Legitimate peace in post-civil war states: towards attaining the unattainable

In: Conflict, security & development: CSD, Band 14, Heft 1, S. 61-87

Abstract

Within the literature on conflict resolution and peace-building, there is a growing awareness about the need to move beyond 'minimalist' (absence of war) and 'maximalist' (absence of different types of structural violence) notions of peace. While the first concept is too narrow-it conceals much human suffering and does not take into account the root causes of armed conflict-the latter is too inclusive, open-ended and difficult to measure. There is, despite this growing consciousness, a lack of midterm definitions of peace that can help peacemakers assess whether a peace process is on the right track, say 10 or 15 years after a civil war has been terminated. In fact, when operationalising and empirically measuring how 'peaceful' post-civil war societies are, many scholars continue to employ indicators based on minimalist or maximalist visions of peace. In this article we introduce the concept of 'legitimate peace', which we argue can function as a midterm benchmark for peacemakers, and outline the benefits associated with its use. Adapted from the source document.