Stoicism: Unveiling the Elusive Path to Peace (Part 2)


Prof Hoosen Vawda – TRANSCEND Media Service

Parental guidance is recommended for minors.

Zeno’s Stoicism, Aurelius’ Foresight, Renatus’ Strategic Wisdom, and Galtung’s Positive Peace: The Collective Foundation and Pillars Upholding Peace

“The present global situation, in the 21st century, regarding sustainable Peace is so precarious that Humanity needs to interweave peace proposals from different eras to ensure the eradication of global belligerence.” [1]

“The less a man is acquainted with the sweets of life, the less reason he has to be afraid of death.”
— Vegetius Renatus [2]

After Tsar Nicholas II and his family were executed by Bolshevik revolutionaries early on the morning of July 17, 1918, a collection of the royal family’s personal photographs was smuggled out of Russia. The albums offer a haunting glimpse into the life of a family destined for tragedy.
Photograph 15 of 28: The Custodian of the Future Tsar, Klementy Nagorny (right) was also tasked with looking after Tsarevich Aleksei (second from right on trolley). After the 1917 revolution, Nagorny joined the royal family in captivity despite knowing it was likely he would be killed. While imprisoned with the Romanovs, he intervened to stop a Bolshevik guard from stealing Aleksei’s gold chain and was shot a few days later, not afraid to die, as a virtuous royal servant.
Photo credit: Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University

1 Jul 2023 – This paper, the second part in the series on “Pillars of Peace” discusses the philosophies of “Peace Propagation” from antiquity to the 21st century, as academically and scientifically documented by the “Big Four” of the Peace movement globally.  Th paper analyses the philosophies in an integrated manner to present a holistic proposal based on the theories, of the ancient, Greek founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Citium, a Roman Emperor, Marcus Aurelius,  a Roman General Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus’s in his seminal work, “Epitoma Rei Militaris,” and last but not the least, making up the “Big Four”, is the 21st century protagonist, Professor Johan Galtung, the Norwegian pioneer of peace research, who first introduced into academic literature the concept of peace.

To begin with, what is the definition of Peace?  Peace can be defined in a holistic, practical, and comprehensive manner as follows:

  1. Absence of Violence: Peace entails the absence of physical violence, coercion, and aggression. It is a state where individuals and communities are free from direct harm and can live without fear of bodily harm or destruction.
  2. Harmony and Well-being: Peace goes beyond the absence of violence and encompasses harmony, well-being, and the fulfilment of basic human needs. It involves social, economic, and political conditions that promote equality, justice, and dignity for all individuals.
  3. Conflict Resolution: Peace involves the constructive and nonviolent resolution of conflicts. It emphasizes dialogue, negotiation, and mediation to address disputes, differences, and tensions between individuals, groups, or nations. It encourages finding common ground and mutually acceptable solutions.
  4. Mutual Respect and Understanding: Peace is fostered through mutual respect, empathy, and understanding between individuals and communities. It acknowledges and values the diversity of identities, cultures, and beliefs, promoting tolerance and appreciation for differences.
  5. Social Justice and Equality: Peace is closely linked to social justice and equality. It requires fair distribution of resources, equal opportunities, and the protection of human rights. It aims to address systemic injustices, discrimination, and marginalization, ensuring that all members of society can thrive and participate fully.
  6. Sustainable Development: Peace is interconnected with sustainable development. It recognizes the interdependence between social, economic, and environmental well-being. It promotes responsible and inclusive governance, environmental stewardship, and equitable access to resources for present and future generations.
  7. Positive Relationships: Peace is built on positive relationships, trust, and cooperation between individuals, communities, and nations. It involves building bridges, fostering empathy, and nurturing a sense of shared humanity. It encourages collaboration, dialogue, and collective action for the greater good.
  8. Inner Peace and Personal Transformation: Peace encompasses inner peace and personal transformation. It involves cultivating a sense of inner calm, resilience, and emotional well-being. It recognizes the interconnectedness of individual well-being and the broader peace in society.
  9. Sustainable Peacebuilding: Peace requires sustained efforts in peacebuilding and reconciliation. It involves addressing root causes of conflicts, healing wounds, and transforming societal structures and attitudes that perpetuate violence. It prioritizes long-term strategies for preventing conflicts and creating resilient societies.
  10. Global Peace: Peace extends beyond local and national contexts and aspires to global peace. It promotes cooperation, dialogue, and collective action on shared challenges such as poverty, inequality, climate change, and human rights violations. It recognizes that peace is a collective responsibility that transcends borders.

