07_(109-122) Social Sciences and Peace Studies.pmd


SOCIAL SCIENCES AND PEACE STUDIES

Mohammad Abdus Sabur

º·¤Ñ́ ÂèÍ

ºèͤÃÑ駷ÕèÊѹµÔÈÖกÉÒÁÑก¨ÐÁͧ¢éÒÁ­Ò³ËÂÑè§àË繢ͧÊѧ¤ÁÈÒʵÃìã¹ é́Ò¹
·ÕèàกÕèÂÇ¢éͧกѺ¤ÇÒÁÊÑÁ¾Ñ¹ ì̧·Ò§Êѧ¤Á ¤ÇÒÁ¢Ñ́ áÂé§àกỐ ¢Öé¹¾ÃéÍÁกѺ¤ÇÒÁáµกáÂก
ã¹àÃ×èͧ¤ÇÒÁÊÑÁ¾Ñ¹¸ì¢Í§Á¹ØÉÂì«Öè§ÊѹµÔÈÖกÉÒ¾ÂÒÂÒÁ¨Ðáกéä¢ ÊÔ觹Õéàͧ·Õè·ÓãËé
ÁÕ¤ÇÒÁà»ç¹ä»ä é́·ÕèÊѧ¤ÁÈÒʵÃìáÅÐÊѹµÔÈÖกÉÒ¨ÐàÊÃÔÁÊÃéÒ§¤Ø³¤èÒãËéáกèกѹáÅÐกѹ
ã¹á¹Ç·Ò§·ÕèÁÕµèͤÇÒÁ¢Ñ́ áÂé§áÅÐÊѹµÔÀÒ¾ º·¤ÇÒÁ¹Õéáºè§ÍÍกà»ç¹ÊͧÀÒ¤ é́ÇÂกѹ
ÀÒ¤áÃกà»ç¹กÒÃÍÀÔ»ÃÒÂÇÔªÒÊѧ¤ÁÈÒʵÃìáÅзÄɮշҧÊѧ¤Á·ÕèàÅ×ÍกÊÃÃÁÒ
ÀÒ¤·ÕèÊͧà»ç¹กÒ÷º·Ç¹»ÃÐÇѵԢͧ¤ÇÒÁ¢Ñ´áÂé§áÅÐÊѹµÔÈÖกÉÒ º·¤ÇÒÁ¹Õé
Âѧä é́ÈÖกÉҤسٻกÒâͧ¼ÙéºØกàºÔกÊÒÁ·èÒ¹ Íѹä é́áกè Johann Galtung, Adam Curle áÅÐ
John Paul Lederach ·ÕèÁÕµèͤÇÒÁ¢Ñ´áÂé§áÅÐÊѹµÔÈÖกÉÒ áÅмŧҹ¢Í§ÊÒÁ·èÒ¹
¹Õéä´éáÊ´§ãËéàËç¹ÇèÒ Êѧ¤ÁÈÒʵÃìáÅÐÊѹµÔÈÖกÉÒµèÒ§àÊÃÔÁÊÃéÒ§àก×éÍ˹ع¤Ø³¤èÒ
¢Í§กѹáÅÐกѹÍÂèÒ§äÃ

Abstract

Peace studies often ignore the insights of the social sciences concern-

ing social relationships. Yet conflict emerges with a break in human relations

which peace studies tries to mend. That creates a possibility for social science

and peace studies to mutually enrich one another in their approach to conflict

and peace. This paper is divided into two parts. Part I discusses social sci-

ence and selected social theories. Part II reviews the history of peace and

conflict studies. The paper then goes on to discuss the contributions of three

pioneers namely Johann Galtung, Adam Curle and John Paul Lederach in

peace and conflict studies; and how their work demonstrates the enriching

reciprocity of social science and peace studies.

