Abstract
This chapter reports the results from a Q study amongst professional peace practitioners. It introduces five different visions of peace, that are compared along the dimensions identified in Chap. 2. The main argument developed in the chapter is that rather than a (Western) liberal peace consensus, a non-Western consensus can be observed. According to most of the Lebanese and Mindanaoan interviewees, peace is a personal endeavour. The Dutch, on the other hand, are divided over all five visions.
The chapter also trims down the seven dimensions found in Chaps. 2, 3 and 4: ontology (whether peace is seen as a process or a goal); domain (whether it is a personal or a political objective), its embedding in individuals or institutions and the scope of a vision. These four dimensions make up the peace cube that is used in the rest of the book.
What is peace? Well, that’s some question… Where can I start? It is a project, not a state of affairs. It means much more than not having war. Although that is also part of it, but it means more like having no sentiments of hate. And maybe to live a good life? […] It is always related to persons. Of course you can also talk of peace in society. Then one talks about security, being able to live under rule of law, justice, equality. But for me, peace is always something very personal.
(Anonymous interview employee #1 (Association Justice et Miséricorde (AJEM), Lebanon). Translated from French by the author.)
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In Sect. 1.2.
- 2.
Interview Rhea Silvosa (Mindanao Peacebuilding Institute, Mindanao).
- 3.
Interview Fulco van Deventer (Human Security Collective (HSC), the Netherlands).
- 4.
Interview Ramzi Merhej (Search for Common Ground (SFCG), Lebanon).
- 5.
Interview Maysa Mourad (independent peace educator, Lebanon).
- 6.
Interview Ziad Saab (Fighters for Peace (FfP), Lebanon).
- 7.
Interview Elie Abouaoun (United States Institute for Peace (USIP), Lebanon).
- 8.
Interview Assad Chaftari (Wahdatouna Khalasouna, Lebanon).
- 9.
E.g. interviews Silvosa and Merhej.
- 10.
Interview Manal Moukaddem (Center for Lebanese Studies, Lebanon).
- 11.
Interview Chaftari.
- 12.
Interview Merhej.
- 13.
For the exact values, see Appendix D.
- 14.
The error-bars indicate the 95% confidence interval. This is a statistical tool normally used to show the reliability of estimates, arrived at by including the values two standard deviations above and below the group average in the error-bar. However, since we are not interested in a precise estimate of how common a vision is amongst a certain group of peace workers (since we are building theory, not testing it) the confidence interval is used here merely as a measure to compare the coherence of the group averages. A large confidence interval means that some respondents in the group score relatively much higher or lower on the factor than others. A smaller confidence interval means that the Q sorts of most respondents in the group cluster around the average correspondence level. In statistical analysis, the difference between two average factor scores is perceived as significant (at p < 0.05) if the 95% confidence intervals of the two groups do not overlap. Here, this is clearly the case for Lebanese and Mindanaoans on the one hand and Dutch military and diplomats on the other.
- 15.
Interview Sara Ketelaar (PAX, the Netherlands).
- 16.
- 17.
Interestingly, when the phrasing is changed to ‘what peace looks like depends on what the conflict is about’ (statement 36), the factor scores change to −2/−2/+2/−2/+1.
- 18.
Interview André Carstens (Former director of Governance, Dutch ISAF mission, the Netherlands).
- 19.
Interview Sara Ketelaar (PAX, the Netherlands).
- 20.
Anonymous interview Dutch diplomat #2.
- 21.
Anonymous interview Dutch army chaplain. ‘Relative non-poverty’ is an interesting addition in light of the ‘welfare’-critique on liberal peacebuilding (see Sect. 2.4.3), as well as discussions of broad vs. narrow interpretations of human security (e.g. Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy 2012: 40–41). However, it does not otherwise feature very prominently in this vision.
- 22.
- 23.
Anonymous interview (Ministry of Defence, evaluations division, the Netherlands).
- 24.
Anonymous interview Dutch army chaplain.
- 25.
E.g. anonymous interview (Ministry of Defence, evaluations division, the Netherlands).
