------MILLENNIAL REFLECTIONS ON INTERNATIONAL STUDIES C:oNVERGENCES BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT, SECURITY, FORE I G N SECURITY STUDIES AND PEACE STUDIES POLICY, AND INTERNATIONAL Louis Kriesberg POLITICAL ECONOMY Past Paths and F.uture Directions in International Studies

Editedby MichaelBrecher andFrank P. Harvey

AnnArbor

THE liNivERSITrOF ?vfrCfilG.AN PRESS Converiences between Security Studies and Peace Studies 161

national relations approaches. Persons doing internationalsecurity CONVERGENCES BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL studies tended to draw from the realist approach and those doing SECURITY STUDIES AND PEACE STUDIES peace studies tended to drawfrom a liberal idealist or constructivist approach.1 Realists generally assume that states are unitaryactors seeking to maximize power. Liberal idealists, however, generally Louis Kriesberg stress the importance of diversedomestic actors, transnationalor­ ganizations, and normative factors. Realists emphasize the anar­ chic nature of the world system, and other approaches stress the varyingdegree of integrationand the shared ways of thinkingin the worldor regionsof it.i Peace studiesanalysts have generally drawnfrom a wider variety of fields of inquiry than have analysts working in internationalse­ curity studies. Many workers in peace studies have been more re­ ceptive, for example, to the perspective and insights of feminist thinking in international relations.a Thefeminist attention to the manifold roles of women in sustainingsocial life fits well with the concern of manyin peacestudies about the ways people at the grass f ntemationalsecurity studies andpeace studies arenot a single sub­ roots affect andare affected by so-called high politics.The emphasis fieldof internationalrelations. Analysts in securitystudies and those among many feminists upon the distinctivequalities of women has in peace studies have generallyviewed themselvesand been viewed contributedto studyingthe roles women have played in peace move­ by others as working in quite different domains. Some persons in ments and the roles they might play in countering wars and over­ each area have been critical or dismissive of the efforts of those in coming large-scale violence.• the other. Nevertheless, many persons across both areas actually Some peace studiesanalysts have also been relatively attentiveto share significant concerns and questions, such as how to avoid or to the possible impact of religion and of culture on war and peace.5 limitwars and other violent conflicts. Furthermore, the work being Analystshave shownhow religiousbeliefs, organizations, andlead­ done in each of these domains is increasingly overlapping. To en­ ers have contributedto mitigatingas well as to exacerbating violent hancethe possibilities of beneficial cooperation among analysts in conflicts. Additionally, some workers in the peace studies domain thesedomains, the past relations and the current movementstoward have been relatively attentive to transnationalsocial movement or­ convergence should be examined.Aft erdoing so, I will discuss prom­ ganizations andto criticalanalyses of global politicaleconomy. The isingoptions for the future. many trends constit,Utingglobalization have increased the power of multinational coiporations, and the persons who control those or­ Earlier Relations ganizations increasingly shape and use the global market for their benefit.' They also provide new opportunities for resistance and In previousdecades, many persons working in security studies and more egalitarian relations.7 many persons working in peace studies differedin several signifi­ Other differences arealso noteworthy. International securityan­ cant ways. For example, they tended to draw fromdiff erent inter- alysts have tended to assume the perspective of one primaryactor in aninternational conflict, typically their own country, while peace I thankthe followingpersons who readearlier drafts of thispaper and kindly gave me studies analysts tended to take a more global or systemic perspec­ theirco=ents: EileenBabbitt, JamesBennett, Volker Franke,and NilsPetter Gle­ ditsch. I, of course, remainresponsible for the observations andjucJ&ments made in tive. Persons in international security studies generally focused on thischapter. military means while persons in peace studies stressed nonviolent 163. 162 Conflict,Security, Forelin Policy, and International Political Economy Converiences between. Security. Studies and Peace Studlas

