urn:nbn:de:0070-ijcv-2009186 IJCV: Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123
Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence: Legitimacy, Recognition, and the Challenge of Dealing with the Past in Divided Societies Marcel M. Baumann, Institute of Political Science and Arnold Bergstraesser Institute, University of Freiburg, Germany
Vol. 3 (1) 2009
Editorial (p. 3)
Focus: Introduction: Is a General Theory of Violence Possible? General Theory of Violence Susanne Karstedt / Manuel Eisner (pp. 4 – 8) Guest Editors: Manuel Eisner and Micro and Macro Theories of Violence Randall Collins (pp. 9 – 22) Susanne Karstedt Violence, Crime, and Violent Crime Richard B. Felson (pp. 23 – 39)
The Uses of Violence: An Examination of Some Cross-Cutting Issues Manuel Eisner (pp. 40 – 59)
Is a General Theory of Socially Disapproved Violence Possible (or Necessary)? Charles Tittle (pp. 60 – 74)
Violence as Situational Action Per-Olof H. Wikström / Kyle Treiber (pp. 75 – 96)
Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks for Organised Violence Martin Shaw (pp. 97 – 106)
Open Section Understanding the Other’s ‘Understanding’ of Violence Marcel M. Baumann (pp. 107 – 123)
Motive Structures and Violence among Young Globalization Critics Renate Möller / Uwe Sander / Arne Schäfer / Dirk Villányi / Matthias D. Witte (pp. 124 – 142)
All text of the International Journal of Con!ict and Violence is subject to the terms of the Digital Peer Publishing Licence. http://www.ijcv.org /docs/licence/DPPL_v2_en_06-2004.pdf ISSN: 1864-1385 IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 108 Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence: Legitimacy, Recognition, and the Challenge of Dealing with the Past in Divided Societies Marcel M. Baumann, Institute of Political Science and Arnold Bergstraesser Institute, University of Freiburg, Germany
Post-con!ict societies which have achieved a cessation of violence and embarked on a political con!ict transformation process cannot in the long-term avoid a process of dealing with the past. Case studies of South Africa and Northern Ireland con"rm this normative claim, showing that within the post-war society as a whole a social consensus on how to “understand” and “recognize” the use of violence that occurred during the con!ict is necessary: under- standing the other’s “understanding” of violence. A mutual understanding must be reached that both sides fought a campaign that was just and legitimate from their own perspective. The morality of the “other’s violence” has to be recognized.
1. Introduction violent past is for the society as a whole to seek an empathic I! "# $%&’' ()*# '%+#',#-, "#’(( $)# '%+#',#-. (B%../ understanding and recognition of politically motivated P,)(0%'', M1-2, 3, 4555)6 violence. :e term “recognition” refers to the philosophical concept of Axel Honneth who claimed that “the struggle for Bobby Philpott was one of the leading members of the recognition” should be at the center of “social con9icts” (see Ulster Defence Association (UDA), which is the largest below). Loyalist paramilitary group in Northern Ireland. He was directly involved in the peace process as part of the UDA :e methodological approach of discourse analysis of delegation that met British Secretary of State for Northern violence will be used in order to bring out the core argu- Ireland during her controversial visit to the Maze prison in ment. :e term “discourse” is used in this paper not as a 6778, when Mowlam talked with UDA prisoners to avert a mere synonym for “debate” or “discussion,” but to desig- crisis in the peace process. Philpott’s statement leads to the nate a more advanced form of communication including central question of this essay: How can divided post-con- the totality of communicative acts (speech acts) that can 9ict societies constructively deal with the past in order to be analyzed according to their common structures, prac- rebuild their social fabric in such a way that the con9icting tices, rules, resources, and meanings (Keller 455;, <;). :e ethnopolitical communities (the former enemies) are able to discourse analysis of violence will focus on the strategies live together in peace? In order to answer that question this used by armed groups—like the Irish Republican Army paper will elaborate on the following thesis: for fragile post- (IRA)—to justify or legitimize their acts of violence. Violent war societies one necessary prerequisite for dealing with the acts are seen within an interpretative “discourse process”
:e idea for this article came from a paper entitled (“Bridging Multiple Divides”), San Francisco, March ! Bobby Philpott, in an interview for the three- “Understanding the other’s ‘understanding’ of 4<–47, 4558. :is was a presentation in the March part documentary “Loyalists” produced by violence: Legitimacy, recognition and the ‘violent’ 43th panel on “Reassessing the past in divided high-pro=le British journalist Peter Taylor challenge of dealing with the past in post-con9ict societies: Human rights, memory and reconcili- and shown on BBC Two on March 3, 4555. societies” given by the author at the ;7th Annual ation policies in cross-regional perspectives.” Convention of the International Studies Association IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 109
taking place within the a>ected community. :is process cal and cultural acceptance by a particular ethnic identity aims to legitimize acts of violence in the perception of the is simply non-negotiable (Ropers 677Ab, 45<). However, an community so that violence becomes self-a?rmative and e>ective con9ict transformation strategy can be arrived at independent. :e meaning of violence will be the central when interests are separated from attitudes and opinions on focus of analyzing the discourse on the “morality of vio- the one hand and from needs on the other hand. Opinions lence” (Hamber 6777a, 6777b, 6777c, 455@). :e morality of are always associated with politically articulated goals, violence is expressed through a process of rationalization of for example the demand for secession of territory. :ey violent acts, a process that is instrumentalized as a delibera- are basic mindsets and viewpoints, which must be distin- tive strategy by the non-state armed groups. guished from interests which suggest that certain “motives” were the causes of or reasons for ethno-political con9ict. :is article will make the case for a quite contentious nor- A transformation of the con9ict cannot take place if the mative argument: Having achieved a cessation of violence con9ict is understood as a “tragic expression of unsatis=ed and embarked on a political con9ict transformation process needs” (Rosenberg 455;, 43). :e same basic assumption is it becomes absolutely vital to reach a social consensus made by Kelman, who perceives con9ict as a process driven within the post-war society on how to recognize and under- by collective needs and fears (6773, 67A). :ese needs are stand the use of violence during the con9ict in moral and primarily of an individual and human nature; however they ethical terms. It is a rather uneasy and uncomfortable chal- are articulated and demanded through groups which rep- lenge, both for the victims and the perpetrators of violence, resent certain interests (ibid.). :e concept focusing on the but a debate that cannot be evaded. :e prerequisite for the “needs” of the con9icting parties leads to the acceptance of divided communities being part of the same post-con9ict an inclusive de=nition of “victim”: there can be no hierarchy society is to achieve a common, not a divided understanding of victims; no one can claim sole ownership of “victim- of the violent past in order to move forward: understand- hood” for himself. Rather, everyone who died as a direct or ing the other’s “understanding” of violence means to reach indirect consequence of the con9ict should be quali=ed and a mutual understanding that both sides fought a campaign treated as a “legitimate” victim. On that basis societies can which from their own perspective was just and legitimate. move forward towards resolving the con9icting “moralities :e morality of the “other’s violence” has to be recognized. of violence” and the contentious “memories” of a divided violent past. :e viability of that approach becomes obvious if we consider the basic need of a divided post-war society. Put Naturally there are important limits to this line of reason- simply, the communities will have to live together in future ing, e.g. there are limits to the demand for understanding and cannot risk being divided over the past. :e basic hu- and recognition. :e following arguments are more or less man needs of the individuals living in them can be iden- explicitly linked to post-war societies where former enemies ti=ed using the terminology and concepts of Rosenberg have to live together. Of course these normative implica- (455@a, 455@b, 455;), J. W. Burton (6783, 6775, 677A), Burton tions cannot be transferred to all cases where violence and Dukes (6775), and Ropers (677Aa, 677Ab), who focus on happened on a massive, organized scale, for example in the “needs” of the con9icting parties as a starting point for the case of genocide. It is very important to make the point con9ict transformation processes. According to Norbert that the political nature of violence in divided societies, Ropers, a distinction has to be drawn between con9icts of where former enemies have to live together aBer war, is an interest and con9icts of identity in the analysis of any eth- essential requirement for the “understanding approach” no-political con9ict (677Aa). While con9icts of interests can to violence which is the core of this article. :is line of in theory be worked out by adjusting the diverging interests reasoning is based on the notion of “divided societies” that through more or less “mutual” accommodations, con9icts perceives post-war societies as being divided by con9icting of identity cannot be resolved by accommodation—it is al- “identities.” :ese divisions already existed before the war most “all-or-nothing.” For example, the demand for politi- and continue to shape the post-war society, for example as IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 110