- 26.
Interview Major Lenny Hazelbag (Dutch Army).
- 27.
Interview Major Daan Boissevain (Dutch Air Force).
- 28.
Interview Major Martijn Hädicke (Dutch Army).
- 29.
See Chap. 8, Sect. 8.2.1.
- 30.
Interviews Joost van Puijenbroek (PAX, the Netherlands) and René Grotenhuis (independent consultant, formerly director of Cordaid, the Netherlands).
- 31.
Interview Grotenhuis.
- 32.
Interview Grotenhuis.
- 33.
Interview anonymous Dutch diplomat #2.
- 34.
Interview Jasper van Koppen (Dutch Army, national reserve).
- 35.
Interview Van Koppen.
- 36.
Which was more of an occupation than an actual war and ended with a (military) liberation by the allied forces that is still celebrated widely each year. Especially military interviewees often still mention this as a constitutive idea of the peace they are defending. E.g. interview General Mart de Kruif (Dutch Army), Eric Overtoom (Dutch Army, national reserve) and Maj. Hazelbag.
- 37.
Its average level of support amongst diplomats is 26%, vs. 8% for Dutch military. See Appendix D.
- 38.
With the exception of Lebanese support for the vision of peace as politics. Which is quite interesting, because it directly contradicts what they say in semi-structured interviews. This contradiction will be explored in Chap. 7.
- 39.
See Sect. 1.2 above.
- 40.
As was explained in the introduction, ‘concourse’ is the technical term in Q methodology for a collection of statements about a certain topic from which the Q set is drawn.
- 41.
E.g. interviews Gabriella Vogelaar (Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC), the Netherlands), Mathieu Hermans (PAX, the Netherlands), anonymous former Dutch diplomat #2 and anonymous diplomat #5 (Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA), North Africa and Middle East Department (DAM).
- 42.
Idem.
- 43.
Interviews Chaftari and Merhej.
- 44.
Statement 48, scores of respectively +1, +4, +5, +3 and +2.
- 45.
See Chap. 2, Sects. 2.3 and 2.4.
- 46.
E.g. interviews anonymous diplomat #3 (Dutch MoFA, Stabilization and Humanitarian Aid Department (DSH)), Michel Rentenaar (Dutch MoFA, former Political Advisor to ISAF), Theo Brinkel (Royal Military Academy, the Netherlands), anonymous programme officer (Cordaid, the Netherlands), Jan Jaap van Oosterzee (PAX, the Netherlands), Saab and Mourad.
- 47.
It should be stressed here that the cube is a visualization of a certain way of conceptualizing peace, not a three-dimensional graph plotting the outcome of some quantitative study.
- 48.
In Sect. 9.4.
References
Advisory Group of Experts (2015). The challenge of sustaining peace. Report of the Advisory Group of Experts for the 2015 Review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. New York: United Nations.
Autesserre, S. (2010). The trouble with the Congo: Local violence and the failure of international peacebuilding. Cambridge University Press.
Babo-Soares, D. (2004). “Nahe Biti: The philosophy and process of grassroots reconciliation (and justice) in East Timor.” The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 5(1): 15–33.
Björkdahl, A., K. Höglund, et al. (2016). Peacebuilding and friction: Global and local encounters in post conflict-societies. London and New York: Routledge.
Boege, V., M. A. Brown, et al. (2008). “States emerging from hybrid political orders: Pacific experiences The Australian Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies Occasional Papers Series.” Australian Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies. The Occasional Papers 10(11): 1–41.
Brown, S. R. (1993). “A primer on Q methodology.” Operant Subjectivity 16(3/4): 91–138.
Carothers, T. (1998). “The rule of law revival.” Foreign Affairs 77: 95–106.
Chandler, D. (2017). Peacebuilding: The twenty years’ crisis, 1997–2017. Springer.
Charbonneau, B. and G. Parent, Eds. (2013). Peacebuilding, memory and reconciliation: Bridging top-down and bottom-up approaches. London and New York: Routledge.
