Advertisement

Dutch Civil Society: Peace Writ Large

  • Gijsbert M. van Iterson ScholtenEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

This chapter is about Dutch civil society visions of peace. In contrast to diplomats and military officers, Dutch civil society peace workers stress that many activities and objectives can be subsumed under the umbrella of peace work, a vision dubbed Peace Writ Large. When asked to operationalize this broad vision in the context of the work they do, interviewees come up with two other visions of peace. The first is peace-as-process, which treats peace as a never-ending process (both political and interpersonal) that requires continuous dialogue, monitoring and intervention. The specific short-term objectives of this process are less relevant, what matters is that ‘the conversation is kept going’. When they do think of peace as a goal, they tend to agree with the military that the first priority is for people in conflict areas to experience freedom from fear.

References

  1. Abubakar, C. A. (2004). “Review of the Mindanao peace processes.” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 5(3): 450–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, M. B. and L. Olson (2003). Confronting war: Critical lessons for peace practitioners. Cambridge: Collaborative for Development Action.Google Scholar
  3. Bellamy, A. J. (2009). Responsibility to protect. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Björkdahl, A. and J. Mannergren Selimovic (2016). “A tale of three bridges: Agency and agonism in peace building.” Third World Quarterly 37(2): 321–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boutros-Ghali, B. (1992). An agenda for peace: Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping. Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to the statement adopted by the Summit Meeting of the Security Council on 31 January 1992. New York: UN.Google Scholar
  6. Darby, J. and R. Mac Ginty (2001). Guns and government: The management of the Northern Ireland peace process. Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Donais, T. (2009). “Empowerment or imposition? Dilemmas of local ownership in post-conflict peacebuilding processes.” Peace & Change 34(1): 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fisher, S. and L. Zimina (2008). Just wasting our time? An open letter to peacebuilders. Available online at http://www.konfliktbearbeitung.net/downloads/file1042.pdf.
  9. Irwin, C. (2002). The people’s peace process in Northern Ireland. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacmillanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mac Ginty, R. (2008). “Indigenous peace-making versus the liberal peace.” Cooperation and Conflict 43(2): 139–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mac Ginty, R. (2011). International peacebuilding and local resistance: Hybrid forms of peace. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mac Ginty, R. (2014). “Everyday peace: Bottom-up and local agency in conflict-affected societies.” Security Dialogue 45(6): 548–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mac Ginty, R. and P. Firchow (2016). “Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict.” Politics 36(3): 308–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Magdalena, F. V. (1997). “The peace process in Mindanao: Problems and prospects.” Southeast Asian Affairs 24(1): 245–259.Google Scholar
  15. Mouly, C. (2013). “The Nicaraguan peace commissions: A sustainable bottom-up peace infrastructure.” International Peacekeeping 20(1): 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Paffenholz, T., Ed. (2010). Civil society & peacebuilding: A critical assessment. Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  17. Richmond, O. P. (2010). “Foucault and the paradox of peace-as-governance versus everyday agency.” International Political Sociology 4(2): 199–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Richmond, O. P. (2013). “Peace formation and local infrastructures for peace.” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 38(4): 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richmond, O. P. and A. Mitchell, Eds. (2012). Hybrid forms of peace. From everyday agency to post-liberalism. Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Ruddick, S. (1995). Maternal thinking: Toward a politics of peace. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  21. Said, E. W. (2012). Peace and its discontents: Essays on Palestine in the Middle East peace process. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  22. Van Tongeren, P. (2011). “Infrastructures for peace.” In Peacemaking: From practice to theory. S. A. Nan, Z. C. Mampilly, and A. Bartoli (Eds.). New York: Praeger: 400–419.Google Scholar
  23. Wink, W., Ed. (2000). Peace is the way: Writings on nonviolence from the fellowship of reconciliation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations