CENTRE FOR PEACE STUDIES
HOME EXAM
SVF-3021
Integrated Peace
& Conflict Studies
FALL 2013
CANDIDATE NUMBER
-12
First Essay:
Section 1, Question 3:
Distinctions have been made between the concepts of negative and positive
peace (Galtung), alias negative
vs. positive security (Kacowic, Archer etc.). Explain the difference
between negative and positive peace/security. What are the challenges to
transition from negative to positive peace/security? Illustrate with a
case, or cases, of your choice.
Candidate Number 12
Please Note:
Outcome targeting: In order to maximise word
efficiency particular learning objectives are being targeted in this essay.
These are - Knowledge 2 & 3. Analytical Understanding 4 and Skills &
Competencies 1, 3 & 4. The remaining outcomes are targeted specifically
using the other question in this exam.
CONTENTS
Introduction
1. Positive & Negative peace – How does
it all relate?
2. The ‘Energic’ Lens:
2.1 Collective Focus – Politics &
Perception
2.2
Individual Focus & the power of choice
3. The Challenge of Transition
Value
Shifting – Societal Change
Energic
Equilibrium
Absorbing conflict
Problems
4. The beginnings of a peace equation - peace as the
ability to manage change by
balancing the interests of self and others.
5. Measuring Positive & Negative Peace?
Conclusion
/ Sketching a Hypotheses
Further
Research: So much more to be done………..
References
Appendix
Introduction:
‘All good things approach their goal crookedly’
(Nietzsche, p304, 2003 (orig. 1961))
This essay looks to
present a perspective for viewing peace that may help us in moving closer
towards it in terms of a way of existing. Within this essay positive and
negative peace are acknowledged as applied divisions suggested in order to
further our understanding of peace and are incorporated into the alternative
perspective that is presented. This essay suggests an alternative perspective
in an attempt to encourage further collaboration on pluralistic level. It is
felt that the unique opportunities that the field of peace and conflict studies
presents should not be missed especially when looking to understand and
perceive peace and its construction in as useful and meaningful a manner as
possible. It must be mentioned that this brief essay is but an initial sketch
in an attempt to bring together surrounding larger ideas dealing with the
conceptualisation and perception of peace.
1. Positive & Negative peace – How does
it all relate?
"Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding."
(Albert
Einstein via Harris, 1995 )
Peace is viewed by
many as a social construct which can influence political activity (Sapio &
Zamperini, 2007). Its positive and negative parts emerge as a result of
different interactional responses when different bodies relate with each other
on interpersonal, inter-group and inter state levels. Both types of peace are
seen as stages on a transformational path when the means by which bodies are
relating is shifting from destructive conflict towards a sustainable
peace. Negative peace is characterised
by the absence of violence (Galtung, 2012) and also the management of conflict.
In a state of negative peace destructive conflict is controlled and power
within the scenario is shared and maintained usually through threat based
bargaining, enforcement, voting and mediation methods. Positive peace a further
step in the right direction is the stage where conflict is transformed. Power
balances are typically confronted and equalised, the main system within the
scenario is changed (for example, political system) and there is usually the
emergence of new forms of education for the people within the scenario, moral
persuasion and negotiation among other things (Brunk, 2012). These transition
stages that move us from conflict to peace are well documented but the
difficulty is in the movement from one stage to another.
As we know relationships
between any amounts of bodies should ideally have sets of understandable rules
that adequately serve all parties involved allowing balanced, relational
exchanges to be maintained (Bentham, 1789). Be it planets in the solar system,
people in the street, regional bodies negotiating policy reform (Culpepper,
2002) or states negotiating trade patterns, there should be laws that help to
outline and encourage the optimal means by which relations can occur and
exchanges can be made.
On an interpersonal
level understandable and clear relational guidelines can allow feelings of
safety to be maintained throughout the interaction process. This usually prevents
incompatible activities such as conflict from occurring (Deutsch, 1973).
Of course
interpersonal conflict is only one type among many (Lulofs & Cahn, 1999;
Muzuwa et al 2013) but it is felt to be one of the more important in this essay
for one reason and that is this. Even when huge powerful nations such as China
and the USA relate through foreign policy it occurs on an interpersonal level
between at most groups of people representing each country. Therefore the
importance of perceiving, understanding and knowing how to regulate the methods
by which we interact and by which exchanges occur between different bodies (national,
celestial, individual) should not be underestimated (Patternote & Kollman,
2013; Overall et al, 2009; Cotula, 2012). Relationships are everywhere and
everything that exists is a result of relational exchanges of some kind. If
relational exchanges are not understood and managed the chances of balance,
harmony, change and in this context sustainable peace being generated are
reduced.
The field of peace
and conflict studies is unique in its richness for inter disciplinary
opportunities and the fusion of ideas and perspectives (Brunk, 2012). It seems
only logical that a problem as big as peace on a global scale be approached
using collaborative angles and the joining of ideas and thinking. In this essay
just such opportunities will be employed.
By applying physics
theory to the context of positive and negative peace we can clearly see that without
methods of exchange occurring at many different levels systems would cease to
change or even operate (Boulding, 1956). For example communicative exchanges between
states and civil society (Poggi, 1978). In fact without sufficiently balanced
exchanges of energy nothing at all would actually even exist. After all energy
is where everything begins and everything ends (Landau, 1957). Perhaps this is why the earth’s natural
resources and climate change are becoming such prominent topics in the fields
of economics and politics right now (Garnaut, 2008).
All living things
require certain amounts of energy circulating through exchanges in there
systems in order to live. The biological example of ‘milieu interieur’
(Bernard, 1974) or homeostasis is useful to use as a parallel at this point to
further stress the importance of achieving balance within systems and also the
emergence of disease through imbalance but what is the optimal method for
achieving balance? Should it be a predictable one?
Galtung’s Entropy
Discourse (2012) asks if unpredictable methods of regulation (chaos in space,
irregularity in time) and less orderly processes are more useful for the health
of systems and the achievement of equilibrium. Interestingly from a
psychological perspective if levels of unpredictability rise enough they can
trigger fear, insecurity, doubt and anxiety (Aldwin, 2007) but paradoxically
can also encourage people to have faith and trust in the possibility of the
unknown/something different.
Using the lens of
physics allows the issues surrounding positive and negative peace to be
orientated more naturally through detached observation and objectively in terms
of the energy flow of systems and there behavioural rheology in terms of
relational exchanges and the natural, social, political and economic laws which
govern them.
The inspiration for
this approach comes partly from Charles Webel’s (Webel & Galtung, 2007)
notion of peace being perceived spectrally but in the rest of this essay we try
to take it a step further by beginning to examine and critique the movement of peace
through an ‘energic’ lense as an inhabitable threshold of our energy spectrum
with positive and negative divisions which people, groups and nations inhabit
dynamically during interpersonal relationships. It is hoped that this approach
can help to contribute and possibly to add to the existing body of knowledge in
this field and maybe take us a step closer toward as Webel puts it a
‘philosophy and metapsychology of peace’ (2007: p3).