Prajna Vihara, Volume 12, Number 2 July-December 2011, 109-122

2000 by Assumption University Pressc

- -~ 109



Social Science as a discipline is much older than peace studies. It

possesses vast deposits of resources from which peace studies can draw

upon and develop further. The main task of social science is to study social

relations. Peace studies as a discipline emerged only in mid fifties after the

Second World War. The purpose of peace studies is to mend relationships so

peace may prevail. This creates a possibility for social science and peace

studies to mutually enriching engagement in the areas of common concern

such as conflict and peace. Conflict exists at micro and macro levels and

affects people worldwide. These common concerns lead to social actions. So

the challenge is how both disciplines could contribute towards a process of

peace building.

This paper will be divided into two parts. In part I, I shall discuss

social science and selected social theories. Part II of this paper includes the

history of peace and conflict studies. Then I shall illustrate contributions of

three pioneers namely Johann Galtung, Adam Curle and John Paul Lederach

in peace and conflict studies; and mutually enriching reciprocity of social sci-

ence and peace studies.

PART I: SOCIAL SCIENCE AND SOCIAL THEORIES

Social scientists conduct a deep investigation of the sources and dy-

namics of the problems that exist in the society. They develop theories they

believe most relevant to address those problems. Society is not static, it changes,

and therefore social theories vary. Some of them remain relevant and appli-

cable longer than others. But it is important for peace builders to understand

works of social scientists as a building block. Here I shall first discuss the main

points of the founders of social sciences and then move to selected theories

for the interest of this paper.

Among the founders of the social sciences, Durkheim’s consensus

theory is based on the idea that our thoughts are inherited not invented. We

learn through socialization and follow the social norms and order which leads

to social solidarity. In pre-modern traditional societies, there was more homo-

geneity and the division of labor was simple. So the solidarity was achieved

automatically.  This is called mechanical solidarity. But in the modern soci-

ety, division of labor is more complex. In this environment Individualism and

110  Prajna Vihara- -~



competition are obvious and the threat of disintegration becomes real. That

makes it harder to achieve solidarity. Durkheim argues that in modern society

human beings are required to be interdependent in order to survive. This is

what he called organic solidarity.  Solidarity enhances prospects for stability

and peace.

The second major point of Durkheim is functionalism. He compares

society with a living organism having various functional organs. In a society

organs are structures such as cultural rules, belief and practices. Members of

the society follow them and that gradually become institutionalized with politi-

cal, educational and religious functions which leads to harmonious society.

Society functions through a system which is called “social system”. If system

does not function then society becomes static. But in the present day of in-

creasingly secular modern society, traditional ceremonial practices of religion

remain but less powerful, whereas civil religion (Bellah) is on the rise. That

means without being part of a hierarchical religious structures citizens still can

possess and demonstrate religiousness. At the same time society tends to

become more conservative.

A criticism of functionalism is that it does not explain adequately the

process of social change. It over-emphasizes socialization and equates organ-

ism with human behavior but less on power structure that widen gaps between

rich and poor and produces and reproduces  conflict in a society. To address

this shortcoming, there developed alternative theories of society.

Marxism believes that the fulfillment and freedom of individuals are

linked to the progress of society and development of alternative social struc-

tures. In other words, it requires abolition of exploitative structures which

support and sustain class-based capitalist mode of production.  Because it

exploits, dehumanizes and deprives the working class people from exploring

their full potentials, the key to this process is the control of means of produc-

tion by the dominant class. According to Marxist sociologists, the sustenance

of this economic-based system is supported by non-economic structures such

as ideas, belief and philosophies which they call superstructure.

Towards the change process of this exploitative capitalist system,

Marxism emphasizes consciousness raising, organizing of working class and

subordinate class and developing a political struggle. This objective is to re-

place old system and establish a system appropriate to new non-exploitative

economic system.

Mohammad Abdus Sabur  111



The critiques of this brand of Marxist ideas call it economic deter-

minism. Marxists of twentieth century argue that this is a misreading of Marx-

ism. Marx did not mean that the social life of human beings is solely deter-

mined by economic factors. For example, according to Gramsci, the control

of ideas allows the domination by the capitalist. The reason he suggested is

that the capitalist maintains control not only by employing force and economic

coercion but by the manufacture of consensus where the working class are

made to feel that their wellbeing is closely tied to the prosperity of capitalist

and bourgeoisie. This is what prevented revolt, and allowed the capitalist to

maintain their power. Therefore there is a need for the working class to de-

velop their own counter culture which would, on the one hand, eliminate the

notion that the bourgeoisie values dominate the society, and on the other hand,

unite both the intellectual and the working class for the same cause. Each class

goes beyond its narrow economic interest in order to exert intellectual and

moral leadership and build alliances with other social forces. We can see why

critical theory calls attention to the instruments of ideological domination.