Essentially, peace encompasses the absence of violence, the promotion of harmony and well-being, conflict resolution, mutual respect and understanding, social justice and equality, sustainable development, positive relationships, inner peace, personal transformation, sustainable peacebuilding, and global peace. It is a multifaceted concept that requires comprehensive and interconnected efforts at individual, community, national, and global levels. While the absence of war is often considered a crucial component of peace, peace goes beyond merely the absence of war. Peace encompasses various dimensions, including social, political, economic, and cultural aspects that foster harmony, justice, and well-being. It involves addressing the root causes of conflict, promoting reconciliation, and building sustainable relationships.

However, it is important to note that war and peace can coexist in different ways:

  1. Negative Peace: Negative peace refers to the absence of direct violence and armed conflict. In this sense, war and peace are seen as mutually exclusive. Negative peace focuses on the cessation of hostilities, but it may not address underlying grievances or structural issues that can lead to renewed conflicts.
  2. Positive Peace: Positive peace goes beyond the absence of war and aims to create a just and equitable society. It involves addressing root causes of conflict, promoting social cohesion, and fostering sustainable development. Positive peace seeks to build peaceful relationships, resolve conflicts nonviolently, and establish institutions that uphold justice and human rights.
  3. Peacebuilding Amid Ongoing Conflicts: Even in the midst of ongoing conflicts, efforts can be made to mitigate violence, protect vulnerable populations, and promote dialogue and negotiation. Peacebuilding initiatives seek to address grievances, build trust, and lay the foundations for sustainable peace, even if the conflict itself has not ended.
  4. Transitional Phases: In some cases, conflicts may transition from open warfare to periods of relative calm or ceasefires. These transitional phases provide opportunities for peacebuilding, negotiations, and the resolution of underlying issues. While the conflict may not be fully resolved, efforts can be made to consolidate peace and work towards long-term solutions.

It is necessary to recognise that achieving sustainable peace requires more than the absence of war. It involves addressing deep-rooted structural issues, promoting justice and equality, fostering dialogue and reconciliation, and building resilient societies. While war and peace are not inherently compatible, efforts can be made to transition from conflict to peace and to build the conditions necessary for lasting peace to prevail.

While the author has written extensively on each of the “Peace, Big Four”[3],[4],[5] protagonists, it is necessary to summarise the main aspects of each of their academic contributions to peace and harmony, based on a solid foundation of virtue.

The Big Four of Peace Propagation from antiquity to the present era, who documented Peace initiatives, from left to right: Busts of Zeno of Citium, Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius, Roman General Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus and photograph of Professor Johan Galtung, the current Peace Academic and Researcher

It is also relevant to present the chronological order of the appearances of the “Big Four of Peace”

  1. Zeno of Elea (c. 490-430 BCE)[6]
  2. Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus 26 April 121 – 17 March 180 AD)[7]
  3. Roman General Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus C.365 – 450 AD[8]
  4. Professor Jahan Galtung 24th October 1930 [9]

The pursuit of Peace for humanity, is an elusive odyssey[10].  Achieving sustainable peace on a global scale is a complex and ongoing challenge that has proven to be difficult throughout history. Conflicts, tensions, and various factors that disrupt peace are deeply rooted in societal, political, economic, and cultural dimensions. This makes the path to peace a complex and ever-evolving journey.