2. The Energic Lense
2.1 Collective Focus: Politics &
Perception
"The
world we have created is a product of our thinking; it cannot be changed
without changing our thinking." (Albert Einstein via Harris, 1995)
From an Energic
perspective as humanity has evolved the manifestation and movement of energy
into matter and reality through Kantian style constructivist methods (Rohlf,
2010) and relational exchanges has caused the emergence of collective societal patterns,
methods of being (ontology), mechanisms for generating meaning (Kierkegaard, 2005)
and regulatory systems (McCorquodale, 2010). It is within these thought based reality
constructs that we operate as individuals, as groups, as organizations and as
institutions and states.
Our sociology and psychology
for example, through ideologies (Baradat, 2012) values, norms, mores, belief
systems, choices, appraisals (Lazarus & Folkman, 1974) and thought patterns
among other things, function as just two of the tools (knowledge constructs)
(Wilkin, 1997) that we employ for perceiving (Bhaskar, 1998, Lopez &
Potter, 2001), digesting, interpreting and expressing energy in the form of information
so we can function as human beings.
It is proposed that
all of these perceptual mechanisms allow energy (frequencies, vibrations) to
move through our human systems and combine individually, and collectively
through awareness dependent relational exchanges (Mead, 1934, Kuwabara &
Yamaguchi, 2013), in order to construct our realities (Berger & Luckman,
1967). The more sharable and inhabitable (favourable) these realities become,
for example a liberal mode of reality (Locke, 1980), conservative reality or a
realist reality (Mearsheimer, 2001) the more people can successfully find a
point of interface and collectively choose to inhabit them. For example a
democratic voting system.
If the energy
signature of the constructed reality is inhabitable enough then logically interpretation
and understanding, through open interface channels using effective communication
exchange will flourish and allow this inhabitable mode of reality the possibility
of increasing its levels of entropy as Johan Galtung encourages (Galtung,
2012). Unfortunately it does not seem that realities created recently through
mechanisms such as ideologies and sets of values have always been constructed
for the good of the many but for the interests of the few.
To encourage and
co-erce many to follow serves energically speaking as a way of narrowing the collective
energy spectrum through regularity and encouraging predictability and levels of
inertia to emerge, effectively like a bottle neck. With low levels of
individuation and spontaneity the energic patterns which individuals and groups
exhibit narrow and become more controllable. The destructive side effect of
this is that our natural urge to evolve intuitively and creatively (Bergson, 1911)
is restricted. The natural circulation of systemic energy is restricted and it
is at this point that rheological problems can begin to emerge
2.2
Energic Lense: The Individual & the power of choice
Looking
now at the individual energically it can be observed rationally that throughout
history that scholars, in particular philosophers have helped to mould and shape
the reality that we occupy. There expressions of energy, dating back to Plato
and Socrates, were realised through attitudes, thoughts and beliefs that were
made available to the masses and as a result have influenced many people’s
actions and decisions.
As individuals it is assumed energically that we
grow, develop and evolve as a result of exchanges of energy, similar to that of
plants when they use the sun and the nutrients from the earth’s soil for
nourishment (Wilkins, 1997). These
relational exchanges for example a legal meeting between the international
court of law and US representatives would occur via conscious and unconscious
choices and decisions that we formulate as a result of analysis, evaluation,
appraisal (Lazarus & Folkman, 1974) and attribution in order to act and
interact. To be conscious and fully aware of these relational processes can
allow us to perceive the choices needed to act responsibly and to exercise
authentic power (Zukav, 2013) so that we may make choices that allow us to
self-actualize (Rogers, 1951a; 1951b) naturally while also serving the
environment around us but we can also choose to relinquish that responsibility
and power by trusting others to make decisions for us (for example voting for
politicians). It is these basic and sometimes unfortunately unconscious
decisions/choices that allow relational exchanges to change and levels of
dependence and power imbalance to emerge within relationships on all levels. It
is in these relational configurations and arrangements that individuals allow
themselves through trust and faith to become vulnerable to external influence
and letting other people think and create realities for them without any form
of exchange or negotiation. This is where the people with the power and
option to influence and control have a duty to act responsibly when introducing
new ideas, rules of conduct, social structures and ways of being so that serving
of others through there actions dominates and self interest is not allowed to
dominate but as history has shown us the right choices are not always made.
A brief point of
critical reflection here allows us to view both of these energic explanations
of collective and individual functioning as possibly cognitively biased in
terms of the perspective of human existence. These explanations can be seen as
framing us merely as emotionless computers that process information (energy)
and therefore as groups, regional bodies and evolving institutions within the
modern global order would be filled with people who only function through
analysing and processing information and making choices based on data rather
than actually compassionately considering people’s needs within the society
that is being democratically represented and served but as it shall now be
shown if certain sets of choices are made through careful consideration of self
and others then it is possible for a balanced equilibrium or sustainable peace
to be achieved.
(For
more detail and depth about the energic theory please see appendix -
Energic
Relation Theory in more depth - Abstract Sketch)
3.
THE CHALLENGE OF TRANSITION:
Balancing the means by which we relate: The NASH
EQUILIBRIUM……..
As John Nash discovered by furthering the work of renowned
economist Adam Smith people can act and interact in an autonomous way that optimally
serves themselves but at the same time takes into account and allows the
optimal workings of others as a result of choice (Nash, 1950). Granted the same amount of choices are not
available to all individuals at all levels but collectively if as Nash
encourages we all make the best decisions we can through taking complete
responsibility for optimising our actions and at the same time taking into
account the optimal ways for others to work than maybe a peaceful equilibrium can
be found. Being self-responsible and aware of choices and there consequences in
relation to self and others is certainly a way of being that could be valued more
highly within society.
Value Shifting – Societal Change
Admittedly from a political perspective Nash’s
ideas if applied to society through enforced policy would place a lot more
emphasis on civil and individual responsibility but it is still felt by many,
at least in more developed parts of the world that levels of institutional and
structural control are too high and that civil society should have more of a
say, more influence. Empowering society could certainly be one way of reducing
levels of negative peace as it encourages the problems suffered by the people
to be solved by the people but admittedly it does require a lot of faith and
trust to be handed over and then used responsibly.
So how could our levels of trust and faith in our
fellow men and women reach a level where this handing over of power could
occur?
Energic Equilibrium:
It is suggested that collectively an adjustment of
the value structure that we currently use placing more emphasis on
self-responsibility and awareness of choices would be one thing that would need
to occur. The method to do this could be to follow Galtung’s previously
mentioned suggestion of more unpredictability within a system. A certain
measure of unpredictability can motivate people to take action and make things
more certain.