International securityanalysts have examined in greatdetail, for Thosefactors includesystemic featuressuch as thenumber of major example, the nature of nuclear warheads and delivery systems and powers in tjie system, state characteristics such as type of gover­ theirimpact on military strategy.• Issues relating to deterrence-and nance, and relationship factors such as trading interd�pendency. to nuclear proliferation have drawn great attention since the end of Among other topics, considerable writing about crisis manage­ World War II. More recently, attention has been given to chemical ment and foreign policy decision making constituted areas where and bacteriological weapons and to terrorism. peace studies and international security studies have overlapped, Finally, international security analysts tended to concentrate on with some variance in emphasis. Thus, some persons in the inter­ avoidingwar (negative peace), whilepeace researchersoften stressed national security studies domain tended to assume that officials issues of justiceand equity (positive.peace)as well. Membersof each generally acted in termsof rationalcalculations of relativelyfixed camp also tended to differin their institutionalbases: those working national interests,while analysts in the peace studies domainoften ininternational security often were employed ininstitutes receiving emphasized group, normative,and emotional factors. Nevertheless, foundationand government funds, while those inpeace studiesoften some analysts identifiedwith each domain read and critiqued each were employed in colleges and in universities, and sometimes in other's work andinfluenced each other. This may be noted in work nongovernmental socialmovement organizations. on the way officials from antagonistic states interact with each These differenceswere particularly strongin the United States in other in crises.1:i the early decades afterWorld War II.The differences arose in large Many professional associationsalso provided settingsfor informal partfrom varying career origins,intellectual traditions, and network and formalexchanges of ideas.For example, the InternationalStud­ associations. In the United States, an important tradition in peace ies Association has long includedan InternationalSecurity Studies studies, emphasizing nonviolence andsocial justice, initiallydevel­ Sectionand a PeaceStudies Section,and members from eachsection oped in church-related colleges. Thefirst peace studiesprogram was sometimes participated together on the same panels. Within the established in r948 at the Churchof Brethren-affiliatedManchester AmericanSociological Association, the Section on the Sociology of Collegein Indiana. In the late 1950s, research-orientedcenters began World Conflicts was established in the early 1970s andits member­ to be established, notably the Center for Research on Conflict Res­ ship always has included students of peace and of military forces. olution at the University of Michigan. Thename of the sectioncurrently is Peace, War, andSocial Conflict. Manyof the people engaged in securitystudies flourished in col­ The International Sociological Association included a Research ltge and university departments and international relations pro­ Committee on Armed Forces andSociety (RCor), and in 1980 that grams. They also were associated with academic andnonacademic· was reorganized to includesociologists studyinginternational rela­ institutes associated with the U.S. government and its armed tions, peace, andconflict resolution; the name of the research com­ forces-for example, RAND.9 As I discuss later, the divergence in mittee waschanged to Armed Forcesand ConflictResolution. 13 theory, research, and practice between people engaged in these two The differencesbetween the peace andsecurity domains have not domainshas hampered the members' work in each camp. been as greatin Europe as inthe United States. Thus, many European Some people, of course, did research and examined policy alter­ peace institutes included work related to alternative military doc­ natives that in some ways bridged these differences. One arena of trines. In varying degrees this was the case for the International shared interests was the causes of war and of peace; indeed, analyses Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), established in 1959; the De­ on this topic by Wright, Richardson, andDeutsch et al. were partof partment of Peace Studies at the University of Bradford, England, the important quantitative tradition in peace research and hence established in 19731 the Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF); peace studies.10 Work in this tradition has continued among both theCopenhagen Peace Research Institute (COPRII, andthe Tampere peace researchers and international security analysts, as illustrated Peace Research Institute (TAPRI). In such European centers, ideas by thework of Singer, Isard, Leng, andVasquez. 11 Theyhave tended were developed, for example, about nonoffensive defense, which to analyze factors that might account for variations in warfareover many peace researchers argue contributed to changes in Soviet time and among different countries, -often using quantitative data. thinking andhence to theending of the cold war.14 Thus, the Soviet 164 Conflict,Security, Forel2n Policy, and International Political Economy Converiences between Security Studies and Peace Studies 165

