Suchergebnisse

"Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, and Peacebuilding" published on by Oxford University Press.

The Secretary General of the International Peace Research Association (IPRA) responds to one of the most frequently asked questions in the field of peace studies: "What are the challenges facing peace researchers in the 21 century?" In the first section he notes that, in some ways, the world is more peaceful now than at in any time in the past century, but then adds three sobering observations about the very high levels of manifest & potential violence, the predominantly reactive nature of most conflict prevention efforts, & the strong feelings of relative deprivation in the era of globalization. In the second section he states that if peace researchers want to make a greater difference, then they must challenge the ways & means of the current practice of peace-making, peace-keeping & peace-building. The first challenge is not to lose sight of the big picture. The macro-perspective gives an overview of the necessary peace building efforts & allows the peace builders to oversee & coordinate what they are doing. The second challenge is to get a better understanding of the sustainable peace building architecture. Winning a war can sometimes be relatively easy -- or at least rapid -- ,but winning the peace can be a far more complex & time consuming enterprise. The third challenge concerns the slow learning process. There is a need to build structures that support a better exchange of knowledge between the decision-makers, the practitioners in the field, & the research community. The fourth challenge is to deal more effectively with the peace building context, which is characterized by uncertainty, unpredictability, competing values & interests, & the struggle for power. The article ends with a plea for reflecting on the meaning of professionalism in peace building. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

In the sixties the green and the peace movements alerted the international community of the deterioration of the environment and of the danger of nuclear conflicts. Since then, the green movement has been transformed into political parties, departments, jobs, environmental impact assessments and several international regimes. The first publication of the Club of Rome in 1972, Limits of Growth, had a catalyzing effect for raising life and death questions that confront mankind and claiming that planetary planning was the most important business on earth (Meadows 1972). The peace movement, on the other hand, evolved differently. There were some peak moments such as the peace marches in the eighties, but the impacts were weaker and less decisive. One explanation is that the peace movement had to cope with the strong bureaucracies of foreign offices and of defense departments that claimed the expertise. Another explanation is that a great deal of the peace movement does not define peace as a collective good. Being removed from the embedded conflict gives a false sense of apartness making some conflicts seem irrelevant to societies at peace. The possibility of cruise missiles hitting peaceful countries caused huge peace marches; the snipers in Sarajevo did not. A third reason is that costs of violence continue to be underestimated because of inadequate estimates of the price of failed conflict prevention (Reychler 1999a).

One of the most important challenges facing the global community in the next decade, is the prevention of destructive conflicts. Listening to the discourse in the United Nations and other governmental and non governmental organizations this may sound like kicking in wide open doors (Bauwens and Reychler, 1994). But the failure of conflict prevention and the high number of conflict zones, indicates that we still have a long way to go. A global survey of contemporary conflicts counts 22 high-intensity and 39 lowerintensity conflicts, and 40 serious disputes (PIOOM, 1995). In 1995 five groups were victims of genocides or politicides. The risks of future victimization of 47 communities in different parts of the world is assessed as high of very high (PIOOM, 1995). The growth of nationalist feelings at the end of the Cold War is only the beginning of more suffering. More conflicts are expected, with old and new causes, such as the unequal or unfair trade balances between North and South, unemployment in the North, the environmental pollution, religious extremism, mass immigration and the growing number of failed states. These problems could hurt people so much that they would be prepared to fight for them.

Argues that religion & religious organizations could play a significant part in promoting a constructive conflict dynamic for resolving future confrontations in the new world order. Following an examination of the role of religious organizations in religious wars, low-intensity violence, structural violence, cultural violence, & their function as religious bystanders in conflicts, the possible influence of religious organizations in peace-building & peace-making is explored. Anticipating the likely role of religious influences in future conflicts, it is concluded that the creation of a new global ethic remains an urgent research challenge. 3 Tables, 45 References. S. Barrera

Issues which may determine future support for the Alliance. The Europeanization of NATO, conventional armaments, nuclear deterrence, security problems in the Third World.