While individuals, organisations, and societies strive for peace, it often remains elusive due to the intricate nature of conflicts and the diverse interests and perspectives involved. Peace requires addressing deep-rooted issues, resolving conflicts, promoting justice, fostering understanding, and nurturing harmonious relationships among individuals and nations. It necessitates continuous efforts, cooperation, and a willingness to engage in dialogue and peaceful negotiations.

Despite the challenges and setbacks, the pursuit of peace remains a fundamental and noble endeavour. It is an ongoing process that requires collective action, the commitment of individuals and communities, and the cultivation of a culture of peace. While it may be elusive, the pursuit of peace is crucial for the well-being, progress, and coexistence of humanity, making it a worthwhile and essential odyssey to embark upon.

The elusiveness of peace[11] throughout history from the time of Zeno through to Galtung, with conflicts eternally repeating themselves in history, can be attributed to a combination of complex factors and inherent challenges within human societies. Here are some key reasons why peace remains elusive:

  1. Human Nature[12]: Conflict is deeply ingrained in human nature, and factors such as greed, power struggles, fear, and differing ideologies contribute to tensions and conflicts. It is challenging to overcome these inherent aspects of human behavior and achieve lasting peace.
  2. Power Dynamics: Power imbalances and inequalities often lead to conflicts. Dominant groups or nations may seek to maintain their advantage, resulting in oppression, aggression, or exploitation. Achieving a more equitable distribution of power and resources is essential for sustainable peace.
  3. Interests and Perspectives: Conflicting interests, ideologies, and worldviews create divergent perspectives that can lead to disagreements and conflicts. Different groups may have competing priorities and visions for society, making it challenging to find common ground and work towards peace.
  4. Historical Grievances: Lingering historical grievances, unresolved conflicts, and cycles of violence can create a legacy of mistrust and animosity. Past injustices and wounds can make it difficult to build lasting peace without addressing the root causes and promoting reconciliation.
  5. Global Interconnectedness: In an increasingly interconnected world, conflicts can spread across borders and have far-reaching consequences. Economic, political, and social issues in one region can impact global stability, making it challenging to address conflicts in isolation.
  6. Structural and Systemic Issues: Structural inequalities, economic disparities, governance failures, and social injustices contribute to conflict. Addressing these underlying structural issues is necessary for achieving sustainable peace.
  7. Lack of Effective Peacebuilding Strategies: The absence of comprehensive and effective peacebuilding strategies can hinder efforts to resolve conflicts and build sustainable peace. It requires a multi-dimensional approach that addresses the root causes, promotes reconciliation, fosters dialogue, and ensures justice and equality.

While peace may seem elusive, it is important to recognize the progress that has been made throughout history. Efforts by individuals, communities, organizations, and nations have resulted in the resolution of conflicts, the promotion of human rights, and the advancement of peace. Continued dedication, learning from past mistakes, and implementing effective strategies are vital for creating a more peaceful world.  High level partnerships are recommended to ensure sustainable peace at all levels.

Johan Galtung is a Norwegian sociologist and mathematician who is widely recognised for his contributions to peace studies and conflict resolution. He has developed several frameworks and theories to understand the nature of peace and how it can be achieved. One of his notable contributions is the concept of “negative” and “positive” peace.

According to Galtung, negative peace refers to the absence of direct violence or overt conflict. It is essentially a state of calm achieved through the absence of physical harm, such as the absence of war or open violence. Negative peace can be seen as a form of passive peace where conflicts may still exist but are temporarily suppressed or managed. However, Galtung argues that this absence of violence does not necessarily indicate a true and lasting peace.

Galtung[13] proposes the concept of positive peace, which goes beyond the absence of violence and seeks to address the root causes of conflicts. Positive peace involves addressing structural violence, which refers to social, political, and economic systems that result in inequalities, oppression, and injustice. Galtung argues that true peace can only be achieved by transforming these underlying structures and creating a more just and equitable society.