From the above discussion, we can see that both functionalism and

Marxism have their own ways of analyzing modern society and how social

change takes place. The third founder is Max Weber. He developed Social

Action Theory. This theory refutes Durkheim’s and Marx’s analyses. Weber

believes that exchange takes place in the society because of people’s desired

goals, their own perception and ways of making choices. They assess the

situation of existing structure and take action. Weber sees reason behind the

existing structures. He does not attach importance to class inequality as a

central question but the values and market power which generates opportuni-

ties. With intellectual capacity an individual utilizes the opportunity rationally.

That is the basis from which modern capitalism develops.

Weber also attaches importance to advantage and disadvantage of

different religious traditions. He compared between Buddhist tradition which

is seen as withdrawal from concerns of day-to-day life and strives for nir-

vana whereas Protestant ethic and spirit of capitalism encourages effec-

tive engagement and hard work. For example Calvinism and their practices of

savings contributed to their economic strength and development.

From above discussion, we can see three main streams of thinkers

and their works impacted upon many social scientists in 20th century. The

second and third generation social scientists continued their work. Among

112  Prajna Vihara- -~



them Frankfurt School contributed to Critical Theory and other group worked

on Weberian Social Action Theorists.

The Frankfurt School under the leadership of Horkheimer, Adorno

and Marcuse, took up the challenge put forward by Marx that the philoso-

phers have hitherto interpreted the world --- the point however is to

change it.  That is why they emphasized a shift away from philosophical

abstraction to make philosophy more useful for social change.  So, critical

theory is rooted in change. It analyses the present to embark on the future.  In

other words, it examines differences and contradictions within modernity and

sees to it that theorizing is developed with attention to its position as a part of

history. Being conscious of criticism that philosophy is equally distant from

social action and empirical enquiry, the Frankfurt School evolved four di-

mensions: (a) to have perception or an image of a society is not enough but

there is a need to see distinctions of components within, (b) it is not merely

what we see on the surface, underlying causes and conditions are also impor-

tant, (c) not only application of social theory rather critical examination of

theory itself is important.  It helps to understand the limitations of theory as

Marx did through an analysis of political economy.  This is how theories can

develop from one stage of society to another and (d) in order to achieve unity

between theory and practice, critical engagement is an integral part of the

process by which the gained knowledge enriches theory.

In absence of critical engagement and reflection, dogmatism arises.

Frankfurt theorists drew this conclusion from observing the rise of Stalinism.

In that case, the integration of the working-class in the system __ instead of

functioning as a vehicle for liberation __ became a tool of totalitarianism.

Habermas in many ways carries influences from both Marx and We-

ber. Based on Marx’s concepts of base and superstructure, he divides social

existence into the social realm which is influenced by structure and the life

world, and is considered as the space for meaningful action. Through Weber’s

works, Habermas sees the importance of modernity in promoting rationaliza-

tion, as a motivation for two types of rational actions: (a) achieving effi-

ciency in human life and (b) determining value in terms of right and wrong.

That means when in the society the first person interacts with the second

person, it is taken for granted that the person is communicating correct and

right thing. So, when the second person communicates, the first person would

expect the same. It is an effort of two persons, two communities, two parties

Mohammad Abdus Sabur  113



coming together to arrive at a consensus. From the perspective of

ethnomethodology this is unique gift of human kind. This enables human be-

ings to engage in collaborative projects and enterprise.

Habermas also recognizes the ability of human beings to undertake

communicative action across cultures. This is necessary in order to identify

common grounds, common causes, and common needs. Based on these, com-

munities are able to achieve consensus for their actions. This gives hope that

parties across political divides can come together as long as they are in dia-

logue with one another.