“majority/minority” situations. :is means that although been set up around the world. Priscilla Hayner compared any post-war society by its very nature could be regarded =Been truth commissions established world-wide before as “divided”—and we should keep in mind that “ethnicity” 677; (Hayner 677;, 677A, 4555). In the South African con- rarely exists in a pure form, rather it is usually combined text, however (serving as the prime example), it is highly with factors such as religion, race, or class in mutually disputed whether the “truth commission” remedy actually reinforcing ways—it is important to understand that the led to forgiveness and reconciliation. Take this statement con9ict-generating cleavages are based on identities that are from Sonny Venkathratnam, a former prisoner on Robben derived from certain ethnic or cultural aspects of “belong- Island whose middle ear was removed with a spoon and ing.” In particular, cases like Northern Ireland, Bosnia, genitals cut o>: “I will never forgive my torturers. Because Nigeria, and the Philippines are examples for this under- for twenty-four hours a day it reminds me that I’ve been tor- standing of divided societies. tured. So, I am not asking for revenge, but don’t ask me for forgiveness” (Venkathratnam 455@). It is precisely the relevance for divided societies which al- lows the central argument of this article to move beyond Although there were completely di>erent voices too, Ven- the purely normative basis of the argument which favors an kathratnam’s statement illustrates the core of the dilemma approach of “understanding” of violence. While achieving confronted by applied science: What right does “peace sci- an understanding of the other’s “understanding” of violence ence” (Baumann 4558a) have to claim or postulate that the might indeed be di?cult in the short-term, since it can and a>ected societies or communities should forgive or become does open wounds and may even put the post-war society reconciled? What moral and ethical justi=cations allow us at risk of a return to violence, in the longer term every to tell a su>ering community that it has to recognize the post-war society has to =nd a way to deal with the past. :is other side’s su>ering and to reach a social consensus? :ere can even be seen in European countries like Spain, where is no universal remedy in dealing with the past; indeed the con9ict-generating cleavages are not based on ethnicity there are ethical constraints and dilemmas which should be or race. In the Spanish case an informal “pact of forget- recognized by peace science, for the “easy” recommenda- ting” (pacto de olvido) was established aBer the civil war. tion of “truth commission,” as it is commonly applied to Although this pact was quite “successful” for seventy years, post-war societies, can have serious and counter-productive its recent breakdown demonstrates the need for a process e>ects. of dealing with the past in Spain. :is process had been “frozen” for seventy years, but the demand never went away: :erefore, the approach taken in this paper is to take a criti- the strategy of forgetting could not last forever. According cal look at the South African case with the aim of trying to the well-known British historian Antony Beevor, in e>ect to learn from its successes and failures. Instead of opening “two Spains” developed. His new book on the Spanish civil some magic, universal peace-building toolbox, we might war makes a strong case for a process of dealing with the identify some basic common features. :e case of South Af- past (Beevor 4558). In an interview he emphasized: “:e rica has been chosen because it is internationally hailed as a Pact of Forgetting has to be broken. All Spanish citizens— “role model” for truth and reconciliation. In addition to the citizens of one of the most modern and most optimistically fact that the South African truth and reconciliation process minded peoples in the European Union—have to learn to led to a series of similar “experiments” around the world, it understand how this tragedy could have happened” (Die can be argued that with respect to the disputed issue of the Zeit, July 63, 455<). “moralities of violence,” “recognition” of the political nature of violence in South African was the main rationale of the A lot has been written on “dealing with,” “managing,” South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. “coping with,” or “overcoming” the past (“delete as ap- :erefore, it appears appropriate to compare South Africa propriate”), and following the South African experience with Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland can be seen as a (see below) quite a number of “truth commissions” have case where a political peace settlement has been reached IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 111
but the process of dealing with the past has not started yet. of the enthusiasts and argues for an empathetic embrace of And because of that the (short-term) political achievements reconciliation, although it might be di?cult and dangerous of the Northern Irish peace process might prove irrelevant (46). At the same time, Porter severly criticises the o?cial in the long term if the divided communities =nd no way to churches and religious leaders for their very limited engage- overcome their hostility and learn to live together. ment in reconciliation: “It is a curious thing that many who boast the purest Christian motives are among those most threatened by the possibility of political reconciliation in 2. Voluntary Apartheid in Northern Ireland: the North” (Porter 455@, 43). Peace-Building through “Chosen Amnesia”? W# 1-# &%" )& 1 &#" #-1 )& N%-',#-& I-#(1&$. I'’C :e main Protestant churches, for example, proclaimed (%&+ 01C' ')D# ',1' 0#%0(# $#2)$#$ ',#/ C,%E($ that they would reject a Northern Ireland truth commis- D%*# %& 1&$ (#1*# ',# 01C' .#,)&$. (E$")& P%%'C, sion based on the South African model (+e Newsletter, B!"#$%& T!"!'($)*, AE+EC' 7, 4553) May 4, 455;). Porter’s critique is absolutely plausible, since in Northern Ireland there is simply not enough strength in :is statement was made by Edwin Poots from the British- the political leadership to be able to support or lead a social Loyalist Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) when he was reconciliation process or any institutional process of that confronted with the necessity of dealing with the past in kind. At the national level, the necessary degree of politi- Northern Ireland. Poots became Minister of Culture, Arts, cal leadership does not exist. :is is the main di>erence to and Leisure in the new Northern Ireland executive which the political leadership in South Africa (M. Burton 6777), as was formed in May 4553. For the =rst time in the history witnessed on several occasions: the “Saville Inquiry” into of Northern Ireland the government included the two the events of Bloody Sunday is a quite obvious example former enemies: the DUP, the most radical Unionist party showing a lack of political leadership for a process of deal- (which strongly supports ties with Great Britain), and Sinn ing with the past (see section ;.4.). Martin McGuinness, Fein, the political wing of the IRA. Although both parties who was Sinn Fein’s chief negotiator during the peace pro- were part of the =rst administration until its suspension cess and a leading member of the IRA in the 6735s, was the in October 4554, the DUP had never spoken directly with only person with a Republican background to give evidence Sinn Fein representatives and had consistently refused to at the inquiry, where he cited a “Republican code of honor” engage with them in any form. All cabinet meetings of the that prevented him from giving evidence against fellow =rst administration were boycotted by the DUP ministers. Republicans. But the British security forces were also more :e new power-sharing government became possible aBer than reluctant to come forward: the British government the St. Andrews Agreement signed by the British and Irish has not yet had the courage to start an o?cial, independent governments in October 455<, which built on the Good truth process or even give its consent to an internal body Friday Agreement of 6778. dealing with the issue in a completely independent way.