Energically this self-responsible behaviour as a
result of the value shift would theoretically cause a shift in the vibrational
output of our current collective reality. If achieved, handing over of power in
this way would result in the empowerment of individuals by giving them more
control over the construction of their realities, and the frequencies that they
emit. The more control that people have over their own existence the more there
perceptual methods could be changed and in turn accommodate more confidence and
independence (non-cooperative existence) to grow psychosocially (Erikson, 1950,
1980) thus opening the door to more curiosity and more learning through doing (Bryson
& Mobolurin, 1997). This is when suddenly you could have a society making
the transition from occupying a negative to a positive peace threshold in an
energic sense. The amount of relational exchanges would need to increase
dramatically in order to sustain trust and faith levels and also absorb the
relative increases in activity but with a higher level of systemic entropy and
energy circulating through more doing and action (relational exchanges) absorption
of conflict scenarios could as Galtung encourages become more possible
(2012).
ABSORBING CONFLICT – MAINTAINING POSITIVE PEACE:
(P) OSITIVE (E) NERGY (C) YCLES
(Positive in, positive out.)
Theoretically the more action that is taking place
(positive energy investment) the more opportunity there would be for exchange
(positive energy returns). Through higher rates of exchange, inertia in people
through fear would be diluted and more understanding would be gained through
processes of personal construction/revision (Jung, 1974) and learning cycles (Piaget,
1955). This in turn would make the task of empathising with each other and
maintaining mutual understanding of each other’s world through shared experiences
more probable. All of this could serve as a transitionary mechanism from
negative to positive peace as Sapio and Zamperini encourage with their interactive-emotional
model for nonviolent transformation of destructive interactions (Webel &
Galtung, 2007).
So in theory using an energic systems based
approach suggests that as long as the communicative economy (energy exchanged through
communication/interaction) of a society can be maintained at a high enough
level by constructive means of relating to one another that are sufficiently
nourishing (Wilkins, 1997; Rogers 1951b) and meaningful (open, trusting,
honest, empathic, considerate and compassionate) (Rogers 1951a, Erikson, 1980) than
enough constructive energy would keep circulating buoyantly and the collective output
would in theory be able to transition naturally and maintain itself through
absorbing conflict in non-violent ways. So in summary with a healthy enough
psychosocial (Erikson, 1950, 1980) circulation on a societal level a country
for example would be able to occupy a constructive collective output threshold (positive
peace threshold) culturally and structurally and have the ability to absorb
conflict efficiently.
Problems?
Obvious questions at this point are ‘how do you
make sure there is enough efficient energic circulation for sustainable
transitions and peaceful societies to exist?’ and ‘What are the requirements that
must be met for maintaining constructive (positive peace) energic threshold’s
on a societal level?’ In short ‘what things are needed?’
One quick answer but maybe not the answer would be to
educate enough people so that they knew how to emit certain nourishing,
restorative vibrations and frequencies of energy expressed through empathy and
considering self and others when formulating thought patterns, attitudes, belief
systems and maybe even political ideologies. Avoiding destructive fear based
patterns for example for example the belief that ‘The world is a bad place’
which seems to be held onto right now by defensive realists, (Walt, 1998) would
have to be changed. As mentioned this is a quick answer but it does feel that
things should start with the individual’s output rather than the collective.
This at least could be a start towards an equation for peace or a way to start
walking the path that is peace. Further suggestions follow.
4. The beginnings of a PEACE EQUATION - PEACE AS THE
ABILITY TO MANAGE CHANGE BY BALANCING THE INTERESTS OF SELF AND OTHERS.
‘You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is like an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the
ocean does not become dirty." (Mahatma Gandhi via Moncur, 2013)
So if we return now
to John Nash’s work and begin to briefly boil down one component of Nash’s
equilibrium strategy, we can begin to expose, from a social science angle at
least, some of the necessary components that relational exchanges must contain
in order to achieve a state of equilibrium. The highlighted component within
the strategy is that people should at all times know each other’s strategies.
With this
assumption it appears that he is encouraging high levels of openness and
honesty in order to foster understanding which would make sense in terms of
increasing systemic relational circulation and flow of energy exchanges. As
physics tell us when a system is closed and without reliable feedback it is
unable to move, adapt or evolve.
It seems then at
least from John Nash’s perspective that with the right amounts of openness,
honesty, understanding and autonomy and consideration it is proposed relational
balance (peace) can be achieved.
(for other ideas
surrounding relational components See appendix – More possible Relational
Components/Variables)
So how do you know if you have got the
balance right?
If balanced
relational dynamics occur then both sides of the equation should be satisfied
(optimised in terms of self and in relation to others). And when something is
nourished (Wilkins, 1997) sufficiently further opportunities for growth emerge (Rogers,
1951a; 1951b). This evolving idea of economic balance communicatively through
relational means is also supported by (Bilgin, 2010).
In summary if this theory is enlarged and applied
successfully to take into account large societies the amount of choices
available to us when constructing realities and designing relational interfaces
(psychosocially) could become high enough so that the variety of relational
exchanges (conflict, positive and negative peace) within interactions could be
consistently and actively absorbed by those involved (Galtung, 2012).
5. Measuring
positive and negative peace?
Conclusion
/ Sketching a Hypotheses
So to conclude if
the required circulatory components are in place and interpersonal systems are
generating enough flow of information (energy exchange) and at a high enough
rate (frequency/vibration) than it is hypothesised that all bodies (national,
governmental, structural, cultural. etc.) within that system will have enough
psycho/social/spiritual material (current/voltage) to be nourished and will
grow economically and in synchrony with one another through managing conflict.
Effectively all
bodies within the system will then be existing within and sharing (through courage
as a bridge to honest openness which in is a way to trust and understanding) a
certain energy spectrum very much like the planets in our solar system all
function from the energy spectrum provided by the sun. This would then
naturally generate peaceful patterns of being through mutual understanding. The
catalyst would be the application, as rough guidelines, the basic behavioural
and relationally economic principles of Nash's equilibrium strategy.
Further
Research: So much more to be done………..
So even if we are now starting to sketch out the
beginnings of a formula for achieving peaceful relational exchanges, which is
very unlikely as this is a very rough sketch, a way to make things even simpler
would be to have the ability to measure the relational exchanges of energy
between people and groups. As
mentioned earlier in this essay the drivers of the relational exchanges of
energy that would need to be measured are people. It is the choices which
people make as a result of the ways in which they perceive and construct
reality through shaping there point of interface (their own reality) when
relating to others that is fundamental. In order for a relational exchange to
occur many different choices are made and, many of them prior, during and after
these exchanges in order for this balance to be realised and then sustained.
Obviously this is a big challenge and would require
innovative new research approaches in terms of observing social phenomenon
quantifiably but right now social science does have new research disciplines
emerging that could be of use for example computational sociology (measuring
online relationships) (Hummon & Fararo, 1995)) and behavioural economics
(Kahneman, 2003) and there is new technology emerging that could help us to
measure emotional exchanges and other components of relational exchanges
(Korotkov, 2008, 2010)
It is suggested
than respectfully that if the framing style of energic relation theory is used
as a way to encapsulate peace and as a result view peace itself it as a product
of balanced relational exchanges than the possibility of measuring the movement
of social energy first qualitatively and then quantitatively becomes more
realistic. By looking at things in this way we give ourselves the chance through
technology to measure the movements of social energy and by doing so further
explore and deepen our understanding of the natural laws and mechanisms of relational
interaction that are employed by celestial bodies and also by people on
interpersonal, inter-group and inter-state levels in relationships happening in
every second of every day. This is surely a direction that social and natural
sciences should be moving toward collaboratively.