On the question of dialogue and effective communication, the soci-

ologist Anthony Giddens introduces Structuration Theory. He believes that

structures can constrain at the same time determine behavior. Structures can

facilitate effective communication, but at the same time, can also impose limi-

tations. Giddens calls this the duality of structure. But with the course of

time, the context itself get regenerated and transformed. Therefore, it can be

said that there is a dialectic relations between structure and actions. But it is

also a fact that society is changing, new factors and conditions both from

outside and inside of a particular society pose new challenges and risks. This

affects everyone. Therefore, it has to be an ongoing process of actions __

reflections __ actions, in order for us to be effective in responding to new

challenges.

I have discussed works of selected social scientists and their contri-

butions in understanding social dynamics and social relations. Social and hu-

man relations are directly linked to peace. In part II, I shall discuss peace and

conflict studies and its contribution.

PART II: HISTORY OF PEACE AND CONFLICT STUDIES, THE

CONTRIBUTION OF SOCIAL SCIENCES IN PEACE

STUDIES AND MUTUALLY ENRICHING RECIPROC-

ITY

In this section I shall discuss history and development of peace and

conflict studies. Then I shall examine the integration and contribution of social

sciences in peace studies and reciprocity. I shall discuss works of Johann

Galtung, Adam Curle and John Paul Lederach with an inbuilt critique of con-

114  Prajna Vihara- -~



flict resolution field and increasingly experience-based relevance of conflict

transformation. Then I shall explore future challenges of peace studies.

Peace and conflict studies as an academic program initially was con-

ceived under international relations as a sub-discipline. Peace studies focused

on understanding structural issues and underlying causes of conflict. Conflict

studies concentrated on implication and impact of conflict resolution theory.

Both were based on the platform of enlightenment peace and created aware-

ness that peace is necessary. In the course of time this sub-discipline has

helped develop a ray of hope that inter-state peace is possible as the United

Nations Charter expressed strong commitment for peace to be achieved

through diplomacy and international relations.

International relations have been influenced by the theories of various

philosophers. These have alternately supported both war and peace. Aristotle

prescribed to make war that we live in peace (2008). For Erasmus, war

has to be avoided at all cost because it serves only the interests of the power-

ful and leads to crime and brutality. Locke, being advocate for modern liber-

alism, emphasized on social contract between the rulers and subjects in favor

of protection of lives and liberty. Bentham further added that there is a need to

develop institutions through which international imperialism can be resisted.

Immanuel Kant promoted the idea of cosmopolitanism anticipating interna-

tional rules of conflict resolution executed through international mechanisms __

such as today’s United Nations. At that time, given the interstate nature of

conflict and experiences of intensity of destructions and sufferings of the people,

conflict resolution was a more obvious immediate response than peace stud-

ies as an academic discipline.

Conflict Studies and Conflict Resolution

Now I shall discuss contributions of pioneers of conflict studies and

the field of conflict resolution. Among the pioneers, the Center for Research

on Conflict Resolution at the University of Michigan in 1950s, founded by

Kenneth and Elise Boulding, emphasized humanistic psychology. The Interna-

tional Peace Research Center, established in Norway in 1959 was founded

by Johann Galtung. He made significant contributions in terms of research and

evolving models of conflict resolution. Here I shall highlight Johann Galtung’s

works.

Mohammad Abdus Sabur  115



Johann Galtung developed a conflict resolution model known as the

ABC-Triangle.  Attitude refers to emotions and cognitions are interpreted

as highest level of hatred to frozen level of apathy. Behavior ranges from

extreme violence to apathy. Apathy is considered more dangerous than hatred

and violence. Therefore for peace makers, it is a task to channel apathy into a

creative work and engagement. Contradiction is the root of conflict. Due to

incompatible goals of conflicting parties one may determine to eliminate the

other. In conflict all three factors are present. Besides the ABC-Triangle,

Galtung’s theoretical and conceptual works include models of ways that con-

flicts emerge between people, communities and states. He also describes struc-

tural violence, seeing it as a system that produces poverty, and institutionalizes

racism and discrimination. He distinguishes between negative peace, which

suggests an absence of violence, and positive peace, which involves new and

supportive relationships towards peace.  Galtung’s Transcend Actions advo-

cate non-violence, creativity and empathy, which help conflicting parties to

move beyond their respective positions and create new possibilities for achieving

goals. This is sharp contrast to coercive and competitive diplomacy. Johann

Galtung has been engaged in research, conflict resolution work and teaching

work. His conflict resolution work has received recognition from the United

Nation’s agencies and other international institutes.