:e debate over a truth and reconciliation commission for :e British government regularly consulted South African Northern Ireland actually began quite a long time before politicians and policy-makers. At the end of May 455;, for the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Given the example, the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, historical fact that 6,855 of the almost ;,555 killings since Paul Murphy, visited South Africa to =nd out what lessons 67<7 have not been solved yet, the community’s desire for could be learned about dealing with a history of violence disclosure has a particular relevance (detailed victim statis- and human rights abuses (BBC News, June 6, 455;, http:// tics can be found in Smyth and Fay 4555). Norman Porter news.bbc.co.uk/6/hi/northern_ireland/@3<3;AA.stm). distinguishes two sides which have dominated the North- Among others, Murphy met with Charles Villa-Vicencio, ern Irish “reconciliation debate”—the “cynics” and the who was the National Research Director of the South Afri- “enthusiasts” (Porter 455@, 6@>.). He considers himself one can Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). Villa- IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 112
Vicencio led Murphy to the crucial conclusion that the TRC cover the past is not forthcoming. It would probably also be is “not exportable”: “Ultimately it came out of the womb of a mistake to use the structure of the South African model this place. :ey [in Northern Ireland] probably need to =nd of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as a starting some way, but I am certainly not suggesting it should be a point for dealing with the past” (Hamber 6777a). TRC” (Belfast Telegraph, June 4, 455;). :e main reason for this consensus, as this paper argues, :is conclusion could at the same time be characterized can be traced back to the existence of two con9icting mem- as the lowest common denominator in the context of the ories of that past that are linked with two contradicting Northern Irish “reconciliation discourse”: the belief that the moralities of violence: a Protestant and a Catholic “version.” past needs to be dealt with is shared by all political par- :e communal divisions de=ned by these “two versions” ties and groups, but at the same time all also agree that the are still manifest in Northern Ireland’s post-con9ict society. South African TRC cannot simply be adopted in the form :is is especially the case in those areas that were worst of a “Northern Ireland TRC.” :e TRC was part of the de- a>ected by the violence during the “Troubles,” namely the mocratization process and a political compromise. :is op- working-class areas. It was indeed a “working-class war” portunity has already been lost in the negotiations that led that had taken place in Northern Ireland. to the Good Friday Agreement, because the section of the Good Friday Agreement addressing the question of victims :e post-con9ict society can be characterized as a situation is very abstract and was leB wide open for interpretation.4 consisting of and based on a chosen “voluntary apartheid” :e agreement established a Victims Commission and the (Baumann 4558b). “Voluntary apartheid” as a theory position of a Victims Commissioner, to which Kenneth includes all relevant endogenous factors governing the post- Bloom=eld was appointed. Bloom=eld published a report war society’s communal divisions. :e underlying assump- (We Will Remember +em) in which the idea of a Northern tion of the theory posits that a lasting and secure “peace” Ireland truth commission was mentioned in very distanced, can only be achieved by the absence of voluntary apartheid; sensitive, and even shy language: “:e possibility of bene=t- since as long as these negative, endogenous structures are ing from some form of Truth and Reconciliation Commis- leB over as virulent factors, the danger of society’s return to sion at some stage should not be overlooked” (Bloom=eld violence is eminent. :us, the peace process remains fragile. 6778, paragraph A.@3). In contrast to violently enforced apartheid, the concept of “voluntary apartheid” characterizes a deliberately chosen At the same time he also emphasized one fundamental ethno-political strategy used by post-war communities to restriction on a “Northern Irish truth commission”: “Un- uphold community division and separateness. “Voluntary happily, “truth” can be used as a weapon as well as a shield. apartheid” can also be seen as a critical indicator of society’s If such a device were to have a place in Northern Ireland, willingness and ability to enter peaceful con9ict trans- it could only be in the context of a wide ranging political formation. As an alternative terminology the traditional accord” (@8). sociological theory of “social closure” could be adopted—in the sense of “ethnopolitical closure.” Social closure can be In today’s Northern Ireland, in Bloom=eld’s words, “truth” traced back to Max Weber: the process leading to “closure” would most likely be a weapon. :e overwhelming consen- is the result of the strategy pursued by each community to sus in this discussion is that Northern Irish society is not maximize their own privileges, advantages, and communal ready to bear the complete and utter truth of the violent success at the expense of the “other” communities within past: “Post the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland the same society (Weber 6744, A4). it is clear that a broad level of consensus on the need to un-
" :e complete text of the Good Fri- http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/peace/ day Agreement can be found at: docs/agreement.htm. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 113
:e ethno-political strategy of total separation uses several :is situation was characterized by Frank Wright as “com- tools or categories: sectarianism, a skeptical common sense, munal deterrence,” in which “serious communication” a strong focus on territoriality, a highly explosive poten- is not possible (Wright 6783, 6775, 677<). If there was any tial of symbols and symbolism, and manifest collective contact between Catholics and Protestants at all, if they traumata (Baumann 4558b). To understand the category passed each other on the streets for example, the division of sectarianism in the context of post-con9ict societies we and “ethnopolitical separateness” was overplayed by what can go back to the sociologist Georg Simmel, a fellow of Harris called “over-friendliness”: they chatted about the Max Weber, who used the concept of “socialization through weather, the high prices in the stores, etc. But the coping con9ict” (Simmel 67A8). :is comes close to what John Paul mechanism of “over-friendliness” prevented any serious Lederach called the process of “Lebanonization” of society: dialogue on substantial matters: “People in Ulster are, as a “Cohesion and identity in contemporary con9ict tend to rule, cheerful, courteous, and helpful to one another. :e form within increasingly narrower lines than those that deep political divisions of which I write, and on which the encompass national citizenship. In situations of armed international media focuses so much attention, are avoided con9ict, people seek security by identifying with something in daily conversations. It is considered to be rude to bring close to their experience and over which they have some up issues of religious a?liations or anything that would control. In today’s settings that unity of identity may be a re9ect these divisions. One never asks a person if he or she clan, ethnicity, religion, or geographic/ regional a?liation, is Catholic or Protestant, for instance; it is simply not done” or a mix of these” (Lederach 6773, 64f.). (Santino 4556, <6).
:e =nal result is a post-war society in which any form of As a strategy for avoidance of dialogue, over-friendliness is social interaction is determined by the “system” of sec- still a common feature in today’s Northern Irish society. In tarianism: “Sectarianism is about what goes on in people’s 4556—almost four years aBer the Good Friday Agreement hearts and minds, and it is about the kind of institutions and seven years aBer the cease=res—Peter Shirlow car- and structures created in society. It is about people’s at- ried out an ethnographic study of Protestant and Catholic titudes to one another, about what they do and say and the interaction in North Belfast. His quite remarkable results things they leave undone or unsaid. Moreover, ‘sectarian’ gained a lot of attention, since his main =nding was that is usually a negative judgement that people make about the features of “sectarianism” had not decreased during the someone else’s behaviour and rarely a label that they apply peace process (Shirlow 455@). :is =nding was veri=ed in a to themselves, their own sectarianism always being the later study he did together with Brendan Murtagh (Shirlow hardest to see (Liechty and Clegg 4556, 654). and Murtagh 455<).
