Call for papers vol 9, no. 1, 2018 is open until 30 March 2018


Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrintE-mail

violent conflict) should be extended to include elements of “positive peace,” including reconciliation, value transformation, and justice concerns”. Second, “the strategies and accompanying activities designed to achieve the goal(s)”. Third, there is the dimension of “the timing of activities”. Fourth, “the context in which peace building should be carried out. And fifth, regarding “the actors that will carry out the peace building actions” (pp.108-110).
The scope of the different dimensions is determined on the decision of the stakeholder on whether to extend their effort on building positive peace. Thus, the strategies may be limited to peacekeeping or expand to remove the causes for conflict. Involved parties include external agents in the form of the UN and its agencies, NATO, the International Financial Institutions etc. and domestic representatives from both sides of the front. Their roles and tasks could also be determined on the principal decision on whether the goal is to develop positive or negative peace.
However, despite these differences in the academic debate on the scale and scope of peace building, most peace building operations de facto are concerned with the idea for positive peace. Endeavors rarely stop at merely disarming the forces and destroying the weapons. Quite the opposite: in El-Salvador the post-conflict activities involved establishment of new democratic institutions, reintegration of ex-combatants in civilian life, and rebuilding of physical infrastructure, as well as macroeconomic policy developed in close cooperation with the International Financial Institutions (Boyce, 1995), in Sierra Leone the United Nations is working with the local government to create conditions for better youth employment opportunities (United Nations Peacebuilding Commission 2010), and in Kosovo's post-conflict development, the European Union is running Kosovo Trust Agency - the organization in charge of privatization of state and social assets (Pugh 2010). Moreover, Iraq is possibly the first country where “the post-war plan was to turn it into a model neoliberal state” (Pugh, 2010, p. 3).
Thus, positive peace carries its own values. Not only the states that host peace building operations can rarely settle with just ending violence, but they usually have to
follow the lead of international agencies in creating conditions for development of what is considered to be a model country of the peaceful and developed world. As Mullenbach (2006) writes, most of the peace building missions that have been subject of research in the past 15 years, including Afghanistan, Cambodia, Croatia, East Timor, Kosovo, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Haiti, Namibia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, and El Salvador, are in fact examples “third-party peace building”, i.e. “peace building missions have been initiated by a variety of third-party actors in nearly every region of the world” ( p. 53). The third parties include the Western states and the International organizations that they largely manage or control. The peace building they deliver is subject to their ideology. Roland Paris (1997) emphasizes this

Creative Commons License
Security Dialogues by Toni Mileski is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at

Copyright © 2012 Security Dialogues. Designed by Cube Systems