(Word Count – 4184)
References
Aldwin. C. M.,
(2007) Stress, Coping and Development: An Integrative Perspective. 2nd
Edition. Guilford Press. New York. US.
Baradat. L, P.,
(2012) Political Ideologies: Their Origins & Impact. 11th
Edition. Pearson Education.
Bentham, Jeremy., (1789), An Introduction to the Principles of Morals
and Legislation, London: T.
Berger, P.,
Luckmann.,T (1967) The Social Construction of Reality : A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge. Anchor Publishing - ISBN 0-385-05898-5.
Bergson, H., (1911) Creative Evolution. Holt &Company. New York. US
Bernard, C., (1974) Lectures on the phenomena common to animals
and plants. Trans Hoff HE, Guillemin R, Guillemin L,
Springfield (IL): Charles C Thomas ISBN 978-0-398-02857-2.
Bilgin. M., (2010) The theory of
communicative language: Political economy for multiple
civilizations.
Futures: Volume 42, Issue 6, August 2010, Pages 512–521 Special Issue: Futures
for Multiple Civilizations
Brunk. C (2012) “Shaping a Vision – The
Nature of Peace Studies” ,in Webel, C.
and Johansen, J. (eds.) (2012) Peace and
Conflict Studies: A Reader. London: Francis & Taylor Ltd.
Bryson. N, Mobolurin. A.,
(1997) An action learning evaluation procedure for
multiple criteria decision making problems. European Journal of Operational
Research. Volume 96, Issue 2, 24 January 1997, Pages 379–386
Boulding. K. E.
(1956) General Systems Theory – The Skeleton of Science. Management
Science April 1956 vol. 2 no. 3 197-208
Cotula, L., (2012)
Law at two speeds: Legal frameworks
regulating foreign investment in the global South. Columbia FDI Perspectives. Perspectives on topical foreign
direct investment issues by the Vale Columbia Center on Sustainable
International Investment, No. 73 June 29.
Culpepper, P. D., (2002) Powering, puzzling, and
'pacting': the informational logic of negotiated reforms, Journal of European
Public Policy, 9:5, 774-790
Deutsch, M., (1973) Conflicts: Productive and Destructive. In Conflict
Resolution through communication, edited by F E Jandt. New York: Harper &
Row.
Erikson, Erik H.
(1950). Childhood and Society. New York: Norton,
Erikson, E. H.
(1980). Identity and the life cycle. New York, NY: W W Norton & Co.
Galtung, J., (2012)
A Theory of Peace: Building - Direct, Structural, Cultural Peace. Transcend
University Press.
Hummon. N. P, Fararo. T. J., (1995) The Emergence of Computational
Sociology. The journal of Mathematical Sociology. Vol 20, Issue 2-3. pp 79-87.
Jung. C., (1974) Psychological Types. Princeton University Press.
Princeton. N.J. USA.
Kahneman. D.,
(2003) Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology of Behavioral Economics. The
American Economic Review. Vol 93, No. 5. Pp1449-1475.
Kierkgaard. S.
(2005) Fear and Trembling. 12th Edition. Penguin Books. UK.
Korotkov. K.,
(2008) New Approaches for remote detection of human emotions. Subtle Energies
& Medicine. Vol 19, No.3. pp111-125.
Korotkov. K.,
(2010) Application of Electrphoton Capture (EPC) Analysis Based on Gas
Discharge Visualization (GDV) Technique in Medicine: A systematic review. The
Journal of Alternative and Complimentary Medicine. Vol 16, No.1, pp13-25.
Kuwabara, T.,
Yamaguchi, K., (2013) Self-interaction, interaction with oneself, taking into
account of taking into account. An Introduction to the Sociological
Perspective of Symbolic Interactionism: Revised Edition, Journal of Economics and Sociology, Kagoshima
University, 80, p. 119.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1974). Stress, Appraisal and Coping.
New York: Springer
Landau. L., (1957) On the
conservation laws of weak interactions. Nuclear Physics
Volume 3, Issue 1, March 1957, Pages 127–131. Institute for Physical
Problems, USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow, USSR
Locke, J. (1980) Second Treatise of Government. Indianapolis: Hacket Publishing.
Lopez, J. and Potter, G., (2001) After
Postmodernism: An Introduction to Critical Realism, (London, The Athlone
Press).
Lulofs, R., Cahn, D., (1999) Conflict: From
Theory To Action.
Mead, G, H., (1934.) Mind, Self, and
Society. Ed. by Charles W. Morris. University of Chicago Press. ISBN
978-0-226-51668-4
Mearsheimer, J. (2001) The
Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton.
Chapters 1 & 2 (54 pp.)
McCorquodale, R.
(2010) “The Individual and the International Legal System” in Evans, M. (ed.) International
Law. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 284-310
(27)
Muzuwa, T., Jordaan, A., Viriri, P., (2013) An
Investigation into the prevalent types of conflict, conflict indicators, the
role played by these indicators and how conflict undermines the management of
disasters in Africa. Developing Country Studies ISSN 2224-607X (Paper) ISSN
2225-0565 (Online) Vol.3, No.6, 2013 - URL: www.iiste.org
Accessed 06/10/13
Nash, J. F. (1950). Equilibrium Points in N-Person
Games. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 36 (1): 48–49.
Nietzsche .F, (2003(originally 1961) Thus Spoke
Zarathustra. Penguin Classics. London, UK
Overall, N, C.;
Fletcher, J. O.; Simpson, J, A.; Sibley,
C, G. (2009) Regulating partners in intimate relationships: The costs and
benefits of different communication strategies. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, Vol 96(3), Mar 2009, 620-639. doi: 10.1037/a0012961
Piaget.
J. (1955) The Construction of Reality in the Child. Basic Books. 1st
Edition. UK
Poggi, G. (1978) The Development of the Modern State: A
Sociological Analysis. Stanford
University Press.
US
Patternote, D., Kollman, K., (2013)
Regulating intimate relationships in the European polity: same-sex unions and
policy convergence. International Studies in Gender, State &
Society. Oxford Journal of Social Politics. Oxford University Press.
UK
Rogers, C.R.
(1951a) Client Centred Therapy: its
current practice, implications and theory. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company
Rogers, C.R.
(1951b) On Becoming a Person,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, USA
Rohlf, M., (2010) "Immanuel Kant", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta
(ed.)
Sappio. A, Zamperini. A, (2007) “Peace Psychology:
Theory and Practice” in Webel. C, Galtung. J., (eds) (2007) Handbook of Peace
and Conflict Studies. Routledge. London. UK. Ch.17 pp 265-278
Stephen Walt,
"International Relations: One World, Many Theories," Foreign Policy 110 (Spring 1998),
29-45.