militaryposture was modified so that it would be recognized asde­ On the other hand, peace studies analysts pointedto other factors fensive andnot regarded as threateningoffensive actions. to account for thetransformation of the Soviet Union'sforeign pol- ·. In many other countries in the world, international security icy, the endingof the cold war, andthen the dissolution of the Soviet studies and peace studies emerged only in the r98os or r99os. In Union.They stressed the importanceof the assurances given to the the contemporary context, for reasons that I will discuss, the do· Soviet UI)ion in·the 1975 Helsinki Accords about the permanence mains are becoming less sharply differentiated. Consequently, of the borders established at the end of World War II. They also work in the relatively new centers of study reflects some of the stressed the growing social exchanges and human ties fostered by changes that emerged after the cold war ended, including greater detente, which continued despite the Reagan administration'slack convergence between internationalsecurity studiesand peace stud­ of support for such activities.2. 1 ies. In short,many differences existed in past decades between persons From 1948 until the end of the r98os, Americansboth in security working in peacestudies andsecurity studies. Theydiffered in their studies and in peace studies typically concentrated their attention research methodologies, in the importance accorded to particular on thecold war. Theformer generallyviewed it as amilitary contest values, in the questions they posed, and hence in the kinds of an­ between two camps consisting of governments.15 Persons working swers they tended to provide. These differences limitedthe work of ininternational security studies emphasized militaryrelations, par­ persons in each domain, as they talked past each other. They too ticularly concerning nuclear deterrence and extended deterrence. often ignored each other'sideas andfindings, or when they did give They gave attentionto the militaryhardware as wellas the doctrines them attention, it was to argue against them. If analysts in each about theiruse. Some of them also studied foreign policy decision domain gave more consideration to each other's work, they might making and crisis management, particularly as conducted by high have complemented eachother's efforts and each enriched the other, officials.16 as discussed.inthis chapter. Analysts working in peace studies examined social movements, such aspeace movement orga.niza.tions opposingweapons nuclear or Contemporary Developments engaged inpeople-to-people diplomacy.17 Theyalso analyzed the role of the military-industrial complex, particularly in the United In the post-cold war era, the domains of peace studies and inter­ States.18 In addition, many of them examined the processes of so­ national security studiesl:iave moved much closer together. Thus, cialization in families and schools and the influences of the mass security is now understood to refer to much more than military media.19 Some of these researchers were themselves associatedwith matters. It is widely thoughtto include concernssuch as environ­ peace movement organizations. mental degradation, refugee flows, and economic issues. Further­ Interestingly,analysts in bothcamps generally failed to anticipate more, large-scale violence directed against ethnic, religious, and the sudden transformationand ending of the cold war. Neither camp other communal groups became matters of broadly shared inter­ undertook intensive analyses about the possible explanations and national attention.2.2. The roles of international governmental or­ implicationsof that failure. However, somepersons in each domain ganizations and. of nongovernmental organizations in preventing offered reasons for the transformation in terms of the policies they and stopping highly destructive conflicts rapidly expanded. Many had previously argued; those policies, they said, worked to prevent of those organizations also increasingly became engaged in peace­ anescalation of the cold war and eventually to transformit.:w Thus, building aftersuch conflicts.2.aThese and related developments are securityanalysts contended that the long-standingmilitant contain­ due to profound global changes and associated changes in ways of ment policyof Democratic and Republicangovernments or the arms inte:preting the transformed world. Partly because of these new buildup and proactive anti-Soviet policy ef President Ronald Rea­ circumstances, the analysts in both domains have also undergone gan's first administration forced the Soviet leadersto yield and ac­ many changes in thequestions they pose and the answers they of­ cept a new accommodation. fer. 166 Conflict,Security, Forelin Polley, and International Political Economy Converiences between Security Studies and Peace Studies 167