One of the most remarkable features of Northern Irish :e most problematic feature of voluntary apartheid, and society is that even several centuries before the outbreak of the one which is most resistant to change, however, is violent con9ict in 67<8, society as whole was sharply divided connected to the divided past and the existence in both along religious lines. :ough Protestants and Catholics communities of collective traumas based on con9icting lived next to each other without violence, they did not live collective memories. According to Maurice Halbwachs the together with each other—and they had nothing to say to memory of the individual is to a large degree determined each other. :is was the =nding of Rosemary Harris’s eth- by a collective foundation. In any society there are as many nographic study conducted shortly aBer the Second World collective memories as existing (ethnopolitical) communi- War: Catholics and Protestants had created two separate ties (Halbwachs 67<<, 67<3, 4554). Halbwachs emphasizes worlds, there was no social integration, even in mixed areas the enormous importance of the community as the primary (Harris 6734, 6;<). context of communication and symbolic manifestation of memories of the past. :us, the act of remembering becomes a social practice. Halbwachs emphasizes that IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 114
memory has to be seen as social memory of the group or tors. It is, of course, more than a simple recollection; it is a community: “:e group must have a memory of itself that shared mental representation of the event, which includes recounts a sense of origin and distinctiveness. A social realistic information, fantasized expectations, intense feel- memory becomes a central facet of the ideological armoury ings, and defenses against unacceptable thoughts” (Volkan of the group, helping to legitimise and rationalise di>erence 6773, ;8). by rooting it in the far-distant past and thus placing weight on the primordial and essential nature of the antagonists or Instead of “downgrading” the violent “macro-event” as a otherness” (Halbwachs 6774, <). “chosen trauma,” it can alternatively be upgraded to become a “chosen glory” for the community’s collective memory Because of the collective conditioning of memory, the (Volkan 6773, 86). :e prime example for the instrumental- simple act of remembering is not reduced to the individual’s ization of “historical” violent events is the annual com- own experience, but rather goes far beyond and encom- memoration of Bloody Sunday (January @5, 6734), when passes the memories and experiences of people from his or fourteen Catholic civilians were killed by British paratroop- her own community: stories and experiences that have been ers (see below). :e fourteen people killed represent human communicated. :us, remembering is an active as well as loss and life-long tragedies for the families; there are many culturally-sensitive process since the collective memory has annual commemorative events, for example the Bloody to be re-built and re-formulated on an ongoing basis: “So- Sunday march in Londonderry. But what is important to cial memories are not recollections of times past but part of recognize is that the Catholic rationalization of the violent the present understandings of the past, people use images event, predominantly articulated by the IRA, perceives it as of the past as a justi=cation for the present relationship and a “chosen glory” and not as a “chosen trauma.” :is became not ‘images from the past’” (Jarman 6773, ;>.). all too obvious in the year 4555 when Martin McGuin- ness was the keynote speaker at the annual Bloody Sunday Collective memories as “images from the past” for the pres- Memorial Lecture. Referring to the fourteen dead civilians, ent have to be monitored, checked, and evaluated by the he said: “:ey are not victims. :ey are heroes” (I was in community on a regular basis in order to =t present (politi- the audience during the speech). McGuinness used a clever cal and/or strategic) purposes. As a consequence it is quite semantic and symbolic trick of communication: while a common practice (memory practice) to delete speci=c acknowledging the loss of the grieving families he also historical events from the collective memory, while other conveyed that for the IRA Bloody Sunday was by no means events are mysti=ed or “de-contextualized,” i.e. removed a “chosen trauma.” Before Bloody Sunday, the IRA was from their concrete historical context (Jarman 6773, 3). almost defeated, with only a handful of weapons leB and no signi=cant support within the Catholic community. :at :is collective orientation towards remembering opens changed dramatically in the aBermath of the killings, with up opportunities for instrumentalization of past events a massive increase in support and volunteers: “:is aBer- with the aim of establishing and enforcing communal noon 43 people were shot in this city. 6@ of them lay dead. division through divided memories. :is makes them the :ey were innocent, we were there. :is is our Sharpeville. crucial and most dangerous feature of voluntary apartheid: A moment of truth and a moment of shame. And I just divided memories of the violent events of the past lead- want to say this to the British government: You know what ing to con9icting moralities of violence. As a result violent you have just done, don’t you? You have destroyed the civil “macro-events” can be either upgraded or downgraded rights movement and you have given the IRA its biggest vic- arbitrarily—to serve to the needs of the community, i.e. the tory it will ever have. All over this city tonight, young man, community’s collective memory. Vamik Volkan’s concept boys will be joining the IRA.” of “chosen traumas” helps us to illustrate this point in more detail: “I use the term chosen trauma to describe the collec- In the famous movie “Bloody Sunday” (4554) by Paul tive memory of a calamity that once befell a group’s ances- Greengrass, this statement was attributed to Ivan Cooper, IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 115
who was one of the leaders of the (nonviolent) human rights (Hayner 4555, @;). International interest in the idea of truth movement in Northern Ireland and also a member of the commissions grew even more in the 6775s in the wake of British House of Commons.@ In retrospect, Bloody Sunday the South African and Chilean developments: “: e in-in- destroyed the last chances of any peaceful settlement at that creased interest in truth commissions is, in part, a re9ection time. As a commemorative event, Bloody Sunday shows of the limited success in judicial approaches to accountabil- how active memory practice can rebuild and consolidate ity, and the obvious need for other measures to recognise the voluntary apartheid at the communal level. However, past wrongs and confront, punish or reform those per- “Bloody Sunday” is not remembered collectively by both sons and institutions that were responsible for violations” communities. Rather, the Protestant collective memory (Hayner 4555). chooses its own events to commemorate “its own victims,” like “Bloody Friday” (see below). From the outset “Chile” and “Nuremberg,” were instru- mental in the South African policy debate on the speci=c It can be concluded that the instrumentalization of the di- format and design of the TRC, because each represents an vided past proves to be the key tool to uphold ethnopolitical “extreme” type of “dealing with the past”: “If post-war Ger-Ger- separateness and division. It is far too early for the North- many represents one extreme of the justice policies pursued ern Irish situation to be quali=ed as a “zone of stable peace” in transitional societies, namely prosecution, then Chile (Boulding 6738). represents the other, namely, blanket amnesty for those who committed gross violations of human rights” (Simpson Coming back to the political arena, it becomes very clear 4554, 446). that the recently elected politicians are all too eager to ignore or leave the past behind (see the quote from Poots It soon became very clear that “prosecuting everybody” was at the beginning). :eir macro-political strategy is one of simply unworkable while trying to take over the apartheid “chosen amnesia” (the term was coined by Buckley-Zistel state machine, whereas a “blanket amnesty” would be [455<]), because they want to move forward with politi- unacceptable to a black populace that had only just fought cal consolidation of the process while ignoring the evident for and won the concessions that had resulted in negotia- structures of voluntary apartheid. As Buckley-Zistel found tions (Bell 455@; Villa-Vicencio 4555a, 4555b, 455@a). As out, a similar strategy was employed in Rwanda: “remem- a consequence, the South African policy-makers decided bering to forget” became the rationale of both communities. to go down the road Desmond Tutu called the “third way” However, while this strategy might achieve some short-term between “Chile” and “Nuremberg.” :e TRC was o?cially rewards, it bears considerable long-term risk of a return to commissioned to uncover “the truth” about apartheid’s hu- inter-ethnic violence because the structures that created the man rights violations and to publicize its =ndings. :e TRC conditions for the outbreak of violence in the =rst place are was made up of seventeen commissioners, selected from not changed (Buckley-Zistel 455<). all political parties and groupings. ABer two years they presented their =nal report (for further description of the 3. Truth-Seeking Exercises and the Morality of Violence structure see Coetzee 455@ and Cherry, Daniel, and Fullard 3.1. The South African Model: “Truth” in Exchange for Conditional Amnesty 455@). During the past twenty-=ve years, truth commissions as a tool for political and social stabilization of post-con9ict :e third way realized in the amnesty process gave the TRC societies have received increasing attention worldwide far-reaching “semi-legal” authority and was the crucial