Webel. C, Galtung. J, (2007) Handbook of Peace
& Conflict Studies. Routledge. London, UK.
Wilkin. P., (1997) Noam Chomsky: On Power,
Knowledge & Human nature. Macmillan Press, UK.
APPENDIX
Energic Relation Theory in more depth - Abstract
Sketch
(SOCIOLOGY ANGLE)
Hypotheses: As well as the commonly mentioned Marxist
sphere concerning the means of production within society it is proposed that
there is also a more humanistic sphere constituting the means by which we
relate to one another(social, political, economical). It is suggested that
energic transactions within this relational sphere (meta, micro (people
interacting), mesa, macro (state interactions), mega (global) levels) catalyse
and effect its motion (frequency, vibrations) and collective output through a
flow of exchanges involving energy that manifests into matter and reality as we
know it.
This relational sphere is linked to 2 other
transactionally interacting energic spheres which collectively constitute our
ontology. These are thought to be energically related to one another by way of
larger relational exchanges of energy.......(3 spheres = divine sphere,
production sphere, relations sphere). This energically relational idea can be
paralleled with that of planetary relationships in our solar system in terms of
forces of gravity, mass, density, orbiting patterns etc.
The collective vibrations and frequencies of these
three spheres are determined by there internal dynamics (e.g. like the 'Milieu
Interior' (Claude Bernard, 1865) of the body, internal homeostasis - achieved
through multiple dynamically balancing mechanisms) and also there energic
relations to one another (external homeostasis). Therefore the motion of each
individual sphere is collectively determined by the relational exchanges of
energy occurring within that sphere (for example within the relational sphere -
between people, groups, nations, continents (social, political and economical
relations)) and also simultaneously the nature of its relations with the other
two spheres (for example like Bordieu - habitus & field style relational
exchanges but on an energic level). Naturally then if one sphere is suffering
from an imbalance then the balance of the entire ontology would be compromised.
AIM: To develop methodological capabilities of
energically measuring our current methods of relation. Measuring micro level
relations and the exchanges of energy that occur during a social
interaction at the interpersonal level is the anticipated starting
point...........
For e.g. exchange of frequency and vibrations within
a social interaction via verbal communication.
The more measurements of energy the better e.g.
speech, body temp, brain activity, subtle energies.
It is hoped that developing this methodology will
allow momentary energy signatures of individuals and there relations to be
recorded so that the nature of energy exchanged between individuals via our
means of relation can be better understood.
Achieving this would allow the possibility of
energically measuring social exchanges in terms of peace and conflict to be
analysed. The possibility of measuring likelihood of conflict development at
different levels of interaction.....inter personal, inter state etc.......and
contexts (social, political, economic) would also improve and also the door
could be opened to the possibility of evaluating and analysing the ways in
which we relate to one another on all levels.
Through achieving this analysis and evaluation the
option to reconfigure our mind based realities (Bhaskar, 1998) to move more
harmoniously with the naturally created world would become more of a
possibility and would allow us to move one step closer to constructing a more
sustainable psychological climate in terms of peace on a global level....
More
possible Relational Variables/Components (research angle?):
Information
exchange rate?(openness) Relational bandwidth? (honesty), upload & download
speed (awareness, comprehension, perception exchange, balance, content,
digestibility, receptivity, awareness....) empathy.....?
Components:
additive/formative/generative(+ve) neutral ( ? ) and negative/destructive (-ve)
E.g. generally
acceptance - universal generative component.....of course construction and delivery
shape the component accordingly so awareness is vital When tailoring relational
material that is to be exchanged through the point of interface....
HOME EXAM
SVF-3021
Integrated Peace & Conflict Studies
FALL 2013
CANDIDATE NUMBER -12
Second Essay:
Section 2,
Question 4
1. Describe
the historical background of the Barents Region. In addition, discuss the
Norwegian motives for launching this initiative in 1992.
Candidate Number 12
Please note:
Outcome targeting: In
order to maximise word efficiency particular learning objectives are being
targeted in this essay. These are - Knowledge 1. Analytical Understanding 1, 2
& 3 and Skills & Competencies 2. The remaining outcomes are targeted specifically
using the other question in this exam.
Contents
Introduction
1. History
Norway: The middle, softer child of a
squabbling Northern family?
Russia: The Harder, Big Brother of the
Northern family?
2. Attitudinal & Ideological formulation
Norway’s Attitude to peace…..
3. The Barents Initiative – Motivations
Causes of Conflict: Appraisal Methods – is
the world really a bad place?
4. Concluding Remarks
References
Introduction
The objective of
this essay is to outline the historical background of the Barents Region and
discuss the motives for the launching of this initiative. The essay begins by
looking at the developmental history of Norway and also the largest nation in
the agreement Russia. This is done so that a chronological formulation of their
current psychology (attitudes and ideologies) surrounding peace and conflict
can be perceived more clearly. From these purposely contrasting formulations
the essay then looks at more recent interactions between the two and discusses
why the countries may have agreed to co-operate. The Essay concludes with
discussion of the motivations behind recent political relations between these
two nations and makes links to the Barents Initiative itself and also discusses
related causes of conflict.
1. History
Norway
- The middle, softer child of a squabbling Northern family?
If anything in this
world is to develop and grow it must be served by nourishing relationships
(Rogers, 1951a, 1951b, Wilkins, 1997). In this instance we are talking about
the growth and development of the state (politically) and nation (culturally)
that is Norway. As the explorative but conflict filled power struggle known as
the Viking age came to an end around the year 1030AD, Norway, after being
briefly united with a form of state administration by Harald Fairhair, was
exposed to Christianity while almost at the same time being at war with the
Danish (Stenersen & Libæk, 2003). Not particularly favourable conditions
for any sort of peaceful or stable growth patterns. Throughout the latter half
of the middle-ages, discounting a brief golden age, unclear succession laws,
population expansion, disease (Black Death) and the emergence of the Hanseatic
League, all inhibited Norway from gaining any real control or strength over its
own development as a nation-state and as a result it was forced to concede
power in pretty much all of the important developmental negotiations (e.g.
dominant language, religion, trade agreements) that occurred (Derry, 1968).
From 1523 all the way through to the 1800’s there were ongoing battles between
Sweden, Denmark and Norway further restricting any growth opportunities for
Norway. At this point Norway was so weak as a country that it was effectively
an automatic victim of everything that was happening around it and was still
battling for some degree of control over its own development. The Napoleonic
wars plunged Norway into further crisis but throughout the 1800’s, maybe due to
a union with Sweden, and perhaps funding coming from large numbers of immigrants
in America, state development in Norway did progress in the form of a liberal
constitution (power divisions), national currency and acts enforcing regular
parliamentary sessions (Stenersen & Libæk, 2003). Political institutions in
Norway were starting to emerge at this point. Labour construction projects,
many legal reforms being passed, and language issues being resolved all led to
more and more independence for Norway. A degree of soft power autonomy in a
geopolitical sense it seems was being grasped but as is noted it was not
without suffering.