There has been research and documentation concerning the advan-

tages and limitations of international relations and the role of the United Na-

tions for conflict resolution.

The UN has succeeded in halting war and reaching peace agreement

mostly at interstate level as a short-term goal. When conflict resolution fails

then as a next step conflict management effort is undertaken mainly to control

damage by sending peace-keeping forces. Between 1988-1998, 35 UN

peace-keeping operations were conducted (Tamara Duffey 2001) with little

or no substantial impact. The conflict resolution school considers that conflict

is bad therefore there is a need to end conflict. Conflict management ac-

knowledges that a conflict cannot be solved within a short time so they at-

tempt to control damage. But both efforts have failed to address the root

causes of the conflict. So the revival of the conflict occurs. The UN mission

for peacekeeping has been criticized for not being able to fulfill its objective of

restoring peace. Bosnia, Rwanda and Somalia are few examples of these

failures.

116  Prajna Vihara- -~



Critics argue that the conflict resolution groups have become compla-

cent and lost relevance.  Bernard Mayer (2000) as an insider who has worked

in this field many years claims that conflict resolution as a discipline is facing

crisis. Professionals in this field are neither involved in major conflicts of our

time such as the Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan and Korea, nor engaged in

environmental social policies. Conflict resolution organizations mostly come

from a middle class orientation from the West which is often an impediment to

reaching out to marginalized people and communities in order to establish

dialogue with them on an equal basis. The identity and independence of this

field is increasingly under attack. Relevance and impact of third party media-

tors has been limited and their objectivity is questioned. They are unable to

engage those people who are bearing the brunt of conflict and wars. After this

critical review of conflict resolution I would like to discuss peace studies to-

wards conflict transformation.

Peace Studies and Conflict Transformation

Peace studies as an academic program was launched at the Univer-

sity of Bradford in 1973, chaired by Adam Curle. Adam’s Curle’s concept of

peace was initially concerned with fulfilling human needs and liberating human

potentials. With time, his concepts became more concerned with human rela-

tions and spiritual values. In 1960’s and 1970’s he was involved in Track Two

or citizen’s diplomacy in the Nigerian civil war and the India-Pakistan Con-

flict. But in 1990s he shifted to peace making from below and assisted local

people of Osijek in their initiative for peace during the Balkan conflict.

Adam Curle’s defined peace and conflict as a set of peaceful and un-

peaceful relationships. He believed that if friendship is based on sufficiently

strong understanding, then it is possible to overcome differences. From indi-

vidual to social level its interpretation would be active organizations and move-

ments, their planned and effective cooperation and intelligent and creative

efforts would resolve conflict. For Adam peacemaking means effecting changes

in relationships, which would ultimately lead to meaningful cooperation and

development in fulfilling human needs. He further added that our main fault is

our failure to recognize that the roots of conflict are largely in our minds.

Therefore, one has to have desire to ‘seek within’ the human spirit.  This

realization helped Adam Curle remain associated with religious society, and

Mohammad Abdus Sabur  117



led him towards spiritual and mystical explorations.  This process of self-

education and training help peacemakers to become unbiased mediators and

facilitators.

Adam emphasized that mediators (from the very name) remain in

the middle and take no sides. Mediators are placed at the center of conflict

and are deeply involved. They possess ability to establish communication with

conflicting parties which is needed to be followed by skillful negotiation. Both

tolerance and determination enable a process to reach an agreement for sus-

tained relationships for nurturing peace. This is a value-based effort blended

with knowledge and humanistic psychology.