Galtung further identifies three key components for achieving positive peace, which he refers to as the “triadic structure of peace”:

  1. Peacekeeping: This component focuses on preventing direct violence and maintaining a state of negative peace. It involves activities such as mediation, negotiation, and the use of diplomacy to prevent or mitigate conflicts.
  2. Peacemaking: Peacemaking involves addressing the underlying causes of conflicts and working towards reconciliation. This component emphasizes the importance of addressing grievances, promoting dialogue, and finding sustainable solutions to disputes.
  3. Peacebuilding: Peacebuilding aims to create the necessary conditions for long-term peace by addressing the root causes of violence and establishing structures that promote social justice, equality, and cooperation. It involves activities such as poverty reduction, education, human rights advocacy, and democratic governance.

Galtung’s theory of peace emphasises the need to go beyond the absence of violence and actively address the structural and systemic factors that perpetuate conflicts. By focusing on positive peace and the transformation of social structures, Galtung argues that it is possible to build a more peaceful and just society.

Johan Galtung’s peace theory has influenced various initiatives and approaches aimed at promoting both negative peace and positive peace globally. Some of the practical examples are:

  1. Conflict Mediation: Galtung’s emphasis on peacekeeping and peacemaking has influenced the field of conflict mediation. Mediators often draw on his ideas to facilitate dialogue, negotiation, and reconciliation between conflicting parties. For instance, the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, which aimed to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, involved mediation and negotiation processes inspired by Galtung’s principles.
  2. Transitional Justice: Transitional justice mechanisms, such as truth and reconciliation commissions, have been implemented in countries transitioning from periods of conflict or authoritarian rule. These mechanisms aim to address past human rights abuses, promote accountability, and foster reconciliation. Galtung’s concepts of peacemaking and peacebuilding have informed the design and implementation of these initiatives. Examples include the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and the Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation Commission in Kenya.
  3. Peace Education: Galtung’s ideas have influenced the field of peace education, which seeks to promote a culture of peace through formal and informal learning. Peace education initiatives incorporate Galtung’s theories and emphasize the importance of teaching conflict resolution skills, fostering empathy, and promoting nonviolent communication. Organizations like the Peace Education Center at Teachers College, Columbia University, and the Peace Education Initiative by UNESCO are working to integrate peace education into school curricula worldwide.
  4. Sustainable Development: Galtung’s theory of positive peace aligns with the principles of sustainable development, which aim to address social, economic, and environmental challenges. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) incorporate Galtung’s holistic approach by addressing poverty, inequality, access to education and healthcare, environmental sustainability, and peaceful societies. The SDGs provide a practical framework for implementing Galtung’s ideas on peacebuilding and transforming social structures.
  5. Nonviolent Resistance Movements: Galtung’s work has also influenced nonviolent resistance movements around the world. Movements like Mahatma Gandhi’s Satyagraha in India and the Civil Rights Movement in the United States drew on Galtung’s principles of addressing structural violence and challenging oppressive systems through nonviolent means. These movements have showcased the power of nonviolent action in achieving social and political change.

These examples illustrate how Galtung’s theory of peace has been put into practice across various contexts, influencing policies, initiatives, and movements aimed at promoting both negative peace and positive peace.

Johan Galtung’s Peace Theory has both positive aspects and some potential shortcomings. It is necessary to discuss these aspects in some detail:

The Positive Aspects are:

  1. Holistic Approach: Galtung’s theory takes a holistic approach to peace, going beyond the absence of violence and focusing on addressing the underlying causes of conflicts. It emphasizes the importance of addressing structural violence, inequalities, and injustices, aiming for long-term and sustainable peace.
  2. Transformational Perspective: Galtung’s theory emphasizes the need for transformative change in social structures and systems to achieve true peace. By addressing root causes and promoting social justice, Galtung highlights the potential for creating more equitable and peaceful societies.
  3. Emphasis on Peacebuilding: Galtung’s theory recognizes the significance of peacebuilding, which involves creating conditions and institutions that foster peaceful relations. It emphasizes activities like poverty reduction, education, and democratic governance as essential for building and sustaining peace.
  4. Influential Framework: Galtung’s concepts and frameworks have had a significant impact on the fields of peace studies, conflict resolution, and peacebuilding. His ideas have shaped the understanding and practices of mediation, conflict resolution, and peace education worldwide.

