Week 5 Reading notes:

Lecture 1 notes: Peace

1. Study of Conflict and Peace: Peace Studies

John Galtung: principal founder of the Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO), where he
founded the Journal of Peace Research
 Negative peace – the absence of something. conflict, weapons, violence, or fear of
violence etc.
 Positive peace- denotes the simultaneous presence of many desirable states of mind
and society, such as harmony, social justice, equity, etc. The attitudes, institutions
and structures which create and sustain peaceful societies.

Johan Galtung
Direct vs. Structural violence
Direct Violence = Armed Conflict as defined by UCDP. Physical violence against someone by
a physical perpetrator.
Non-state violence
One-sided violence
Criminal Violence (e.g., organized crime)
Homicide/Suicide

We tend to concentrate on direct and think without it there will be no more violence.

Structural violence: It is indirect...`present when human beings are being influenced so that
their somatic and mental realizations are below their potential realizations’ (1969)

Cultural violence: culture that legitimises

and normalises direct and structural
violence. (1969)

Galtung and Peacebuilding

• Johan Galtung (1975) `Three Approaches
to Peace: Peacekeeping, Peace-making and
Peacebuilding’ called for the creation of
peacebuilding structures to promote
sustainable peace by addressing the “root
causes” of violent conflict and supporting
indigenous capacities for peace
management and conflict resolution.

These more unspoken of forms drive

inequality and injustice and lead to physical
violence. Conditions that we live in that
encourage or allow violence.
If we broaden definition too much, do we lose disciplinary focus?

2. Realism and ‘Peace’

Peace = stability (system least likely to see great power war)
As system is anarchic, we’re caught in the security dilemma and will not get peace and need
to be worried about constant threats not dreaming of peace (utopian).

Liberals and ‘Peace’

• Democracy and the Democratic Peace Thesis (Republican Liberalism)
• Free Trade and Economic Interdependence
• International Organizations and International Law
(Regimes)
• The ‘Liberal Peace’
e.g., Kantian peace triangle
We can achieve greater peace through Kantian triangle.

2. Rise and Domination of the ‘Liberal Peace’

• End of Cold War and victory of the ‘West’
• Represents a far more ambitious agenda aimed at
transforming societies in line with ‘modern’ norms of
governance and economics.
• Components vary but usually includes democracy
promotion, the rule of law, `good governance’, promotion
of human rights, economic reform and privatization

Rise of Liberal Peacebuilding

All post-Cold War major UN peace operations have involved similar elements of the
liberal peacebuilding agenda.

3. Critical Approaches to Peace

Critique Realists – who argue negative peace is only `realistic’ goal in anarchy. Self-fulfilling
prophecy.
Can change the world in way that will reduce both direct and structural violence.
`Stability’ is negative peace = constant insecurity
E.g. Cold War
• Neo-Marxism – `Liberal Peace’ is a form of Liberal Imperialism in which laissez faire
economics has become the ‘common sense’ of the age.
• Improvement on Realist approaches, but still masks a high level of ‘structural violence’
embedded in liberal political, economic, and social systems.
• Peace requires radical change/revolution (system change) to establish economic and
social justice.
Feminism - peace requires absence of all forms of violence; direct; structural and cultural;
with presence of justice and equality for all.
Militarism as promoting certain type of culture and behaviour. Domestic violence.
Liberal `Peace’ in the USA?

4. So how should we measure peace?

Create a paradigm shift in the way the world thinks
about peace

Summary
• Peace is a contested concept.
• There are distinct Traditional and Critical Approaches to Peace
• How you define it will affect how you measure it
• Your definition will affect how you seek to achieve it
• Your definition will also affect whether your interventions, like UN peacekeeping
operations, might be considered ‘successful’ in achieving it.
True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice. – MLK

Lecture 2: Peacebuilding (Peace Operations)

How you define peace impacts how you measure and resolve it.

• Amidst these challenges, in 2023 88,000 peacekeepers from 125 countries served in 12
missions around the world, partnering to protect and advance peace for millions of people.
• They helped support political solutions to conflict, supported ceasefires, protected
civilians from violence, protected human rights, and helped to build state capacity in key
areas that will help countries maintain security without UN support.
• They also took on tasks like helping humanitarians deliver aid to communities in need,
observing and monitoring, and removing explosive remnants of war to address immediate
threats to populations. Fifty-nine of those peacekeepers gave their lives in the service of
peace.