RUSSIA:
The Harder, Big Brother of the Northern family
It’s no surprise
that Russia’s size as a country historically has been a great advantage. In the
first half of the middle ages (500-1000AD), in comparison to Norway’s smaller
less habitable geography, Russia’s habitable lands seems to have discouraged
large amounts of its population from leaving to explore until around 200 years
after the Viking age in the 1100’s and then more notably in the 1400’s (Novgorodian Karamzin
Annal, 2002). The availability of resources is suggested to have
been one of the early factors that allowed the structural, political,
psychosocial (Erikson, 1950, 1980) and cultural strength of Russia to form. The
unavoidable high rate of trade circulation through these lands seems to have
served to develop a more solid identity for the state organ that became Russia.
Another factor surprisingly seems to be the Mongol invasion in the 1200’s. This
is noted to have impacted Russian development unevenly in terms of population
(Mcevedy & Jones, 1978) and seems to have allowed a productive but Mongol
supported, and possibly soft power (Nye, 1990, 2004), internal rivalry between
cities (Moscow & Tver) to develop through the 1300’s (Curtis, 1998). This
inter-city rivalry between Princes to inherit the cultural and political legacy
of Russia is argued to have been the catalyst for the rise of the autocratic
Tsardom of Russia and then the Russian Empire (Walkin, 1962). The Mongol
invasion is also thought in a more negative sense to have created the
‘east-west gap’ by inhibiting developmental reforms (social, political,
economic) and innovation scientifically by around 200 years (O’ Neill et al,
2006). There is evidence of internal development structurally at this time but
perhaps Russian development was deliberately oppressed by the Mongol rulers in
an attempt to maintain control but it could be argued that it was not squeezed
and controlled enough. Sufficient levels of trade circulation were permitted during
the Mongol rule and do appear to have maintained Russia’s survival and
development with the outside world enough so that internal development of the
state as an organ could occur. Also the timing of this Mongol dominance and
control appears to have insulated Russia from the effects of the Renaissance
and reformation in Western Europe again allowing uninhibited internal growth of
early political institutional organs. After the internal issues with the
Mongols were resolved in the late 1400’s Russia was its own nation again and,
not surprisingly after lots of internal development began to expand rapidly in
an external sense (e.g. state boundaries) (Pipes, 1997). Trade circulation,
between east and west, like a healthy blood supply enabled this large transformational
growth of Russia into a dominant body on the global stage. Expansion east and
west culminated with the conquest of Siberia and military victory over Sweden
and Poland (The Great Northern War 1700-1721) confirming Russia as a major hard
power but perhaps with its developmental roots in soft power attraction.
2. Attitudinal & Ideological formulation
As it can be seen
the unfolding of history and the experiences that are attached to it have a
great deal of developmental influence (Castiglione & Hampsher-Monk, 2001)
when it comes to nation-states socially constructing (Berger & Luckman,
1967 ) there ideologies and attitude’s (Baradat, 2012) towards conflict, peace
and humanity in general.
Unfortunately
Russia’s ideologies and attitudes have been very rigid and aggressive toward
the majority of their international relations resulting in a traumatic and
conflict dominated period throughout the recent past ending in the 1990’s with
the conclusion of the Cold War. The details of this will not be covered in
here, instead we will focus, as the exam question requests, the country of
Norway.
As history would
have it Norway has unavoidably, in a geographical sense, been placed between
and tangled with many nations geopolitically. Some holding great deals of power
and influence at a global level. From a psychosocial relational standpoint
(Erikson, 1950, 1980) there is certainly a case for the impairment of this
countries development throughout its history because of traumatic actions
carried out by other nation’s (Bell, 2006). However it does seem that in recent
times a certain amount of recovery has been occurring and they have been making
positive use of their difficult experiences. In recent times these experiences
have helped them to stabilise relations surrounding there state boundaries
(Riste, 2001) and land distribution which of course is one of the main roles of
the modern state (McLennan et al, 1984). The ‘terra nullius’ or common district
(open space) period along with the ‘Pomor’ period in the 1800’s are good
examples of flexible and stable trade expansion and really helped to cement
long lasting positive relations between Norway and Russia (Nielsen, 1994) but
this does seem to have been where a well-managed (in terms of not generating
conflict) but underlying perceptual distortion of the Russians as a threat
began to emerge. The Foreign Policy developments starting in 1905 allowed the
Isolationist and Neutralist positioning of Norway to emerge (Riste, 2001). Both
these approaches from a developmental perspective were perfect as it allowed
Norway to spend time recovering internally and shifting its psychology and
state infrastructure for example restructuring its perceptions of other states
and economically rebuilding. This would only have been possible by observing
from a distance with detachment.
Critiquing Norway’s
growth from the perspective of developmental psychology it does appear similar
to a vulnerable middle child being consistently exposed at an early age to
unstable/dysfunctional relationships within a family dynamic which in turn
leads to degrees of perceptual distortion (Piaget, 1955). This meaning in terms
of requirements for development, it did not until recently ever really have the
means and opportunities for functional (stable) relationships to take root
politically and economically. It does appear that The Viking age, as a time
when Norwegians were not at home but out exploring foreign lands, could have
reduced their rate of internal development leaving them vulnerable, easily
influenced and disrupted by new ideas such as Christianity. Certainly from a
Jungian, psycho therapeutic perspective, if too much attention is paid to
external matters an imbalance can occur and internal matters can suffer through
neglect (Jung, 1974). Pierre Bordieu and his habitus (structure/agency) ideas
(1977) also stress the importance of the external/internal dialogue and vice
versa being in balance in terms of social exchanges as does Pocock in the
preface to his 1989 text Politics, Language and Time.
These historical
psychosocial factors in a political sense, when combined with awkward geography
in terms of climate (especially the northern half of the country) do seem to
have made development difficult for Norway when trying to gather geopolitical
momentum. It is suggested that these internal external imbalances could have
been the trigger for the perceptual distortion by Norway over Russia’s
activities during the 1800’s (Pomor Trade period). However the isolationist and
neutral approaches that emerged did serve Norway recovery time from these
struggles but as we know only so much can be gained from detached observation.
The time for Norway to actively enter the international political scene did
arrive with the outbreak of World War two. To their credit, and also perhaps
because of their position geographically, Norway’s approach was to encourage
more ‘civilised ways of settling disputes for example making use of
international law and open dialogue (Vambheim, 2011)
Norway’s ability to
sit back and observe through neutral isolation does appear to have served as
impetus for internal recovery and also fusion of past experiences with the
development of new approaches when negotiating internationally. Norway’s
intelligence when managing alliances with western nations and at the same time
not aggravating Eastern relations with Russia throughout the last century has
been admirable. Through very subtle terms of negotiations such as the
importance of common defence through common planning (The 1949 North Atlantic
Treaty) which seemingly encouraged a balance between self and others when
making decisions Norway did successfully chart a course through the very
difficult times after the second world war and throughout the Cold War. Other
examples were the ‘No-Go’ NATO area which successfully calmed Russian concerns
over rising Western threats of invasion and also the very astute management of
the Norwegian Intelligent Service. This was funded by Western powers but
strictly operated by Norwegian personnel. Again this delicate measure regarding
NIS staff simultaneously generated trust and loyalty with the Western allies
and still maintained degrees of stability with Russian relations (Riste, 2001).