Chanies amoni Peace and Se.curity Analysts Global Chan2es Man changes in the activities, institutional settings, and ways of y . In recent decades, as is widely noted, the worldhas been undergoing thinking among persons in the security studies d peace stt:1dies � _ profound and rapid· changes. This is evident in the increasing eco­ domains have occurred since the r97os and especially smce r989. nomic integration, ever more swift and intensive communication, These changes have tended to bring security analysts and peace an- andmany other global trends. Consequently,the world is becoming alystsinto closer association. . . . . more homogenized, but with various people resisting and some re­ Thedevelopment of problem-solving conflictresolut1on 1d s d . � � actingviolently against that verydevelopment.:u Furthermore, mul­ practiceshas affectedgreatly both security and peace studies. This tinationalbusiness corporations, transnationalsocial movement or­ has been particularly so in dieUnited States since the early r97os.31 ganizations, and international governmental institutions are By the endof the last century, the ideas and applicationsof problem­ increasing in number, size, and resources.2.5 All this contributes to solving conflict resolutj.on had .spread and evolved in most parts of reducingstate sovereignty. the world. This developmentprovides a newly-shared languageand These interacting developments have profound significance for way of thinking for persons working in peace studies and int�rna­ peace and security studies. Conflictsmarked by large-scale violence tionalsecurity studies. Even tough-talking diplomats arenow likely withinstates greatly increased in the r99os but show some signsof to assertthat they are striving for win-winoutcomes. slackening since then. 26 These conflicts have often been between Thegrowth of thefield of conflictresolution, in conjunctionw �th peoples mobilized by appeals to differentethnic, linguistic,religious, the other pieviously noted developments, has affected the practice or other communal identities. Although these conflicts may seem of people in both internationalsecurity andin peace studies. Peace to be domestic, external connectionsgenerally are significant; they researchers are much more likely themselves to conduct and to as­ are manifested in the growing engagement of diaspora groups, the sociate with people who engage in peacemakingand peace-buil�g impact of the violence on neighboring countries, and the support work. This includes arranging and facilitating conflict resolution given to one side by officials in other governments who seek to ad­ workshops anddialogue groups, providing conflict resolution train­ vancetheir own interests. ing, andconsulting about conflictmanagement systems. Such work As a consequence of such developments and the other global is undertakenby a wide variety of organizations, such as the Carter trendspreviously noted, internationalnorms about humanrights are Centerof EmoryUniversity, CDR Associates,the Fellowshipof Rec· increasingly shared. The demand to take actionto stop grossviola­ onciliation the Mennonite Conciliation Service, Search for Com-. tions of humanrights has become widespread and insisted upon by mon Gro�d, and theUnited StatesInstitute of Peace (USIP). many states and international organizations, nongovernmental as Ina complementaryfashion, persons engaged in internationalse­ wellas governmental.The visibility of such human rightsviolations curity studies are increasingly engaged in studying how to prevent andthe normative insistence to stop themhave resulted innumer­ large-scale violence andto build stable peace.31 They strive to do so ous interventionsby internationalorganizations such as the United using a wide array of nonviolent methods, includingeconomic sane· Nations. These interventions, unlike earlier UNinterventions, were tions and diplomaticmediation. The Institute for Defense Analysis not contingent upon the concurrenc�of the combatingparties. 27 This inAlexandria, Virginia, in conjunction with the United States Insti­ has given a new legitimacy to the use of force in international set­ tute of Peace, has designed.a computer-based peace-building/pos­ tings.18 Yet the costs in deaths and protractedengagement have di­ tsettlement transition simulationto help examine alternativestrat· minished the wilHngness of many governments to undertakesuch egies. Persons in international security studies increasingly wo�k interventions. In any event, the increased relative significance of withtheir own andforeign g�vernments to foster reconciliation and large-scaleinternal conflicts has raisedthe salienceof domesticcon­ institutionsto manageconflicts, as theyare involved with activities flicts for security studies workers �d violence management for relating to peacekeeping, nation-building, and peace-building. Fur­ peace studies workers. 2.9 thermore, they increasingly associate with persons in nongovem- 168 Conflict, Security, Forelzn Policy, and International Political Economy Converzences between Security Studies and Peace Studies 169

