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