These challenging
experiences have served to move Norway forward and to help develop an admirable
attitudinal approach when negotiating on an international level. This
experience and maturity does appear to now be allowing steady development and
maintenance of more nourishing relational exchanges to occur.
Norway’s
Attitude to peace…..
History shows that
the interactions (Mead, 1934) and political exchanges between bodies at all
levels (inter personal, inter group, inter-state) are the fuel for the mind
based processes of perception (Bhaskar, 1997) as was briefly discussed with the
distorted perceptions of Russia by Norway. Crucially it is these fragile
formulations of reality through processes of attribution (Gordon & Graham,
2006), appraisal (Lazarus & Folkman, 1974), decision making (Doya & Shadlen, 2012) and framing (Goffman, 1974)
among other things that can allow divisive dispositional layers to form within
personalities. Seemingly it is these divisive elements of an identity that may,
through choice, lead to the development of destructive friction generating
mechanisms for interpreting reality. As we have seen throughout history when
these types of authoritarian personalities have emerged within individuals
(Hitler, Stalin) it has allowed conflict to bubble and boil spilling over into
violence, aggression and large amounts of suffering (Cohrs et al, 2011).
As Wolfenstein
encourages our understanding of people, there groups, there associated
nation-states and the entwined political relations, must be achieved only
through the use of many different approaches. If we do not understand people
properly we cannot hope to adequately understand political processes. There is
always the urge to relate (be political) within all of us and so logically
there are very often personal motivations behind political actions
(Wolfenstein, 1969).
It would appear at
this point than that attitudes and ideologies of entire nations come from
single individuals and there relational exchanges with themselves and their
societies. And amazingly it appears that these formulations and constructions
of reality through an individual’s perceptual choices can if allowed determine
how an entire nation relates to the rest of the world. Can it really be that
simple?
It is difficult to
believe that the world in terms of the modern global order and all of its
relating parts rest simply upon the political attitudes and ideas of
individuals but if this is the case than the people in these representative
positions hopefully are extremely aware of the perceptual mind based interfaces
(Bhaskar, 1997) they are constructing when engaging with one other. It is perhaps an obvious point but when
representing so many on the international political stage the means by which we
relate interpersonally, for example the construction and use of language
(Wilkin, 1997; Pocock, 1985) when engaging becomes vitally important.
Communication after all is the blood flow and main circulatory carrier in the
form of words for the exchange of all that we express from within be it with
ideas, energy, opinions, thoughts, behaviours, moods or beliefs.
It is suggested
then that nations, simply because they are ultimately represented by
individuals meeting on interpersonal level, also crave the same main thing that
individuals do when engaging with one another politically, namely a feeling of
safety/security. Feeling understood on an individual level is known to be a way
of helping people to feel safe peaceful and secure when engaging. Carl Rogers,
the humanistic and influential psychotherapist insists that empathising
(placing yourself in the other person shoes) with others, through considering
their needs, is one of the three core conditions of any functional
relationship, the other two being, congruence and positive regard (Rogers,
1951a; 1951b).
It is when people
feel insecure and unsafe that stress, a product of the individual and physical,
psychosocial environment interacting with one another (Mason, 1975), triggers
the need to take control of things. Usually, at least on an individual level,
taking control of things tends to happen through methods of manipulation, more
commonly aggressive and violent ones but interestingly this pattern also
appears to happen on an international and political level (TSEBELIS &
PROKSCH, 2007).
3. The Barents Initiative - Motivations
So admittedly than
then from a rather reductionist perspective (ref) the need for nation-states to
feel safe and secure is suggested to have been the main motivations for the
agreement of the Barents Region Initiative in 1993. This suggestion is an
obvious one given the position of Russia after the cold war and also the
expanding position through confidence of Norway as an evolving soft power on
the international scene. Of course there is much more elaborate discussion on
the many other political and economic motives for this initiative but what is
not so obvious is where the insecurity is coming from. Where is this underlying
insecurity in nations coming from that triggers conflict, aggression, violence
and war.
Causes
of Conflict: Appraisal Methods – is the world really a bad place?
The reason why we
are asking this question of course links to the nature and causes of conflict
themselves. It is when people, who represent nations, feel insecure that
problems start to occur. It is when we perceive that things are out of our
control and that they pose a threat to us that the need arises for us to remedy
this and take control of things. Once we feel we have control of things
feelings of safety usually emerge again. Unfortunately the easiest and most
commonly used method for gaining control over things on all levels
(interpersonal, inter group, inter-state) right now does still seem to be
through the use of violence and aggression. Clearly self-interest, through
motives for self-preservation, dominate in these cases and the individual,
group or particular nation-state, through escalating levels of insecurity and
fear gaining control with everything else being disregarded.
Of course where
self-interest is dominating there will be an imbalance and imbalance is from
the perspective of health known as disease. Relational exchanges dominated by
self-interest from personal experience are very rarely a source of nourishment
or health. Self-interest from the perspective of psychology is commonly linked
to the mind and a part of the mind known as the Ego. Eckhart Tolle the
spiritual author speaks of the ego as the dominant configuration of the mind
which nearly all of society uses without question. He also views the mind as a
very useful instrument but one that can be used in many different ways (Tolle,
2001 ).
Norway’s acts of
self-imposed restrictions and occupying a position of neutrality (Riste, 2001)
over the last 100 years are suggested as different, more balanced and healthy
ways for the collective mind of a nation when approaching international
relations. When compared to other nations it could be said that the collective
mind of Norway has been employed in a slightly different way when speaking of
foreign policy and international relations. Certainly they have been a lot
softer and more peaceful than nations such as Germany, Russia and the United
States. It is suggested that Norway’s psychological motion has been less ego
driven and self-interested and more concerned with the bigger picture and
welfare of other nations over recent times. When looking back over the actions
of Norway particularly through the 1900’s the common good through co-operation
does appear to have been an underlying theme (Riste, 2001; Nielsen, 1994).
In terms of game
theory and solutions concepts the actions of Norway again appear to have been
moving them towards a state of Nash equilibrium in the sense that they have
been making the best decision they can while at the same time taking into
account the decisions of all others involved (Osborne et al, 1994)). The more
aggressive decisions and consequent actions of other nations (Russia, Germany,
United States) seem to have come about through the best decisions being made
for themselves but not by necessarily taking into account the decisions of
others. This then would place them further away from a point of equilibrium and
closer to state of imbalance or ill health.