# Ivan Cooper himself gave his blessing to the con=dence that it was made with great integrity.’ hardware and, most importantly, very little sup- movie: “‘I‘ve seen the =lm six times now,’ says Mr (…) ‘Before Bloody Sunday, I believe there were port.’” BBC News, January @5, 4554, http://news. Cooper, now A8. ‘And my =rst thoughts were that it no more than @5 to ;5 IRA volunteers in Derry. bbc.co.uk/6/hi/northern_ireland/6376575.stm. was an emotional experience. I‘m able to say with :ey had a very small base, small amounts of IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 116
factor for which the TRC gained the most international 3.2. “Discriminatory Truth-seeking” in Northern Ireland recognition. :e South African version of amnesty was the However, achieving the desired social consensus on the central innovative feature of the TRC: morality of violence is an uphill struggle. According to Brandon Hamber the challenge for post-con9ict societies is “Our amnesty process has been quite unique in the world. to be willing to adopt a totally di>erent moral starting point We have conditional amnesty. We would not have had all of for the analysis or assessment of acts of violence in order to these revelations if we had just gone for a blanket amnesty move forward: “Violence during times of political con9ict and families would still have been deprived of the knowl- is by de=nition a political action fraught with the hidden edge.” ; hands of political agendas and posturing. It is for this very reason that consensual strategies for dealing with the past Amnesty was only granted in exchange for “truth”: “Appli- should be sought. It is only through taking control of the cants had to make a “full disclosure” of their human rights apparatus of memory and history that societies coming out violations in order to qualify for amnesty. In most instances of violence can begin to engage with and develop construc- applicants would appear before the Amnesty Committee, tive collective memories of the con9ict” (Hamber 6777b). and these hearings would be open to the public” (Boraine 455@, 6 $ Glenda Wildschut, in Long Night’s Journey Into Day, documentary =lm, 4555, transcript at: http:// www.newsreel.org/transcripts/longnight.htm. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 117 Seen within this framework violence by the IRA and others Ireland. But the moral challenge to such legitimization was directed against the “institutions” of the British crown strategies is this: a police o?cer was not only a “military” and according to their “discourse processes” violent acts servant of the state, but also “o> duty” a private citizen, a were not directed against the community, i.e. not against family man, a father, and a civilian. And he even might not individual members of the Protestant community in North- even have supported the government he was serving under. ern Ireland. :is point was reinforced in July 4554, when So for a large part of his life he was indeed a “non-combat- the IRA made a public apology to the “innocent victims,” ant.” Only through the eyes of the IRA can he be seen as a namely to “non-combatants” killed during acts of “legiti- legitimate target. mate” violence: “While it was not our intention to injure or kill non-combatants, the reality is that on this and on a On the other hand we can also take the con9icting morali- number of other occasions, that was the consequence of our ties of violence one step further and ask critical questions actions. . . . We o>er our sincere apologies and condolences from a completely contrary point of view: are there reasons to their families” (An Phoblacht, July 68, 4554).A or “rationalizations” that could persuade survivors whose relatives fell victim to violent acts “perpetrated” by the IRA :us, the basic analytical assumption of this paper is that and others that the armed groups and their families can be violence is a means of communication, disseminating (sym- recognized as victims, too? Or in other words, is it feasible bolic) meaning which is open for interpretation: “Rather or justi=ed to classify armed combatants not only as “ter- than de=ning violence a priori as senseless and irrational, rorists” or “perpetrators,” but also as “victims”? we should consider it as a changing form of interaction and communication, as a historically developed cultural form of To understand this point we need to take a look at the biog- meaningful action” (Blok 4555, 4;). raphies of the individuals involved in violence and the cir- cumstances and living conditions of their families. Not only However, these discursive legitimization strategies cannot did they serve very long prison sentences, but their families be leB unchallenged, because “recognition” and “under- were destroyed, “innocent” lives were ruined. In addition, standing” are not a one-way street. :e challenge to the many family members who had no IRA connection were legitimization discourse is that during war there will always murdered. “Civilian” family members of the armed groups be civilian fatalities and combatants who decide to par- were drawn into the civil war and many of them were ticipate in a war, i.e. choosing violence or armed con9ict, killed. One example out of many is Tommy McKearney, a thereby accepting the loss of innocent civilian lives. :us former IRA member who served seventeen years in prison. when demanding that victims and surviving families All three of his brothers were murdered, none them mem- understand the violent acts of armed groups as having been bers of the IRA, and Tommy himself almost died during the carried out for politically motivated reasons, the armed famous IRA hunger strike of 6785. Tommy and his family groups must in return also recognize how di?cult it is for can thus be quali=ed as “victims” of the Northern Ireland victims and surviving families to comprehend the ration- con9ict. When asked in an interview, “Was it all worth it?” alization of violence that distinguishes between “legitimate he replied: “I am by no means a philosopher, but I can only targets” and “civilians.” answer this question philosophically. I played all the cards which were dealt to me. I have no problem with my past. :e police is a prime example illustrating this point. Mem- Sure, it caused a lot of pain for me and my family” (Tages- bers of Northern Ireland’s then overwhelmingly Protestant zeitung, July @5, 455A). police force were seen as “legitimate targets” because they were the manifest institutions of British “foreign rule” in % Complete text: BBC News, July 6<, 4554, http:// news.bbc.co.uk/6/hi/northern_ireland/46@[email protected]. