Military Review English Edition May-June 2014 | Page 57
PEACE STUDIES
Skill Development
Connie Peck notes that knowledge and practice
must inform each other, and that conflict resolution and
management programs need to be constructed to assist
conflict practitioners—not simply to add to theory
development.12 If peace is the desired outcome of any
conflict, it must be achieved through conflict transformation and management. Therefore, it is critical to
begin a discussion on how peace and conflict studies
can be integrated into Army professional development
and training by—
●● Including peace studies and peace scholarship in
the U.S. Army War College curriculum, with the focus
of scholarship at the strategic level.
●● Focusing on conflict management at the U.S.
Army Command and General Staff College.
●● Emphasizing conflict transformation skills training at branch qualifying schools and noncommissioned
officer academies, with individuals concentrating on
grassroots problem solving.
Too often, it is simply assumed that individuals
possess the skills necessary to address conflict. In fact,
multiple skill sets undergird the process of conflict
transformation. Mediation and negotiation, nonviolence, restorative justice, and joint problem solving
skills can be integrated into existing military education
and training.
Mediation and negotiation. Skills that can be
taught under mediation and negotiation include—
●● Introduction to mediation and negotiation
skills.
●● Mediator as process expert.
●● Negotiation skills: hard-bargaining and principled negotiation.
Nonviolence. Skills that can be taught under
nonviolence include—
●● Nonviolence as a peace-building tool.
●● Just policing.
●● Nonviolent communication.
Restorative justice. Skills that can be taught under
restorative justice include—
●● Community circles.
●● Dialogue groups.
Joint problem solving. Skills that can be taught under
joint (referring to all partners) problem solving include—
●● Facilitation.
●● Large-group problem solving.
●● Integration of the curriculum.
Summary
Peace is a charged, contested, and often marginalized
term. It can challenge the warrior ethos. However, we
find ourselves in a period of si gnificant change, and
formal and informal institutions and systems of the
past that support negative peace alone need modification to meet new demands. Tomorrow’s battlefields
still need warriors able to close with and destroy the
enemy but also those proficient in conflict prevention,
management, and transformation skills. Asymmetrical
approaches to conflict management are the new norm.
An increasing focus is needed on preventing conflict.13 The desired end state of all military operations
should be a durable, lasting, and just peace. Experience suggests that a tension can exist between the
military and those in the field of peace and conflict
studies. This seems an unnecessary tension. With
fewer people having military experience, uninformed
opinions regarding military culture are guiding the
peace discourse.
Military professionals are often the strongest advocates for peace development and nonviolence. Professional soldiers must not be marginalized and left absent
from the peace development table because of peace
activist prejudices. Rather, the warrior ethos that embodies mission, selfless service, and physical and mental
courage should be embraced. Professional soldiers who
view themselves as peace builders can be counted upon
to use force only when necessary, and judiciously. MR
NOTES
1. Raymond T. Odierno, “The U.S. Army in a Time of Transition: Building a
Flexible Force,” Foreign Affairs 91, no. 3 (2012).
2. Oliver Ramsbotham, Tom Woodhouse, and Hugh Miall, Contemporary
Conflict Resolution, 2 ed. (San Francisco, Wiley, John & Sons, Inc., 2005).
3. Johannes Botes, “Conflict Transformation: A Debate Over Semantics or
a Crucial Shift in the Theory and Practice of Peace and Conflict Studies,” The
International Journal of Peace Studies 8, no. 2 (2003).
4. Jerome T. Barrett, A History of Alternative Dispute Resolution: The Story of
a Political, Cultural, and Social Movement (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 2004).
5. Odierno.
6. Reina C. Neufeldt, “Just Policing and International Order: Is It Possible?”
in Just Policing, Not War: An Alternative Response to World Violence, ed. G. W.
Schlabach (Collegeville, MN, Liturgical Press, 2007).
7. John P. Lederach, “The Doables: Just Policing on the Ground,” in Just
MILITARY REVIEW May-June 2014
Policing, Not War.
8. Human Security Center, Human Security Report 2005: War and Peace in the
21st Century (British Columbia, Canada: Oxford University Press, 2005), .
9. Louis Kreisberg, “Contemporary Conflict Resolution Applications,” in
Leashing the Dogs of War, ed. Chester Crocker (Washington, DC: Institute of
Peace, 2001).
10. Odierno.
11. Gerald W. Schlabach, “Practicing for Just Policing,” in Just Policing, Not
War, 104.
12. Connie Peck, “Training as a Means to Build Capacity in Conflict Prevention:
The UNITAR Approach,” in Conflict Prevention: From Rhetoric to Reality, ed. D.
Carment and A. Schnabel (Lanham, MD, Lexington Books, 2004).
13. Odierno.
55