“WELL, PRINCE, so Genoa and Lucca are now just family estates of the Buonapartes. But I warn you, if you don’t tell me that this means war, if you still try to defend the infamies and horrors perpetrated by that Antichrist— I really believe he is Antichrist—I will have nothing more to do with you and you are no longer my friend, no longer my ‘faithful slave,’ as you call yourself! But how do you do? I see I have frightened you—sit down and tell me all the news.”(Tolstoy, 2001)
hedemise of passion to dominatemay engender peace and harmony whiledifference in
perspectives may create antagonism, between individuals as well as between states, but
co-existence with the conflicting ideas is possible with the enhanced-mutual
understanding of the origin of issues. Sociological theories of crime contain elements of social
conflict, consensus theories tend to judge alternative normative systems from the point of view of mainstream values, and they do not call for major restructuring of society1.Although, conflict
is inevitable in human life but the violent conflict leaves it evil impact on human existence for
centuries. But if we look at the other side of the pictures, soft conflict, so to speak, cyber conflict
and/or conflict of ideas and thought is being preferred, in practice, to the violent and armed
conflict, though its scale can be questioned. Thus the world is steering ahead on the path of
Kantian perpetual peace.

The occurrences of Herroshima and Nagasaki are the bleak stories of history of humanity.
The ethnic conflict erupted in Rawanda took hundreds of thousands of Tutsi and Hoto lives. The
plight of the people of Federally Administrated Tribal Area (FATA) in Pakistan is self
explanatory, who are being sandwiched, in an effort to bring just peace,amongTilibans, NATO
forces and Pak Army where armed conflict triggers from marginalization that spurs
radicalization, and an armedstruggle for identity.The general lack of understanding or knowledge
of the logic of just peace is an issue with normative implications, which both from an idealist and
realist perspective calls for reflection concerning contemporary use of military force(Frank,

1 Cultivating Peace in 21st Century: A teaching resource to support education in global issues, peace and security, human rights, cultural diversity and active citizenship

www.hsadvocates.com 2

2007). Undeniably, conflict exists in real world’s scene at different scales due to different
motives and causes and to answering the root causes may bring peace. I am of the view, unlike
Darwinian realists,that human nature is pre-eminently good and just and where ever it finds
opportunity, it prefer harmony to conflict, at least to violent conflict.

Many major donors practice social forms of democracy in their own states such as Britain
and the Scandinavian donors (Richmond, 2008) to harness inclusiveness that ultimately
diminished the centuries’ long oppressiveness and flourished peace. How peace and cooperation
is possible, on the basis of reciprocity and identity was defined by Immanuel Kant some 200
years ago(Joshua S. Goldstein, 2009), was followed by his war-raged German nation and other
Eastern European countries much later but it was realized there, we observed Scandinavians state
as the most peaceful places, though their past was marred with barbarian history. To strengthen
the point further, the first Peace Studies Institute established in 1959 in Oslo was an effort of a
Johan Gultung, the pioneer of peace studies, a Scandinavian citizen, who contributed more than
20 books and a hundred papers on fostering peace and harmony. Thomas Hobbes noted in 1651
the Leviathan that lives of the people were ‘nasty, brutish and short’, a starting point toward
theory of justice. This refer to human history of brutally from where it started journey toward
humane. Had Hobbes been alive, his opinion would have been different. Although it is still point
for theory of justice today, since lives of so many people across the world have exactly those dire
features, despite the substantial material progress of others(Sen, 2009).

Peace is not simply the absence of war, as Dr. Ursula Franklin said, contrary to what realists define2. Peace is the presence of‘justice’and the nonexistence of ‘terror’ in a society.The
absence of political representation, denial of human rights and persistence ofabsolute poverty
and issue of identity often become the trigger cause of violence; and the presence of
aforementioned social conditions may foster peace and harmony in the society. Thus the process
of marginalization fosters conflict while social inclusion engenders peace and harmony. As Marx
argues “Freeman and slave, patrician and plebian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in
a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another”; so to minimize
the difference among oppressors (the bourgeoisie), and the oppressed were (the proletariat) is


www.hsadvocates.com 3

the key moving toward peace and nations succeeded in resource distribution enjoyed its fruit in
the shape of a welfare state, if not welfare society. But Marxist method to bring peace may not be
suggested as there is Hamletian ‘method in madness’.
“Establishing lasting peace is the work of education”
Maria Montessori
Western States have tended to uphold liberal internationalist claims that new international norms prioritizingindividual rights to protection promise a framework of liberal peace3, if not
elsewhere, it is visible at least in their own states. Access to quality life (health, education, and
housing), freedom of speech and rule of law sans despotic tendencies are the core characteristics
of Scandinavian countries. These states observe promising human development index that
support to establish an ideal, perpetual long term peace not just a victors’ short term forced peace
although the properties of peace are usually vague, confused and contradictory(Gultung, 1967).

Nonviolence is also about not judging people as we perceive them to be — that is, a
murderer is not born a murder; a terrorist is not born a terrorist. People become murderers, robbers and terrorists because of circumstancesand experiences in life. 4 The development
initiatives based on participation and inclusiveness may cultivate harmony and peace in a
society.In my opinion peace in the real world’s scene exits, it is the particular lens that may
observe. The incidents of violence and atrocities are often have amplified presentation in media
while the deeds of justice and peace are often ignored. A typical farmer, leading a simplified and
a hermit’s life may be in an absolute state of peace and calmness while on the other hand in
collective life, where the role of state is enhanced, presence of civil liberty and justice nourishes
peace that relatively exists in Scandinavian nations.

Work Cited:(1103 Words)
1. Frank, Thomas. “Idealist and Realist Aspirations for Just Peacce.” University of Aarhus , 2007.
2. Gultung, Johan. “Theories of Peace .” A Synthetic Approach to Peace Thinking. Oslo : International Peace Research Institute, 1967.
3. Joshua S. Goldstein, Jon C. Pavehouse. “International Relations.” New Dehli : Anand Sons, 2009.

3 The Responsibility to Protect? Imposing the ‘Liberal Peace’ DAVID CHANDLER

4 Terrorism and Nonviolence: M.K.Ghandhi, www.gandhiinstitute.org/terrornonv.html

www.hsadvocates.com 4

4. Richmond, Oliver P. “Peace in International Relations .” New York : Routledge , 2008. 148.
5. Sen, Amartya. “The Idea of Justice.” Lahore: Izharsons Printers, 2009. 412.
6. Tolstoy, Leo. War and Peace. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University, 2001