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 118 :e di?cult debate on the linkage and relationships January 455;. :e mural portrays = ve major IRA bomb at-at- between violence, legitimization, and morality ultimately tacks that struck the Protestant community of the Shankill leads to the conclusion that every attempt to compare or Road area in West Belfast (in one, the Shankill Road bomb- quantify individual or communal su>ering is doomed to ing of October 4@, 677@, nine Protestants and one of the fail: “:e whole process becomes unfortunate if you start to IRA men carrying the bomb lost their lives in the attack on compare su>ering” (Villa-Vicencio 455@b). Frizzel’s =sh shop). :e mural includes two straightforward messages from the Protestant community for the IRA and In the reality of post-con9ict societies, communities keep the British government: “No Military Targets, No Economic being torn apart with each side claiming to be the “real” Targets, No Legitimate Targets” and “Where“Where are our inqui-inqui- and “legitimate” victims, thereby belittling the other side’s ries? Where is our truth? Where is our justice?” su>ering. :e social-psychological feature of voluntary apartheid (see above) reinforces the di>erence between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” (“real” and “unreal”) victims as the predominant societal viewpoint: the members of one’s own community who lost their lives through violence are regarded as victims whereas the members of the “other” group are not accepted as such. How do we get societies to a point where they are ready to understand and even accept the other side’s su>ering and start to abandon cognitive hierarchies of victimhood? :e political dimension of the reconciliation process is espe- Protestant Mural on the Shankill Road, © CAIN (cain.ulst.ac.uk). cially signi=cant in this case. If the exclusive de=nitions of victims prevailing in society are not overcome, the success Two declarations by the IRA can be seen as responses to of the political con9ict transformation process will also be the Protestant claim, epitomized by the mural, that their constrained for a long time. :us, the political consolida- victims are “forgotten” and not recognized in the same tion of the Northern Irish peace process might soon prove way as Catholic victims. First, the public apology of July 6<, to be temporary if the divided past resulting in a divided 4554 (quoted above), which was hailed as a “historic” step society is leB unresolved (voluntary apartheid). internationally. Yet, as that apology was made only with re- spect to “non-combatants,” it implies that the IRA’s military 4. Speech Acts Not Speaking for Themselves targets—institutions and symbols of the British state—were 4.1. Innocence of a “Guilty Victim” or Guilt of an “Innocent Victim” legitimate and therefore required no apology. :e second Brandon Hamber made it clear that Northern Irish soci- “historic” IRA statement, issued on July 48, 455A, followed ety must engage in the challenge of resolving the divided the same ideological pattern. :e organization announced past by analyzing and engaging with the “moralities of the end of its armed campaign, but at the same time stated violence,” although it is questionable whether a consensus that the armed struggle had been legitimate: “We are very can ever be reached (Hamber 6777a). :e perceptions and mindful of the sacri=ces of our patriotic dead, those who rationalizations of violence on both sides face each other went to jail, volunteers, their families and the wider repub- quite irreconcilably. One symbolic example illustrating the lican base. We reiterate our view that the armed struggle lack of understanding and recognition for the Republican was entirely legitimate. We are conscious that many people discourse on violence in the broader Protestant community su>ered in the con9ict. :ere is a compelling imperative on occurred when a new mural was formally inaugurated in all sides to build a just and lasting peace.”< & Irish Republican Army (IRA) State- paign, July 48, 455A, http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/ ment on the Ending of the Armed Cam- othelem/organ/ira/ira48535A.htm. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 119 :e reactions of the victims re9ect the ambiguity and lence discourse of the non-state actors in war: Is it possible contradictions of the quali=ed IRA apology, which was not to distinguish at all between civilians and non-civilians, be- received positively by the Protestant community: “While tween civilian victims and military victims? It is a di?cult apologies such as this are easy to formulate, where is their task to explain to the family of a murdered RUC policeman declaration that the war is over, that they were not justi=ed that their dead father was not a civilian. But in return, the in their use of violence and will never resort to it again—or state forces, the police and the army, must also ask them- do they continue to believe that they were justi=ed and wish selves the critical question: How do you explain to a mother to hold the option of returning to murder to further their of a twelve-year-old child killed by a police plastic bullet, ends if the ballot box ceases to deliver.”3 that the police was not a part of the “occupation force,” not a “legitimate target”? FAIR is an advocacy and lobby group acting for IRA victims and their families. Aileen Quinton, who lost her :e search for answers to these di?cult questions can be mother in the Enniskillen bombing, reacted to the IRA’s facilitated by focusing on the “needs” of the con9icting par- declaration of July 48, 455A, in a similarly negative way: ties as a starting point for a con9ict transformation pro- “Why should I be grateful to the IRA for stopping doing cess (see section 6.). :e various concepts focusing on the what they’d no right to do in the =rst place? You shouldn’t “needs” of the con9icting parties (Burton 6783, 6775, 677A; get brownie points for not murdering people” (Sunday Burton and Dukes 6775; Kelman 6775, 6773a, 6773b; Kel- Tribune, July @6, 455A). man and Cohen 673<; Rosenberg 455@a, 455@b, 455;.) lead us to conclude that all victims of the civil war in Northern :ere have been some more positive reactions on the other Ireland have the same need, namely recognition of their suf- hand. Alan McBride, who lost his wife in the Shankill Road fering. For this reason, all victims of violence must be given bombing, said: “You have to recognise the fact that the IRA equal status in the sense of an “inclusive de=nition of the have not gone this far before. I do welcome it from that per- victims.” However, if everybody becomes a victim the value spective. But I would urge caution. Words are not enough of the category becomes questionable: indeed, the category and this needs to be backed up by action. Having said that, of “victimhood” becomes almost irrelevant. So it makes it could be the start. If they are true to their words this more sense to talk about “lost lives” instead of applying the could breathe some much needed air back into the peace contentious concept of “victims” versus “perpetrators.” process, which has been sadly lacking of late” (Guardian, July 47, 455A). 4.2. Moralities of Violence: Lives Lost Are Lives Lost? Northern Ireland is still far away from a consensus on how But by and large the prevailing conditions of Northern Ire- to assess the victims of the ethno-political con9ict; inclusive land’s post-con9ict society are those of voluntary apartheid, and exclusive de=nitions and perceptions of “victimhood” where there is a strong perception of “one-sided victim- collide, while the exclusive de=nition is clearly predominant hood” and a moral competition for primary “victim status”: at societal level. “A political culture that is based on competing claims to victim-hood is likely to support and legitimise violence, and :e political attitude of Sinn Fein pretends to be based unlikely to foster an atmosphere of political responsibility on an inclusive de=nition of the victims. Eoin O’Broin, a and maturity” (Smyth 6777). party spokesman, describes a memorial plaque in front of the Wave Trauma Center in North Belfast, which lists all From the perspective of the victims and surviving relatives, the people who lost their lives in the con9ict in this area the following critical questions arise with respect to the vio- since 67<7: “OBen the IRA volunteer’s name or the British ' Families Acting for their Innocent Rela- tives (FAIR), press release, July 6<, 4554. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 120 soldier’s name who is on the list was responsible for some- Inquiry (also called the Saville Inquiry), which was set up body else’s life whose name is also on the list. . . . If we are by Tony Blair in January 6778 to =nd out the “truth” about going to have a real process of reconciliation, a real process the events of January @5, 6734, when fourteen Catholic civil- of truth, at some level we have to acknowledge, whatever ians were shot dead by British paratroopers.8 Presided over our political judgements: Lives lost were lives lost! And all by Judge Lord Saville of Newdigate, the inquiry has heard of those people’s grief has to have some sort of equality” almost one thousand witnesses over the years, but has still (O’Broin 4554). not published a =nal report. :roughout the life-time of the inquiry serious criticism has been directed against it, Although it is o?cial Sinn Fein policy to approve a truth for example because of the total costs of about F6A5 million and reconciliation commission, the party recognizes that (Guardian, March 47, 455;). But the central point of criti- society is not yet ready to think in inclusive victim catego- cism was that the victims of Bloody Sunday came exclu- ries (O’Broin 4554). Nor should we forget that Sinn Fein sively from the Catholic community. :ere are increasing is totally opposed to any form of amnesty for the “state demands for IRA attacks resulting in the loss of hundreds forces,” i.e. the police and the British Army. In their eyes the of Protestant lives to be investigated with the same atten- British “crown forces” were not legitimate actors of violence. tion and the same =nancial investment as the events of Bloody Sunday. :ose making that case usually refer to the If the dilemma of con9icting moralities of violence is to Enniskillen bombing, and to “Bloody Friday” in Belfast, be resolved and a social consensus of inclusive “under- when the IRA exploded twenty-six bombs on July 46, 6736. standing” of victimhood achieved, the di?cult question If the request for an inclusive de=nition of victims is taken of amnesty must be addressed. :ere are very clear signals seriously, then the needs of the Protestant victims and their coming from all armed groups that they would be ready to families cannot be ignored. contribute to clearing up the 6,855 deaths still unresolved— depending on whether or not amnesty would be given 5. Conclusion: Understanding, Recognition and (Critical) “Self-Analysis” in exchange for this act of clari=cation. Michael Stone, a T,# %&(/ ',)&+ I 21& )D1+)&# ',1' )C D%-# 01)&!E( former combatant of the Protestant Ulster Defence Asso- ',1& C#(!-1&1(/C)C )C 2,)($-.)-',. W,/ )C )' ',1' "# ciation (UDA), made the connection with South Africa in ,1'# 0#%0(# "# $%&’' G&%"H H%" )C )' ',1' "# 21& an interview with Tim Sebastian on BBC Hardtalk (June ()*# ")', +,%C'C 1&$ D/',C 1&$ C,)..%(#',C ",)(C' 66, 455@), emphasizing that he would be ready to make his ,1*)&+ &% 2-#$).)()'/ ",1'C%#*#- %- !%E&$1')%& '% knowledge public if he were guaranteed amnesty. %E- '%E2,C'%&#C %! ",1' 01CC#C !%- 0%()')21( 0%()2/ %- 0%()')21( 0,)(%C%0,/H A&$ %! 2%E-C#: IC ',1' 1 :e central problem for the implementation of any ver- 0%()')21( 0,)(%C%0,/ 1' 1((H (E-*)&# 4556) sion of a “Northern Ireland TRC” is connected to what was called the danger of “discriminatory truth-seeking” David Ervine was a member of the Ulster Volunteer Force (Moltmann 4554, ;@f.). :e danger of “discriminatory (UVF), a Protestant paramilitary group and chief enemy truth-seeking” is linked to the question of amnesty. :e of the IRA. He served almost ten years in prison before be- Protestant mural cited earlier is a vehement example of coming the leader of the Progressive Unionist Party (PUP) “discriminatory truth-seeking”: “Where are our inquiries? and an outspoken supporter of the peace process. Northern Where is our truth? Where is our justice?” Irish society as a whole still has extensive “self-analysis” to cope with, because if there is any consensus at all in Bernhard Moltmann made the very strong accusation of Northern Ireland, it is the negative or skeptical “common “discriminatory truth-seeking” against the Bloody Sunday sense” that Northern Ireland is not ready for the truth of the ( Website: http://www.bloody- sunday-inquiry.org.uk. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 121 violent past. A positive sign might be the overarching con- Another example is the proposals of the Consultative Group sensus within Northern Irish society that the past cannot be on the Past, an independent group established in 4553 to leB “untouched” and that is has to be dealt with, but there is seek views across the community on the best way to deal no plausible agreement on how to do this (Hamber 6777a). with the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland. :e group, co-chaired by Lord Robin Eames, the former archbishop What is important, however, is that post-war societies like of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland, and Denis Bradley, Northern Ireland can never be transformed into Aldous a prominent public =gure and former vice-chairman of Huxley’s “Island” or a pre-modern “Ladakh.” Post-war so- the Police Board, published its =nal report on 48 January cieties will never be free of con9ict, since new con9icts will 4557. Most controversially it included the proposal that a arise in the future. :e right “peace prescription” can only payment of 64,555 pounds should be made to all who lost cure a society of its divided past, heal its memories, and relatives as a result of the troubles: civilians and members of reassert a society’s capacity to establish common institu- the non-state groups (Consultative Group on the Past 4557). tions for peaceful con9ict management. In order to reach :e Consultative Group characterized this payment as this capacity the sociological concept of “recognition” is “recognition payment” aimed at recognizing that everybody a helpful tool. In his ground-breaking study, the German who died as consequence of the Troubles was a legitimate philosopher Axel Honneth argued that “the struggle for victim. Unsurprisingly, a storm of anger followed. For ex- recognition” is, and should be, at the center of social con- ample, Lord Morrow from the DUP argued that “mothers’ 9icts (Honneth 677<, see the comments in the introduction). tears are not the same”: “:e question has been asked, ‘Are Putting the “journey” towards mutual “recognition” by so- the tears of the mother of a paramilitary killer any di>erent ciety as a whole at the center of the con9ict puts the concept from the tears of the mother of a victim who had no in- at the center of the transformation of the con9ict, too. :e volvement whatsoever in violence?’ I happen to think there debate that followed Honneth’s publication is quite illustra- is a di>erence, in particular, when that mother declares tive. Honneth’s philosophical considerations were strongly her support for the murderous activities her o>spring was challenged by Nancy Fraser, who criticized that within engaged in” (+e Newsletter, February @, 4557). the philosophical debate there was too much emphasis on “recognition” while the important questions surrounding Even before publication, the Consultative Group made a the idea of “redistribution” were marginalized (Honneth similarly controversial proposal which was excluded from and Fraser 455@). Leaving aside the Honneth-Fraser debate, the =nal report: On January 8, 4558, it proposed that the mutual recognition comes into play as a “soB factor” within British government should formally declare and “recognize” the realm of con9ict transformation and acquires an enor- that it had fought a “war” against the IRA. :roughout the mous potential for post-con9ict societies since it can lead to “Troubles” successive governments and the security forces a weakening of voluntary apartheid. :e main focus must claimed they were dealing with “criminal activity” and a be on mutual recognition of victimhood while acknowledg- “breakdown of law and order” in Northern Ireland. Declar- ing the su>ering and loss on both sides. ing that a “war” had been fought would give some moral and ethical legitimacy to the “fallen comrades” of the IRA, One impressive example of recognition occurred in May who would then be considered as “victims of war”—on an 4553, when Sir Mike Jackson, who was an o?cer in the equal basis with police o?cers and soldiers. Parachute Regiment in Londonderry at the time of Bloody Sunday, said: “I have no doubt that innocent people were Willie Frazer responded very angrily to the proposal: “If shot.”7 Jackson had previously consistently refused to give there was a war it justi=es the murder of our loved ones. evidence to the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. It was not a war, it was a terrorist campaign” (BBC News, ) BBC News, May 47, 4553, http://news.bbc.co.uk/4/ hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/<<77347.stm.. IJCV : Vol. 3 (1) 2009, pp. 107 – 123 Marcel M. Baumann: Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence 122 January 8, 4558, http://news.bbc.co.uk/6/hi/northern_ In order to cross that rubicon, the =rst step is the mutual ireland/363<436.stm). However, Jude Whyte, whose mother recognition of victimhood. :is should be the institutional was killed by a UVF bomb, was quoted as saying that it basis of any Northern Ireland commission dealing with the was important to move forward: “What Denis Bradley and past. Robin Eames are doing is asking people together to cross the rubicon and forgive, not to forget, but to hand the next generation something better” (ibid.). Coetzee, Martin. 455@. An Overview of the TRC Amnesty Process. In +e 6. References Provocations of Amnesty: Memory, Justice and Impunity, ed. Charles Villa- Aijmer, Göran. 4555. :e Idiom of Violence in Imagery and Discourse. Vicencio and Erik Doxtader, 686–7;. Cape Town: Africa World Press. In Meanings of Violence: A Cross Cultural Perspective, ed. Göran Consultative Group on the Past (CGP). 4557. Text of Report Aijmer and Jon Abbink, 6–46. Oxford and New York: Berg. Launch Address by Denis Bradley and Robin Eames of the Apter, David. 6773. Political Violence in Analytical Perspective. Consultative Group on the Past, 48 January. Belfast: CGP. In +e Legitimization of Violence, ed. David Apter, Ervine, David. 