John Paul Lederach has been appreciative of Adam Curle’s ideas and

his critique of the conflict resolution model of Johann Galtung. Within that

conflict resolution model he sees a danger of manipulation, co-optation and a

misunderstanding of conflict. Like Adam Curle, Lederach emphasizes right

relationship and a social structure which is committed to human rights. Re-

spect for human life and nonviolence, are his emphasis. Lederach believed

peace is embedded in justice and he does not agree with concepts such as

negative and positive peace. His main thesis is that there is a need to think

critically at a much deeper level concerning both the content and process of

conflict resolution.

Lederach prefers the concept of conflict transformation instead of

conflict resolution. The transformation approach employs a process by which

parties in conflict see their role in a deeper understanding of the nature and

root causes of conflict. This process is an analytical and conceptual tool to

enable community members to assume responsibility and  be engaged in the

process of long term change. Outside facilitators have a role to encourage and

facilitate the self-empowerment of the community from within. In this approach

the people themselves can employ their cultural resources and wisdom to-

wards achieving self-sustaining harmony and peace.

In contrast to the field of conflict resolution, the school of conflict

transformation believes that conflict is a natural phenomenon. According to

Lederach, conflict can neither be controlled nor eliminated. But it can be trans-

formed and human relationships can be mended. This concept may sound

prescriptive depending on how one applies it. Conflict cannot always be trans-

formed in a constructive way. That is where reciprocity of social science and

peace studies could play critical role.

118  Prajna Vihara- -~



Integration and Reciprocity of Social sciences and Peace Studies

Lederach attaches importance of the body of knowledge of social

sciences and its contribution to understand society, social relations, and re-

sources available within, which enriches the approach of conflict transforma-

tion. Through the elicitive process, local, relevant and effective symbols, terms

and language can be utilized as resources. This helps mobilize participation

and find most desirable outcomes. In this process conflict transformation, re-

construction, rebuilding tasks can be accomplished and the process can be

owned and directed by people themselves.

The nature, scale and dynamism of conflict have been shifting from

interstate to intrastate. Such as conflict between ethnic, religious and cultural

communities within a state, between people and promoter of development

projects, transnational corporations, aid agencies and so on.  Edward Azar

termed them as protracted conflict. Azar’s protracted social conflict theory

refers to violent struggle of community groups in search of recognition, politi-

cal participation and economic development. Denial and deprivation of such

rights and needs lead to conflict. Around the common issues the struggling

communities develop their own identity and negotiate with the state power.

Failure on the part of the state and the government to recognize and address

those issues create conditions for identity groups to engage in prolonged vio-

lent conflict. Therefore it is the responsibility of the government to enter into

dialogue and initiate program development process genuinely owned by the

people. This is one of the examples how conflict can be transformed to an

opportunity for peace and development. This process requires enquiry and

research at a deeper level in order to understand the underlying causes, not

only at surface level. Generally, sociologists and anthropologist have been

doing such research for a long time to understand human behavior and the

social relations but not necessarily directly in connection with the concerns for

peace. That has resulted in minimum or no contribution to the development of

peace studies. It is increasingly being recognized that there is a need and

opportunity for both disciplines to reflect, exchange and engage in identifying

common ground and enrich each other. Considering the fact that society con-

tinues to evolve and change, actors and dynamics also change, and therefore,

theoretically informed empirical research is needed on a continuing basis. On

the other hand, Peace studies can play a role in sensitizing social sciences to

Mohammad Abdus Sabur  119



be proactive and practical in responding to conflict studies of various natures.

Lederach has been appreciative of Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the

Oppressed and has documented the conscientization process among peas-

ants and workers to achieve in-depth understanding about social and political

contradictions. It leads to empowerment of the oppressed to take action to-

wards ending oppression. Lederach also talked about elicitive approach and

a participatory process by which participants draw local knowledge and wis-

dom. In contrast prescriptive process is used for direct transfer of knowledge.

It limits learner’s creativity but provide space for cross-fertilization of ideas

between learner and teachers or trainers. Therefore, Lederach prefers com-

bination of both.