mental organizations-for example, those providingpeace-building tion officials mightuse in anticipating their responses to such vio­ services, advocating the protection of human rights, and giving hu­ lence and its consequences. This work drew on the international manitarianassistance. 33 securityapproach. Subsequently, the emphasis shiftedto developing As a result of all these developments, more people are engaged in policies for averting and limiting such violent outbreaks. This em­ the practice of peace-building, and persons withbackgrounds in the phasis upon preventive diplomacy drew relatively more on the peace international security and the peace studies camps more often in­ studies approach.35 teract with each other. In addition, more venues for such interac­ A major subfield focuses on interrupting and stopping violence. tions have been established-for example, the United States Insti­ The matter of particular interest here is the role of external actors, tute of Peace, founded in r984. Intellectual exchange is fostered by whether intemational governmentalorganizations, nongovernmen­ journals suchas SecurityDialogue andInternational Security. Con­ tal actors, or national governments. Thus, there is important new flict resolution courses and programs areincreasingly being intro­ work on sanctions.For �ple, targeted,or "smart,"sanctions have duced in traditional international relationsprograms. Furthermore, recently been stressed,but even their effectivenessis in question for programs in civilian institutions provide trainingfor military and certaingoals. 36 other national defense executives andmanagers, as in the national Another expanding substantive subfield relates to peacekeeping security studies courses provided by Syracuse University's Maxwell and postconflictpeace-building. Several issues are currently receiv­ School of Citizenship and Public AHairsand Johns Hopkins Univer­ ing considerable attention,and that is likely to increase among peace sity's Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced Intemational Studies. Fi­ and security analysts. Peacekeeping by the UN and by regional in­ nally,the curricula at militaryservice academies, the commandand temational organizations has expanded greatly after the end of the general staff colleges, and the war colleges increasingly reflect a cold war.a1 Militaryp ersonnel are increasingly trainedin peacekeep­ broader range of perspectives and of security tasks, such as peace­ ing operationsand how to avert conflictescalations. 38 keeping.34 Currently, increasingattention also is being given to sustaining agreements that have been reached.311 Particular attention is more andmore givento building institutionsthat would reduce intercom­ Future Developments m� conflicts andprovide channels for their nonviolent manage­ In anticipating the future, I will stress likely developments that I ment."°This includes variousforms offederal structures, autonomy, regard as desirable. I anticipate that new subfieldswill develop that and power sharing. It also includes democratic processes providing cut across the domains of security and peace studies. Some of these basic political rights. Increasingly, too, attention is being given to subfields will focus on substantive issues. For example, they are the civil society needed to sustain democratic processes and insti­ likelyto relate increasingly to differentconflict stages: prevention, tutions. limitingand interruptingviolent conflict escalation,terminating vi­ Thefinding that democracies do not make war against each other olence, and postconflict peace-building. In addition, they are likely hasbecome a matter of great interest and the subject of considerable to focus on particularways of conductingand terminating conflicts; research. Workers in peace studies and security studies are exam­ such methods include mediationand negotiation,constructive ways iningthe natureof that relationship andof the relationship between of conductinga struggle,contributing to conflicttransformation, and democraticpolities and foreign intervention: 41 Nongovernmentalor­ fosteringdomestic conditions and institutionsthat areconducive to ganizationsthat provide humanitarianrelief, medical care,and other peace. Finally, some issues relating to general theoretical and ana­ services are proliferating. They are working in some of the same lyticalapproaches will affectthe work of most people in peace stud­ areas as do national governmental organizations and international ies and security studies. governmental organizations. Consequently, inefficient use of re­ One substantive subfield that has rapidly grown relates to early sources and inappropriate competition sometimes arise. Ways to warning and preventive diplomacy. At first, the emphasis was on achievea more effectivedivision of labor and better coordination are forecasting the outbreak of intense violence andproviding informa- increasinglybeing discussed.� 171 170 Conflict, Security, Forslin Policy, and International Political Economy Convariencas batwHn Security Studies and Peace Studies

