Peace Theory

Military analyst, peace activist, teacher, and social theorist Randall Caroline Watson Forsberg (1943–2007) founded the Nuclear Freeze campaign and the Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies. In Toward a Theory of Peace, completed in 1997 and published for the first time here, she delves into a vast literature in psychology, anthropology, archeology, sociology, and history to examine the ways in which changing moral beliefs came to stigmatize forms of "socially sanctioned violence" such as human sacrifice, cannibalism, and slavery, eventually rendering them unacceptable. Could the same process work for war? Edited and with an introduction by political scientists Matthew Evangelista (Cornell University) and Neta C. Crawford (Boston University), both of whom worked with Forsberg.

Positive Peace addresses how sustainable intra-state peace could best be elicited through the UN system in non-liberal/democratic divided societies. It offers a novel positive peace vision together with a comprehensive framework for positive peace that would strengthen the UN’s conflict prevention pillars and complement its post-conflict peacebuilding efforts.

Classical political theorists such as Thucydides, Kant, Rousseau, Smith, Hegel, Grotius, Mill, Locke and Clausewitz are often employed to explain and justify contemporary international politics and are seen to constitute the different schools of thought in the discipline. However, traditional interpretations frequently ignore the intellectual and historical context in which these thinkers were writing as well as the lineages through which they came to be appropriated in International Relations. This collection of essays provides alternative interpretations sensitive to these political and intellectual contexts and to the trajectory of their appropriation. The political, sociological, anthropological, legal, economic, philosophical and normative dimensions are shown to be constitutive, not just of classical theories, but of international thought and practice in the contemporary world. Moreover, they challenge traditional accounts of timeless debates and schools of thought and provide new conceptions of core issues such as sovereignty, morality, law, property, imperialism and agency.

Comprising essays by Peter Wallensteen, this book presents an overview of the thematic development of peace research, which has become one of the most dynamic and innovative areas of war and conflict studies. Peace research began in the 1950s when centres were formed in the USA and Europe, and today there are research institutes and departments on every continent, with teaching and research programs in most countries, and peace researchers contribute to the development of international studies, development research and security analysis. Prof. Wallensteen has been a witness to much of this since forming the Department of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University in the late 1960s, and this book brings together thirteen of his articles with five new essays in one volume. The book presents articles on such key issues in peace research as the causes of war, conflict data, conflict diplomacy, non-violent sanctions and third- party diplomacy. In this way, it demonstrates how basic research can be conducted in fields often seen as ‘unresearchable’ and ‘too complicated to deal with’. This volume shows that it is a matter of developing definitions, creating valid measures and finding ways of collecting information, recognising that innovations of this kind require supportive research environments. Furthermore, the results are not only useful for the growth of research activity itself, but for finding ways of dealing with actual conflicts. Thus, attention is also paid here to conflict prevention, peace agreements, sanctions and third-party activity for preventing and ending armed conflict, and building a lasting post-war peace. This book will be of great interest to all students of peace studies, conflict resolution, war and conflict studies, development studies and IR/security studies in general.

Comprising essays by Michael W. Doyle, Liberal Peace examines the special significance of liberalism for international relations. The volume begins by outlining the two legacies of liberalism in international relations - how and why liberal states have maintained peace among themselves while at the same time being prone to making war against non-liberal states. Exploring policy implications, the author focuses on the strategic value of the inter-liberal democratic community and how it can be protected, preserved, and enlarged, and whether liberals can go beyond a separate peace to a more integrated global democracy. Finally, the volume considers when force should and should not be used to promote national security and human security across borders, and argues against President George W. Bush’s policy of "transformative" interventions. The concluding essay engages with scholarly critics of the liberal democratic peace. This book will be of great interest to students of international relations, foreign policy, political philosophy, and security studies.

Ever since the revival of Kant's Perpetual Peace thesis, the linkages between democracy and peace has been a central topic in international relations research, with sustained debate over whether it exists and if it does, why it does. In this stimulating volume, two leading IR scholars place the democratic peace debate within a broader context, including the extent of threats in international relations, degree of satisfaction with the status quo, the diffusion of democracy, and the rise of the trading state. Step by step, Thompson and Rasler examine the democratic peace through a series of puzzles concerning arguments at the dyadic, systemic, and individual state levels. Synthesizing a broad range of knowledge and linking islands of theory, Puzzles of the Democratic Peace provides a distinctive look at the state of the field and paths forward.

This lively survey of the history of conflict between democracies reveals a remarkable--and tremendously important--finding: fully democratic nations have never made war on other democracies. Furthermore, historian Spencer R. Weart concludes in this thought-provoking book, they probably never will. Building his argument on some forty case studies ranging through history from ancient Athens to Renaissance Italy to modern America, the author analyzes for the first time every instance in which democracies or regimes like democracies have confronted each other with military force. Weart establishes a consistent set of definitions of democracy and other key terms, then draws on an array of international sources to demonstrate the absence of war among states of a particular democratic type. His survey also reveals the new and unexpected finding of a still broader zone of peace among oligarchic republics, even though there are more of such minority-controlled governments than democracies in history. In addition, Weart discovers that peaceful leagues and confederations--the converse of war--endure only when member states are democracies or oligarchies. With the help of related findings in political science, anthropology, and social psychology, the author explores how the political culture of democratic leaders prevents them from warring against others who are recognized as fellow democrats and how certain beliefs and behaviors lead to peace or war. Weart identifies danger points for democracies, and he offers crucial, practical information to help safeguard peace in the future.

In the last years of the nineteenth century peace proposals were first stimulated by fear of the danger of war rather than in consequence of its outbreak. In this study of the nature and history of international relations Mr Hinsley presents his conclusions about the causes of war and the development of men's efforts to avoid it. In the first part he examines international theories from the end of the middle ages to the establishment of the League of Nations in their historical setting. This enables him to show how far modern peace proposals are merely copies or elaborations of earlier schemes. He believes there has been a marked reluctance to test these theories not only against the formidable criticisms of men like Rousseau, Kant and Bentham, but also against what we have learned about the nature of international relations and the history of the practice of states. This leads him to the second part of his study - an analysis of the origins of the modern states' system and of its evolution between the eighteenth century and the First World War.