be necessary to try despite Proportionality: Must be proportionate to the initial act Last resort: Only when all efforts to resolve the conflict peacefully has been exhausted -But what if we wait they become stronger Right intention: Must be prosecuted on the basis of aims that are morally acceptable (may/may not be same as just cause)
What is structural violence?
When a government or other forms of power function in such a way which results in harm to others. This may be through inequalities (eg. no access to sanitation or education resulting in bad lives). When a power forcibly and consciously limits human development or undermines well being where fairer alternatives are possible (doesn't include poor governments which is trying its best but failing). Includes discrimination and segregation. Structural violence is often: -Harder to measure and exert responsibility -A conscious choice (structure causes the harm) -Lead to preventable suffering not being prevented -Causes harm through lack of necessities (which might only be given to a specific group) -Widespread but often unchallenged and unacknowledged -May be either due to government action or inaction Eg. The Ethiopia is making sure that the tigray region isn't getting enough food/medicine
What is direct violence?
When an individual or group is harmed through direct action. Also includes crimes against humanity where systematic direct violence have been directed towards a certain group. Direct violence is often -straight forward to identify -possible to investigate and establish responsibility possible to measure -possible to identify in such a way that those responsible can be held to account.
What and why is violent conflict?
When... -A legitimate structure or process for dialog or democratic solutions does not exist -Lack of trust between both sides -Violent approaches are seen as the only way to secure core interests -Grievance and trauma are sustaining which deepens the conflict Eg. -Terrorist attacks, genocide, interstate/ civil/ insurgency/ guerrilla war -Kurdistan separatism and Turkey, Eastern Ukraine (2014), Syrian civil war