4556. Interview by Marcel M. Baumann. June 43. 6–@4. New York: New York University Press. Feldman, Allen. 6776. Formations of Violence: +e Narrative of the Body and Baumann, Marcel M. 4558a. :e Trouble with the Peace Science’s Political Terror in Northern Ireland. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. “Trouble-Makers.” Peace Review 45 (;) (October 4558): ;AA–<6. ————. 6778. Retaliate and Punish: Political Violence as Form ————. 4558b. Zwischenwelten: Weder Krieg, noch Frieden: Über den and Memory in Northern Ireland. Éire: Interdisciplinary konstruktiven Umgang mit Gewaltphänomenen im Prozess der Journal of Irish Studies @4–@@ (6773–6778): 67A–4@A. Kon,ikttransformation. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für SozialwissenschaBen. Halbwachs, Maurice. 67<<. Das Gedächtnis und seine sozialen Bell, Terry. 455@. Un-nished Business: South Africa, Apartheid Bedingungen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. and Truth. London and New York: Verso.. ————. 67<3. Das Kollektive Gedächtnis. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke. Beevor, Antony. 4558. Der Spanische Bürgerkrieg. Munich: Goldmann. ————. 6774. On Collective Memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Blok, Anton. 4555. :e Enigma of Senseless Violence. In Meanings Hamber, Brandon. 6777a. :e Past Imperfect. Exploring Northern Ireland, of Violence: A Cross Cultural Perspective, ed. Göran Aijmer South Africa and Guatemala. In Past Imperfect: Dealing with the Past and Jon Abbink, 4@–@8. Oxford and New York: Berg. in Northern Ireland and Countries in Transition, ed. Brandon Hamber, Bloom=eld, Kenneth. 6778. We Will Remember +em. Report of 6–64. Derry/Londonderry, Northern Ireland: INCORE/University of the Northern Ireland Victims Commissioner. Belfast. Ulster. http.//www.brandonhamber.com/pastimperfect.htm. Boraine, Alexander. 455@. South Africa’s Amnesty Revisisted. In +e ————. 6777b. Remembering to Forget. Issues to Consider when Establishing Provocations of Amnesty: Memory, Justice and Impunity, ed. Charles Villa- Structures for Dealing with the Past, In Past Imperfect: Dealing with the Vicencio and Erik Doxtader, 6 ————. 4555. Same Species, Di>erent Animal: How South Africa Compares Schröder, Ingo W., and Bettina E. Schmidt. 4556. Violent Imaginaries and to Truth Commissions Worldwide. In Looking Back Reaching Forward: Violent Practices. In Anthropology of Violence and Con,ict, ed. Ingo W. Re,ections on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa, ed. Schröder and Bettina E. Schmidt, 6–4;. London and New York: Routledge. Charles Villa-Vicenio and Wilhelm Verwoerd, @4–;6. Cape Town: Zed Books. Shirlow, Peter. 455@. “Who Fears to Speak”: Fear, Mobility, Honneth, Axel. 677<. +e Struggle for Recognition: +e Moral and Ethno-sectarianism in the Two “Ardoynes.” +e Grammar of Social Con,icts. Cambridge: MIT Press. Global Review of Ethnopolitics @ (6): 3<–76. Honneth, Axel, and Nancy Fraser. 455@. Redistribution or Recognition? Shirlow, Peter, and Brendan Murtagh. 455<. Belfast: Segregation, A Political-Philosophical Exchange. London: Verso. Violence and the City. London, Dublin, and Ann Arbor: Pluto. Jarman, Neil. 6773. Material Con,icts: Parades and Visual Displays Simmel, Georg. 67A8. Soziologie: Untersuchungen über die Formen in Northern Ireland. Oxford and New York: Berg. der Vergesellscha.ung. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Keller, Reiner. 455;. Diskursforschung: eine Einführung für Simpson, Graeme. 4554. “Tell No Lies, Claim No Easy Victories”: A Brief Sozialwissenscha.lerInnen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für SozialwissenschaBen. Evaluation of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Kelman, Herbert C. 6775. Interactive Problem-Solving: A Social- In Commissioning the Past: Understanding South Africa’s Truth psychological Approach to Con9ict Resolution. In Con,ict: and Reconciliation Commission, ed. Deborah Posel and Graeme Readings in Management and Resolution, ed. John W. Burton Simpson, 445–A6. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press. and Frank Dukes, 677–46A. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Smyth, Marie. 6777. Remembering in Northern Ireland. Victims, Perpetrators ————. 6773a. Ino?zielle Diplomatie – Ihr Beitrag zur Lösung and Hierarchies of Pain and Responsibility. In Past Imperfect: Dealing internationaler Kon9ikte. In Frieden machen, ed. Dieter with the Past in Northern Ireland and Countries in Transition, ed. Brandon Senghaas, 4;@–<3. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Hamber, @6–;7. Derry/Londonderry, Northern Ireland: INCORE/University of Ulster. http.//www.brandonhamber.com/pastimperfect.htm. ————. 6773b. Socio-Psychological Dimensions of International Con9ict. In Peacemaking in International Con,ict. Methods & Smyth, Marie, and Marie-:erese Fay, eds. 4555. Personal Techniques, ed. I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen, 676–4@3. Accounts from Northern Ireland’s Troubles. Public Con,ict, Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press. Private Loss. London and Sterling, VA: Pluto Press. Kelman, Herbert C., and Peter Cohen. 673<. :e Problem-solving Venkathratnam, Sonny. 455@. Interview by Marcel M. Baumann. June A. Workshop. A Social-psychological Contribution to the Resolution of Villa-Vicencio, Charles. 4555a. Restorative Justice: Dealing with the Past International Con9icts. Journal of Peace Research 6@ (4): 37–75. Di>erently. In Looking Back Reaching Forward: Re,ections on the Truth Lederach, John Paul. 6773. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa, ed. Charles Villa- Societies. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press. Vicenio and Wilhelm Verwoerd, <8–3<. Cape Town: Zed Books. Liechty, Joseph, and Cecelia Clegg. 4556. Moving Beyond Sectarianism: Religion, ————. 4555b. Getting On with Life: A Move towards Reconciliation. Con,ict and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland. Dublin: Columba. In Looking Back Reaching Forward: Re,ections on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa, ed. Charles Villa-Vicenio Moltmann, Bernhard. 4554. „Es kann der Frömmste nicht im Frieden and Wilhelm Verwoerd, 677–457. Cape Town: Zed Books. bleiben“: Nordirland und sein kalter Frieden, HSFK Report 8. Frankfurt am Main: Hessische StiBung für Friedens- und Kon9iktforschung. ————. 455@a. Restorative Justice: Ambiguities and Limitations of a :eory. In +e Provocations of Amnesty: Memory, Justice and Impunity, ed. Charles O’Broin, Eoin. 4554. Interview by Marcel M. Baumann. November <. Villa-Vicencio and Erik Doxtader, @5–A5. . Cape Town: Africa World Press. Porter, Norman. 455@. +e Elusive Quest: Reconciliation ————. 455@b. Interview by Marcel M. Baumann. June 63. in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Blacksta>. Volkan, Vamik. 6773. Bloodlines: From Ethnic Pride to Ropers, Norbert. 677Aa. Friedliche Einmischung: Strukturen, Ethnic Terrorism. New York: Basic Books. Prozesse und Strategien zur konstruktiven Bearbeitung ethnopolitischer Kon,ikte, Berghof Report 6. Berlin: Berghof Weber, Max. [6744] 455<. Wirtscha. und Gesellscha.: Grundriss Research Center for Constructive Con9ict Management. der verstehenden Soziologie. Paderborn: Zweitausendeins. ————. 677Ab. Die friedliche Bearbeitung ethno-politischer Kon9ikte. In ————. 6776. Schri.en zur Wissenscha.slehre. Stuttgart: Reclam. Friedliche Kon,iktbearbeitung in der Staaten- und Gesellscha.swelt, Widgery, Lord. 6734. Report of the Tribunal Appointed to Inquire ed. Norbert Ropers and Tobias Debiel, 673–4@4. Bonn: Diez. into the Events on Sunday, /0 January 1234, which Led to Loss Rosenberg, Marshall B. 455@a. Gewaltfreie Kommunikation: of Life in Connection with the Procession in Londonderry on Eine Sprache des Lebens. Paderborn: Junfermann. that Day. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery O?ce. ————. 455@b. Getting Past the Pain between Us: Healing and Wright, Frank. 6783. Northern Ireland: A Comparative Reconciliation without Compromise. Encinitas, CA: Puddle Dancer. Analysis. New York: Barnes & Noble. ————. 455;. Kon,ikte lösen durch Gewaltfreie Kommunikation: Ein ————. 6775. Communal Deterrence and the :reat of Violence in the Gespräch mit Gabriele Seils. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder. North of Ireland in the Nineteenth Century. In Political Violence: Ireland in a Comparative Perspective, ed. John Darby, Nicholas Santino, Jack. 4556. Signs of War and Peace: Social Con,ict Dodge, and A. C. Hepburn, 66–48. Belfast and Ottawa: Appletree. and the Use of Public Symbols in Northern Ireland. New York and Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. ————. 677<. Two Lands on One Soil: Ulster Politics before Home Rule. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Marcel M. Baumann [email protected]