Davenport, C., E. Melander, et al. (2018). The peace continuum: What it is and how to study it. Oxford University Press.
De Coning, C. (2018). “Adaptive peacebuilding.” International Affairs 94(2): 301–317.
de Graaf, G. (2001). “Discourse theory and business ethics. The case of bankers’ conceptualizations of customers.” Journal of Business Ethics 31(4): 299–319.
De la Rey, C. and S. McKay (2006). “Peacebuilding as a gendered process.” Journal of Social Issues 62(1): 141–153.
Dietrich, W. (2012). Interpretations of peace in history and culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Firchow, P. (2018). Reclaiming everyday peace: Local voices in measurement and evaluation after war. Cambridge University Press.
Hilhorst, D. and M. Van Leeuwen (2005). “Grounding local peace organisations: A case study of Southern Sudan.” The Journal of Modern African Studies 43(4): 537–563.
Krijtenburg, F. (2007). Cultural ideologies of peace and conflict: A socio-cognitive study of Giryama discourse (Kenya). Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
Mac Ginty, R. (2010). “Hybrid peace: The interaction between top-down and bottom-up peace.” Security Dialogue 41(4): 391–412.
Mac Ginty, R. (2011). International peacebuilding and local resistance: Hybrid forms of peace. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mac Ginty, R. (2013). “Indicators+: A proposal for everyday peace indicators.” Evaluation and Program Planning 36: 56–63.
Mac Ginty, R. and P. Firchow (2016). “Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict.” Politics 36(3): 308–323.
Mac Ginty, R. and O. P. Richmond (2013). “The local turn in peace building: A critical agenda for peace.” Third World Quarterly 34(5): 763–783.
Mac Ginty, R. and O. Richmond (2016). “The fallacy of constructing hybrid political orders: A reappraisal of the hybrid turn in peacebuilding.” International Peacekeeping 23(2): 219–239.
Mahmoud, Y. and A. Makoond (2017). Sustaining peace: What does it mean in practice. Issue Brief. New York: International Peace Institute.
Millar, G., J. Van Der Lijn, et al. (2013). “Peacebuilding plans and local reconfigurations: Frictions between imported processes and indigenous practices.” International Peacekeeping 20(2): 137–143.
Paarlberg-Kvam, K. (2018). “What’s to come is more complicated: Feminist visions of peace in Colombia.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 21(2): 1–30.
Paris, R. (2004). At war’s end: Building peace after civil conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richmond, O. P. (2005). The transformation of peace. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Richmond, O. P. (2011). A post-liberal peace. London and New York: Routledge.
Richmond, O. P. (2013). “Peace formation and local infrastructures for peace.” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 38(4): 271–287.
Spivak, G. C. (1988). “Can the subaltern speak?” In Can the subaltern speak? Reflections on the history of an idea. New York: Columbia University Press: 21–78.
Tadjbakhsh, S. and A. M. Chenoy (2012). Human security: Concepts and implications. London and New York: Routledge.
Tasew, B. (2009). “Metaphors of peace and violence in the folklore discourses of South-Western Ethiopia: A comparative study.” In Department of social and cultural anthropology. Amsterdam: VU University.
Upham, F. (2010). “Mythmaking in the rule of law orthodoxy.” In Promoting the rule of law abroad: In search of knowledge. T. Carothers (Ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press: 75–104.
van Leeuwen, M., W. Verkoren, et al. (2012). “Thinking beyond the liberal peace: From utopia to heterotopias.” Acta Politica 47(3): 292–316.
Van Tongeren, P., M. O. Ojielo, et al. (2012). “The evolving landscape of infrastructures for peace.” Journal of Peacebuilding & Development 7(3): 1–7.
Von Clausewitz, C. (1984 [1832]). On war. Indexed edition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Iterson Scholten, G.M. (2020). Western Dissensus, Non-Western Consensus: A Q Study Into the Meanings of Peace. In: Visions of Peace of Professional Peace Workers. Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27975-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27975-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27974-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27975-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)