1. Origins and Evolution: UN Peacekeeping during the Cold War

United Nations Truce - Supervision Organisation (UNTSO)
Traditional Peacekeeping Operations
Monitoring a Border or Demilitarized Zone
Monitoring a Cease-fire, Truce, or General Armistice
Supervising the Withdrawal of Forces Performing Quasi-Judicial Functions
Legal Basis in the Charter: Chapter 6 ½
United Nations - Emergency Force (UNEF)
Field operations established by the UN.
• With the consent of the parties concerned
• To help control and resolve conflict between them
• Under UN command and control
• At the expense collectively of the member states
• With military and other personnel and equipment
provided voluntarily by them.
• Acting impartially between the parties
• Using force only in self-defence
• Expanded to use of force in self-defence and in
defence of the mandate in 1973.
2nd Generation – Multidimensional
1. Organizing and conducting democratic elections
2. Arranging the return of refugees
3. Maintaining law and order
4. Disarming and demobilizing armed forces
5. Protecting humanitarian assistance
6. Assisting in reconstruction and rehabilitation
United Nations Transitional-Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC)
1. Origins and Evolution: Failures
UNOSOM II: First peace-enforcement operation under the command of the Secretary-
General Mandated through SC Res. 814 (March 1993) to use ‘all necessary means’ to
establish a secure environment for humanitarian relief operations in Somalia.
Also mandated to provide assistance in ‘rehabilitating [Somalia’s] political institutions and
economy and promoting political settlement and national reconciliation’.
Mandate restricted to non-coercive means in February 1994 (Res.897)
Genocide in Rwanda (1994) and Bosnia –Herzegovina (1995)

1. Origins and Evolution: Protection of Civilians and Use of Force

Brahimi Report 2000:
• Three principles should remain the bedrock principles of peacekeeping, but peacekeepers
who witness violence against civilians `should be presumed authorized to stop it’
Capstone Doctrine 2008:
• Distinguishes between strategic and tactical consent
• The strategic consent of the host state and major parties to any settlement is still required
– but force can still be used against anyone endangering civilian lives.
• Use of force tactically in this way conceived as ‘robust’ peacekeeping
• Use of force without strategic consent peace-enforcement

1. UN Multidimensional and Integrated Stabilisation Mission in Mali (MINUSMA)

• Established in 2013
• Operations mandated to `stabilize the key population centres, especially in the north of
Mali and, in this context, to deter threats and take active steps to prevent the return of
armed elements to those areas’
• April 2016 UNSC encouraged MINUSMA to engage in `direct operations against
asymmetric threats
• 310 UN fatalities
• Closed Dec 2023

1. The United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the

DRC (MONUSCO)
• MONUSCO has a Force Intervention Brigade – (authorized by UNSC Res. 2098 28 March
2013) `on an exceptional basis and without creating a precedent or any prejudice to the
agreed principles of peacekeeping, include an “Intervention Brigade” consisting inter alia of
three infantry battalions, one artillery and one Special force and Reconnaissance company
with headquarters in Goma, under direct command of the MONUSCO Force Commander,
with the responsibility of neutralizing armed groups.’
• Ist peace-enforcement operation since Somalia
• MONUSCO fatalities over 230
• Yes, but the moving towards the use of force tends to lead to
failure. Traditional UN
peacekeeping operations should only deploy when there is a peace
to keep.
• UN peacekeepers are not ‘war fighters.
• Use of force mandates confuse the UN forces (may not even be
taught the same military doctrine on use of force) and leads to loss
of impartiality
• Troop contributing countries unhappy with increasing levels of
violence and casualties
• Use of force (for PoC and counterterrorism) should be left to single
states and military organisations (Howard, 2019)

• Not so much. When we measure success in terms of positive

peace, the record is not so successful. For some critics, the Liberal
model is the problem. Peacekeeping is a form of ‘neo-colonial’
control.
UN as an IO concentrates on negotiating peace with governments
and representatives of warring parties
• Implements a ‘top-down’ strategy of peacebuilding, rather than a
’bottom-up’ approach that reflects the needs of local populations
• Feminist critiques of neoliberal peacebuilding (Duncanson, 2016).
• Peacekeeping and the Liberal Peace combined to ensure neo-
colonial control of poor countries.

2. How should we measure success?

• Everyday Peace Indicators
Many of the approaches to measuring peace favoured by IOs, INGOs
and donor
governments are deficient. Their level of analysis is often too broad
or too narrow, and their aggregated statistical format often means
that they represent the conflict-
affected area in ways that are meaningless to local communities.

3. Summary and Future Directions

• Should the UN avoid missions in which there is no `peace to keep’
and in which
it will be likely compelled to use force?
• Should the UN jettison its `liberal’ model of peacebuilding? If so,
what
should replace it?
• How should the UN deal with ‘new wars’ like those in Mali? How
might it?
prevent such countries from becoming havens for jihadi terrorists,
drug dealers.
and organized crime?