To add further inputs from social science in peace studies, Jean Piaget’s

constructive epistemology can be useful which refers to a process by which

human beings generate knowledge and meaning through interaction between

experiences and ideas and that leads to reform and change. Taking the lead

from constructivism, Seymour Papert’s theory of constructionism argues for

reconstruction rather than the simple transmission of knowledge because learn-

ing can be more effective when a tangible object is created in the present

world. Lederach from a practitioner’s perspective cites Moore (1986) and

emphasizes a multi-disciplinary perspective. He stresses the necessity of com-

bining social knowledge and theoretical approaches in order to provide a role

for knowledge in the change process. It is relevant in the sense that peacebuilding

is a continuous process.

Lederach’s contribution has been very significant in peace studies. At

the same time it can be said that peace studies so far has not addressed the

issue of caring the state of mind such as anger, anxiety, agony, grief and re-

morse as observed by Adam Curle. Healthy state of mind can get rid of men-

tal roots of conflict and nurture healthy human relationship, which is peace.

CONCLUSION

The speed of change which Adam Curle illustrated in his book An-

other Way, is real and will continue for many years to come. It will create a

more complex world where conflict will take multi-dimensional shapes and

dynamics. This means the students of peace studies ought to keep their minds

120  Prajna Vihara- -~



and hearts open to study these new social phenomena. In this way both social

sciences and peace studies can play mutually enriching role.

The development of both social sciences and peace studies, so far

have been predominantly embedded in the Western concepts and their theo-

retical base. Therefore, it remains a major challenge for scholars of young

generations from the rest of the world to bring cultural, religious and spiritual-

based value perspective for peace building.

The right balance between (a) academic excellence and practical en-

gagement (b) between paying attention and investment of energy to deal with

macro conflicts with widespread devastating impact, for example, worldwide

war against terrorism, climate change and  responding to  protracted conflict

within the nation state and affected communities remain as a major challenge.

Through from conflict transformation perspective, it is very clear that peace

building is a continuing process and nothing is definitive, but it does not mean

that the engaged communities, actors and facilitators should not make efforts

and aim at tangible changes and results. In this change process moral dimen-

sion, prudence dependent virtues as well as prudence as a memory of future

are of great importance to address the mental roots of the conflict and nurture

sustainable human and social relationship for peace.

References

John. Pips, Introducing Social Theory, p11, p17, p33, p41, p51, p71, p169,

173, policy press, UK, 2003.

Bellah N Robert, Beyond Belief: Civil Religion in America, Essays on

Religion in a Post Traditionalist World, Berkeley: University Press,

1991.

Calhoun. Craig, Josef. Karaganis, Hand Book of Social Theory, Critical

Theory, Pp180-181, Sage Publication Ltd. India, 2003.

Williams. Raymond, Marxism and Literature, Pp110-111, Oxford Univer-

sity Press, 1997.

Ramsbotham. Tom. Woodhouse, Hugh Miall, Conflict Resolution, The

prevention, management and transformation of deadly conflicts, PP3-

9. Policy Press, UK. 2011.

Duffey. Tamara, Cultural Issues in Contemporary Peacekeeping, Interna-

Mohammad Abdus Sabur  121



tional Peacekeeping Journal, vol.7, Issue 1, published by Frank Cass,

2000.

Mayer S. Bernard, Beyond Neutrality, Confronting the Crisis in Conflict

Resolution, Jossy-Bass, CA 94103-1741, 2004.

Woodhouse. Tom,  Adam Curle: Radical Peacemaker and pioneer of peace

studies. http” Journal of Conflcitology.uoc.edu, 2010.

Curle. Adam, Another Way, Positive Response to Contemporary violence,

John Carpenter publishing, Oxford OXI 4PH, 1995.

Lederach. P. John, The Little Book of Conflict Transformation, Pp4-5,

p15, pp29-31,Good Books, Pansalvania, 2003.

Lederach. P. John, Preparing for Peace, Conflict Transformation Across

Cultures, p8, Pp74-77, Syracuse University Press,1996.

Comte-Sponville, A Small Treaties on the Great Virtues: The Use of

Philosophy in Everyday Life, Metropolitan Book, 2001.

122  Prajna Vihara- -~