Gandhi’s ideas and
philosophy on how to relate to others are also relevant here. He talked about a
soul force or insistence upon truth (Satyagraha) and this can also be applied
at this stage in the sense that the purest form of truth in terms of choosing
correctly how to act in any situation is the choice that best serves the self
and also all others that are involved, that is at least according to Buddhist
methods (Sangharakshita, 2007). It is
suggested that by acting in this way with right action and right intention as
the Buddhists call it, a form of structure and agency style (internal/external)
balance in terms of relational exchanges individually and in terms of the nation
state (political, economic and social) can be found that benefits the many
instead of the few. It is possibly that this pursuit of balance and peace has
been the main motive for Norwegian actions in foreign relations throughout the
1900’s and so also the setting up the Barents region initiative.
4. Concluding Remarks:
In summary then it
is Norway’s difficult history and experience that is suggested to have revealed
to them the importance of balanced exchanges and also the very real dangers of
getting it wrong. Other countries also seem to be learning these ‘soft power’ style
lessons now such as Germany, as a result of world war two and Russia since the
disasters of the cold war. This history it seems is now enabling Norway to act
efficiently and with the skill necessary to avoid internal and external
imbalance as a nation-state. Norway’s recent acquisition of oil resources and
the decision to create a fund for the future of its people is suggested as yet
another example of a very considerate, balanced way of decision making as to
how best use this fortunate acquisition of resources.
People and
countries all over the world need hope and motivation, they need things to hold
onto and inspire them in the battles against violence, aggression and war.
Actions that reduce levels of fear and insecurity on all levels in the world and
help to make it a more stable and habitable place cannot be a bad thing and
Norway does appear to be at least one country that is wishing for that to
happen. Perhaps Norway could be one of the first nations to be starting to
exist and progress while keeping their own interests and others in a degree of
healthy equilibrium. It is hoped that if more nations follow this path it just
might be the evolutionary path that the flowers of peace begin to start growing
on. For us to get anywhere near a state of peace it does seems that relations
on all levels, but in this case between countries must be as balanced and
symmetrical as possible in terms of respect, power, economic trade and trust.
Norway as this essay suggests do appear, on the surface at least, to be very
good at this right now. The global does not now seem to be about power,
dominance and success. Things seem to be shifting. In conclusion as the Dalai
Lama rightly said
‘The planet does not need more successful
people. The planet desperately needs more peacemakers, healers, restorers,
storytellers and lovers of all kind.’
(Dalai Lama)
(Word Count – 3882)
References
Baradat. L, P.,
(2012) Political Ideologies: Their Origins & Impact. 11th
Edition. Pearson Education.
Bell. D., (2006)
Memory, Trauma and World Politics: Reflections on the relationship between past
and present. Palgrave Macmillan.
Berger, P.,
Luckmann.,T (1967) The Social Construction of Reality : A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge. Anchor Publishing - ISBN 0-385-05898-5.
Bhaskar, R.A., 1997
[1975], A Realist Theory of Science, London: Verso. ISBN 1-85984-103-1
Bourdieu, P.
(1977), Outline of a Theory of
Practice, Cambridge University Press: London.
Castiglione. D, Hampsher-Monk. I. (2001) The History of Political
Thought in National Context. Cambridge University Press. UK.
Cohrs. J. C, Petzel. T, Funke. F, (2011) “Authoritarian Personality” in
Christie. D. J., (2011) The Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology. Wiley- Blackwell.
Curtis. G, E (1998) Russia: A Country Study, Department of the
Army. ISBN 0-16-061212-8.
Derry, T.K. (1968) A Short History of Norway (George
Allen and Unwin, 1968 edition).
Doya. K, Shadlen M. N. (2012). "Decision Making". Current
Opinion in Neurobiology 22 (6): 911–913.
Erikson, Erik H.
(1950). Childhood and Society. New York: Norton,
Erikson, E. H.
(1980). Identity and the life cycle. New York, NY: W W Norton & Co.
Goffman, E. (1974).
Frame Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Gordon, L. M.,
& Graham, S. (2006). Attribution theory. "The encyclopedia of human
development." Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1, 142–144.
Jung. C., (1974) Psychological Types. Princeton University Press.
Princeton. N.J. USA.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1974). Stress, Appraisal and Coping.
New York: Springer.
Mason, J. W.
(1975). A historical view of the stress
field. Journal of Human Stresses, 1, 6-27
Mead, G, H., (1934.) Mind, Self, and
Society. Ed. by Charles W. Morris. University of Chicago Press. ISBN
978-0-226-51668-4Mcevedy.
C, Jones. R. M., (1978) Atlas of World Population History (Hist Atlas). Puffin
Publishing. UK.
McLennan. G, Held. D, Hall. S, (1984) The Idea of
the Modern State. Open University Press.
Philadelphia. USA.
Nielsen, J. (1994) “The Barents region in
Historical Perspective”, in Stokke, O. and Tunander, O. (eds.) The Barents
Region: Cooperation in Arctic Europe. London: Sage Publications. Pp87-100
Novgorodian Karamzin Annal. (2002) The Full
Collection of the Rissian Annals. Vol.22. St. Petersburg.
Nye.
J., (1990) Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American power. Harper Collins
Publishers. Canada.
Nye.
J., (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs.
O'Neill,
P, H., Fields. K, Share. D., (2006). Cases in Comparative Politics. New
York: Norton. pp. 197–198. ISBN 978-0-393-92943-0.
Osborne,
Martin J., and Ariel Rubinstein. A Course in Game Theory. Cambridge, MA:
MIT, 1994. Print.
Piaget.
J. (1955) The Construction of Reality in the Child. Basic Books. 1st
Edition. UK
Pipes.
R., (1997) Russia under the Old Regime: Second edition. Penguin Books.
Pocock.
J. G. A., (1985) Virtue, Commerce, and History: Essays on Political Thought and
History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge University Press. UK
Pocock.
J. G. A., (1989) Politics, Language and Time. 2nd Edition.
University of Chicago Press.
Riste.
O., (2001) Norway's Foreign Relations: A History. Universitetsforlaget Oslo
Rogers, C.R.
(1951a) Client Centred Therapy: its
current practice, implications and theory. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company
Rogers, C.R.
(1951b) On Becoming a Person,
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, USA
Sangharakshita
(2007) The Buddha's Noble Eightfold Path, Windhorse Publications. ISBN
1-899579-81-8
Stenersen, Ø; Libæk, I., (2003). The
History of Norway (in Norwegian). Lysaker: Forlaget Historie og Kultur.
ISBN 82-8071-040-8.
TSEBELIS, G. and
PROKSCH, S.-O. (2007). The Art of Political Manipulation in the European
Convention. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 45: 157–186.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.2007.00707.x
Tolle, E., (2001) The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enligtenment.
Hodder paperbacks.
Vambheim, V. (2011) War on Terror – or Dialogue? Security Dialogues Vol
3, pp. 19-38. Skjope: Faculty of Law and Philosophy, University of Skopje.
Walkin, J., (1962) The Rise of Democracy in Pre-Revolutionary Russia:
Political and Social Institutions under the Last Three Czars, Praeger.
Wilkin. P., (1997) Noam Chomsky: On Power,
Knowledge & Human nature. Macmillan Press, UK.
