Suchergebnisse

The first days of December, 1946, saw the completion of the first round of the peace treaties. Except for the verification of the texts and the final arrangements for signature, the treaties with Italy, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Finland were now ready, after fifteen months of back-breaking and often heart-breaking effort. The initial installment of peace-making had, in fact, taken more than fifteen months, for several of the thorniest questions—notably, the disposition of the Italian colonies, freedom of commercial navigation on the Danube, and Italian reparation—had received their preliminary going-over at Potsdam. And at least one question—the disposition of the Italian colonies—had been post-poned for later settlement.

Examines Southeast Asian approaches to nonviolence & peace making that reflect the unique characteristics of the region. These include the religious nature & inclusiveness of politics & political movements, a tendency toward authoritarianism, & the role of women as charismatic religious or political leaders. It is argued that this approach mixes elements of Eastern & Western cultural traditions while remaining compatible with Southeast Asian political culture, which reflects Asian understandings of authority, struggle, & human rights. The involvement of the Assoc of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in mediating the conflict in Cambodia & offering membership to the repressive government of Myanmar are discussed as examples. It is concluded that a sense of humor & lightness has & will continue to have an important function in the nonconfrontational way of dealing with problems in Southeast Asia. T. Arnold

Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of interest in indigenous, traditional and customary approaches to peace-making in the context of civil wars. Supporters claim that indigenous approaches to peacemaking are participatory and relationship-focused, and that peaceful outcomes have a higher chance of community adherence than template-style international peace interventions effected through the `liberal peace'. Using historical and contemporary examples, this article assesses the feasibility of a complementary relationship between customary and Western forms of peace-making. It posits that internationally supported peace operations (the liberal peace) are promoting a standardization of peace interventions in civil war situations that often fails to deliver a widely enjoyed peace. In some cases, traditional and indigenous approaches to peace-making and reconciliation can offer a corrective to the failings of the Western peace-making model. Yet, any temptation to romanticize `indigenous' and `traditional' peace-making must be resisted: instead, the concepts require careful conceptualization and interrogation. The article concludes that the structural power of Western peace-making methods limits the space for alternative approaches to peace-making and that rather than a co-existence of both forms of peace-making we are more likely to see the co-option of indigenous and traditional approaches by Western approaches.