Practitioners and analysts alike are giving great attention to at­ and more is needed.45 The synthesizing work obviously requires fo­ te mpts at reconciliation between antagonists, and this attention is cusing on policy-relevantissues. One such focus relates to the dilem­ likely to grow. The issues are complex, since .the very concept is mas associated with advancing human rights and justice while also multidimensional. In moving toward reconciliation, one or more settlingfights and ending violence. Not all values caribe maximized partyin a fight is likely to seek justice,truth, security, and kindness, at the same time, and this poses dilemmas as the pursuit of a good perhaps even forgiveness.� Various groups may emphasize one or goal may result in many bad consequences. Improving knowle�ge another of these dimensions at different times. Consequently, bal­ about the likelihood of various consequences of different strategies ancing the achievement of various dimensions of reconciliation is will contribute to resolving thedilemmas. difficult and occurs in varying sequences and degrees among dif£er­ Such knowledge, however, cannot be precise for any single case. ent groups in the opposing communities.44 We mortals will have to rely on good judgment in each case.46 Yet, Aside from various substantive subfields within which persons insofaras good information andunderstanding is widely shared, good working in peace studies and in security studies will act in some judgment is more likely to occur and be able to be followed. degree cooperatively, some general issues will affectpeople working in these domains. For example, policy-relevant work is likely to be Conclusions increasingly done for and with nongovernmental actors and not di­ rected only at governmentofficials. Academics may well spend some I anticipate that con"{ergence between security studies and peace time engaged in nonacademic work, while persons engaged in ap­ studies will continue as the range of the peacemaking and peace­ pliedwork are likely for a timeto take academic appointments.This building agendagrows broader and more complex. Work ineach do­ engagement will most likely affect not only the questionsasked but main has already benefited by the increasing overlap between the also the kind of answers sought and found. Thus, attention is likely domains. The policy questions addressed and the repertoire of an­ to be given to relatively malleable factors, to agency rather than to swers offeredby persons in each domain have expanded. Peace stud­ structural conditions. ies workers increasingly recognize that atrocities occur, that vio­ Inaddition, the increased interactionand overlap betweenpersons lence takes many forms, and that there are times for acting .with in thesedomai ns may have a salutary effect on theory, research, and urgency. Security studies workers increasingly recognize the grow­ practice in each. Much international relations theorizing has been ing importance of cooperating with nongovernment actors and of directed at what others have written, with too little reference to expanding reliance on nonmilitary options. evidence relevant to the ideas. Advocates of particular approaches Progressis being made. One important sign of andcontributor to may overstate the case in order to get a hearingfor matters that they that progress is the increased range of voices joining the conversa­ feel havebeen given too little attention.But that canresult in having tions about peace and security. As previously noted, this is the case for theideas dismissed, and that further escalates the. debate.• So drivenI the increasing engagement of women in peace and security stud­ the debates become difficult to resolve. ies and the growing application of feminist thought in those do­ Attention to the shared questions is a way to transform such de­ mains. They are providing new insights and importantperspectives. bates. Attentionalso needs to be givento theinformation that would In addition, work by persons in and from regions of the world help answer the questions that are posed. The information may be previouslyexcluded or ignored fromconversations are now included. qualitative or quantitative, but in either case, it has an external ref­ Thus, many centers of peacemaking and security studies are being erent about which experientially-based consensus is possible. Thus, established in more andmore countries in thedeveloping world. In the discussions about the.finding thatdemocracies do not make war SouthAfrica, for example, some centershave done significantwork on each other have relied heavilyon a variety of empirical analyses. for many years and are now broadening their range of work. The Finally, some persons in these domains are likely to undertake Centre for Intergroup Studies, for instance, was founded in Cape­ analyses that help synthesize the ideas and practicesof international town in 1968, under the leadership of Hendrik W. van der Merwe; it securitystudies and of peace studies. Some such work is being done, focused on conflict resolution within South Africa, helping to de- 175 174 Conflict, Security, Foreizn Polley, and International Political Economy Conver2ences between Security Studies and Peace Studies

relates of War I: Research Origins an.dRationale, ed. J. David Singer Richard Ned Lebow andThomas Risse-Kappen, eds., Intemational Re­ {New York: Free Press, 1979), 265-97; Walter Isard, UnderstaD.dmg lations Theory and the End of the Cold War (New York: Columbia Uni­ Conflict and the Science of Peace (Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell,1992); versity Press, 1995); William Curti Wohlfarth, The Elusive Balance: RussellJ. Leng,"Influence Strategies and InterstateConflict," in Singer, Power and Perceptions during the Cold War (Ithaca, N.Y.: CornellUni- The Correlates of War, 12.4-57; John Vasquez, The War Puzzle (Cam­ versity Press, 1993). bridge:Cambridge University Press, 1993). 21. MaryKaldor, "WhoKilled the Cold War?" Bulletin of the Atomic Sci­ u. For example, see Glenn H. Snyder and Paul Dic:sing, Conflict amo.Dg entists (July-August 1995): 57-60. Nations: Bargaining, Decision Making, and System Structure inInter­ 22. Walker Conner, Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding national Crises {Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977); (Princeton,N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1994); Donald L. Horowitz, RichardNed Lebow, BetweenPeace and War(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Ethnic Groups in Conflict (Berkeley: University of California Press, University Press, 1981!, MichaelBrecher, Crisesin World Politics (Ox� 1985� ford, England: Pergamon, 1993); Margaret G. Hermann and Charles F. 23. LarryDunn and Louis Kriesberg, "Mediating Intermediaries:Expanding Hermann, "WhoMakes Foreign Policy Decisions andHow: AnEmpir­ Roles of Transnational Organizations," in Studies in InternationalMe­ {Lon­ ical Inquiry,"International Studies Quarterly33, no. 4 (1989): 361-87; diation:Essays inHonour of JeffreyZ. Rubin,ed. Jacob Bercovitch Robert Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics don and New York: Macmillan and St. Martin's, 2002). {Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1976). 24. Benjamin Barber,"Jihad vs. McWorld," AtlanticMonthly, March 1992, 13. Inthe late 1970s, the idea of broadeningthe scope of RCo1 was raised 53-63. by some InternationalStudies Associationmembers interested in .find­ 25. Smith, Chatfield,and Pagnucco, Transnational Social Movements and ing a hospitable research committee for their activities. Exploring op­ Global Politics. tions for this group, I was encouraged by Morris Janowitz, a leading 26. Ted Robert Gurr, Peoples versus States: Minorities at Risk in the New figure inRCoi:, to join that research committee and broaden its scope. Century(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Institute of Peace Press, 2000). Gwyn Harries-Je_nkins, then chair of RC01, agreed, and the scope and 27. OtaraA. Otunna and MichaelW. Doyle, eds., Peacemaking and Peace­ name of the committee was fonnally changed. Sociologists studying keeping (New York/Oxford:Rowman and Littlefield, 1998). military forces predominate in the membership of the committee, but 28. An.drewJ. Goodpaster, WhenDiplomacy Is Not Enough: ManagingMul­ those studying conflict resolutionand nonviolence also belong and par­ tinationalMilitary Interventions (New York: CarnegieCommission on ticipatein panel sessions and other committee activities. PreventingDeadly Conflict, 1996), 1-38. 14. Jergen Dragsdahl, "How Peace Research Has Reshaped the European 29. Noted in personal communicationby EileenBabbitt. ArmsDialogue," in Annual Review of Peace Activism, r989, ed. John 30. Persons working in the problem-solving conflict resolution approach Tierman (Boston: Winston Foundationfor World Peace, 1989), 39-45. tend, in varying degree, to emphasize ways in which adversaries in a 15. Manypeace researchers, particularlyin Europe and inthe ThirdWorld, conflict shift from seeing each other as engaged in a struggle in which examined imperialismand economic dependency. For example, sec the what one side gains is at the expense of the other to seeing a mutual frequently cited article by Johan Galtung, "A StructuralTheory of Im­ problem for which they seek a solution that has some mutualbenefit. perialism," published originally in the Journal of Peace Research in 31. LouisKriesberg, "The Growth of the Conflct Resolution Field," inTur­ 197r; it is reprinted in Johan Galtung, Peace and World Structuze:Es­ bulentPeace, ed. Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela saysin Peace Research (Copenhagen: Ejlers, 1980). Aal{Washington, D.C.: U.S. Ins�tute of Peace Press, 2000), 407-26. 16. Snyder and t>iesing, Conflict amo.Dg Nations; Graham T. Allison, The 32. Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict, Final Report of Essence of Decision: Explainingthe CubanMissile Crisis (Boston: Little, the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict (New York: Brown, 1971). CarnegieCorporation, 1997), ArieM. Kacowicz, Yaacov Bar-SimanTov, 17. John Lofland, PoliteProtestors: TheAmerican Peace Movement of the Ole Elgstrom, and Magnus Jemeck, eds., Stable Peace among Nations r98os (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse UniversityPress; 1993); SamMarullo (New York/Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000). and John Lofland, eds., Peace Action in the Eighties (New Brunswick, 33. Alice Ackermann, Making Peace Prevail: Preventing Violent Conflict N.J.: Rutgers UniversityPress, 1990). inMacedonia (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 2000). 18. Dieter Senghass, Riistiing und Militarismus (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 34. Volker Franke pointed out some of these developments in a personal 1972) .. communication. 19. James William Gibson, Wanior Dreams: Violence and Manhood in 35. David Caxment and Patrick James, eds., Peace in the Midst of Wars Post-VietnamAmerica (New York: Hilland Wang, 1995). (Columbia:University of South CarolinaPress, 1998); Michael S. Lund, 20. LouisKriesberg, International ConflictResolution: The U.S.-USSR and Preventing Violent Conflicts (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Instituteof Peace Middle East Cases (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 199.2); Press, 1996). 36. David Cortright and George A. Lopez, eds. Economic Saned.om:Pana­ cea or Peacebuilding :in a Post-Cold WarWorld (Boulder, Colo.: West­ view, r995J, David Cortright and George Lopez, with Richard W. Con­ roy, Taleh Dashti-Gibson, and Julia Wagler, The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UN Stiategies in the 199os (Boulder, Colo.: LynneRienner, 2.000). Evidence against the cffectiveness 0£ economic sanctions has been reported for a long time by peace researchers and others.For ex­ ample,see Peter Wallensteen,"Characteristics of EconomicSanctions," Joumal of Peace Research 5, no. 3 (r968): 248-67. 3 7. RobertA. Rubinstein, "CulturalAspects 0£ Peacekeeping:Notes on the Substanceof Symbols,"Millemrium 22, no. 3 (r993): 547-62. 38. David La.st, "Organizingfor Effective Peacebuilding," inPeaceJceeping and Conflict Resolution, ed. Tom Woodhouseand Oliver Ramsbotham (London: Cass, 2000), 80-96. 39. 'FenOsler Hampson, NurturingPeace: WhyPeace Settlements Succeed or Fail (Washington,D.C.: U.S. Instituteof PeacePress, r996). 40. John McGarryand Brendan O'Leary,eds., The Politics of EthnicConflict (London: Routledge,r993). 41. Nils Petter Gleditsch andHavard Hegre, "Peace and Democracy," Jour­ nal of Conflict Resolution 4r, no. 2 (r997): 283-310, Margaret G. Her­ mann and Charles W. Kegley Jr., "TheU.S. Use of MilitaryIntervention to Promote Democracy: Evaluating the Record," Inte.mational Inter­ actions 24, no. 2 (r998): 91-n41 BruceRussett, "TheDemocratic Peace: And Yet It Moves," International Security r9 (spring 1995): 164-75; Bruce Russett andJohn R. Oneal, TriangulatingPeace: Democracy, In­ terdependence, and International Organization(Princeton, N.J.: Prince­ ton University Press, 2001). 42. Louis Kriesberg, "Coordinating Intermediary Peace Efforts," Negoti.a­ tion Journal 12 (October r996): 34r-52, John Paul Lederach, Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Instituteof Peace Press,r997). 43. Michael Henderson, TheForgiveness Factor (London: GrosvenorBooks, 1996); Martha Mi.now, Between Vengeance and Forgiveness (Boston: Beacon Press, r998l, Eugene Weiner, ed., TheHandbook of Interetlmic Coexistence (New York: Continuum, r998). 44. Louis Kriesberg, ''Paths to Varieties of Inter-Communal Reconcilia­ tion," inFrom Conflict Resolution to Peacebuwung, ed. Ho-Won Jeong (Fitchburg, Md.: Dartmouth, 1999). 45. Hugh Mi.all,Oliver Ramsbotham, and Tom Woodhouse,Contemporary Conflict Resolution (Cambridge, England:Polity, 1999). 46. Isaiah Berlin, "My Intellectual Path," New YorkReview of Books, May 14, r998, 53-60. 47. Lederach, Building Peace; JohanGaltung, Carl G. Jacobsen, KaiFrithjo£ Brand-Jacobsen, and Finn Tschudi, Searching for Peace (London and Sterling, Va.: Pluto, 2000).

•. - ·�·· .... � '<• ..,.. ' . • . . J;...'.�' .