The possible Shortcomings are:

  1. Lack of Concrete Strategies: One criticism of Galtung’s theory is that it lacks specific, actionable strategies for achieving peace. While the theory provides a conceptual framework, it may be less helpful in offering practical guidance on how to address complex and deeply rooted conflicts, such as the genocide and ethnic cleansing in Palestine by Israel, which has systematically increased in 2023, with Palestinian lands being regularly expropriated by the illegal Israeli settlers. The Palestinians are regularly harassed by the Israelis with increasing impunity, knowing that they have the total support of Netanyahu’s government and approval from the collective West.
  2. Simplification of Conflict Dynamics: Some critics argue that Galtung’s theory oversimplifies the dynamics of conflicts by focusing primarily on structural violence and systemic factors. It may not sufficiently account for the complexities of individual, cultural, and historical factors that contribute to conflicts.
  3. Limited Attention to Security Concerns: Galtung’s theory tends to prioritise social and economic justice, sometimes at the expense of addressing security concerns. Critics argue that it may not adequately address the legitimate need for security measures in certain contexts, especially when immediate violence and threats exist.
  4. Western-centric Bias: Another critique is that Galtung’s theory may have a Western-centric bias, as it emerged primarily from the experiences and contexts of Western societies. Some argue that its applicability to non-Western contexts and diverse cultural settings may be limited, and alternative perspectives and theories should be considered, for indigenous population in Africa and First Nations in Western Countries.
  5. Practical Implementation Challenges: Implementing Galtung’s theory in practice can be challenging due to resistance from entrenched power structures, political complexities, and competing interests. Transforming deeply rooted inequalities and social structures requires sustained efforts and collaboration, which can be difficult to achieve in practice.

While Galtung’s theory has certain limitations, it has also served as a valuable foundation for further research, critical discussions, and practical initiatives aimed at promoting peace and justice globally, without any doubt.

While Galtung’s recommended strategies for achieving peace have been influential and widely discussed, it is important to note that their success or failure is context-dependent and influenced by various factors. Here are a few examples where Galtung’s strategies may not have achieved the desired goals:

  1. Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Galtung’s emphasis on peacebuilding and addressing structural violence has faced challenges in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Despite efforts to promote dialogue, negotiation, and reconciliation, a lasting peace agreement has not been achieved. The deep-rooted historical, political, and religious complexities of the conflict, as well as competing nationalistic narratives and interests, have hindered the implementation of Galtung’s strategies.
  2. Post-Conflict Reconstruction in Afghanistan: Following the U.S.-led intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, efforts were made to implement peacebuilding and development strategies. However, despite substantial investments in infrastructure, education, and governance, the desired goals of sustainable peace and stability have not been fully realized. Factors such as ongoing violence, corruption, and the resurgence of the Taliban have limited the effectiveness of Galtung’s recommended strategies in this context.
  3. South Sudan: South Sudan gained independence from Sudan in 2011 after decades of civil war. However, despite peace agreements and international support for peacebuilding efforts, the country descended into a violent civil war in 2013. Galtung’s strategies faced challenges due to political rivalries, ethnic tensions, weak governance structures, and competition over resources, which hindered the establishment of lasting peace.
  4. Colombian Peace Process: While the Colombian peace process with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebel group resulted in a peace agreement in 2016, challenges have emerged in its implementation. Galtung’s strategies of addressing structural violence and promoting peacebuilding faced obstacles due to the reemergence of armed groups, political divisions, socioeconomic inequalities, and difficulties in reintegrating former combatants into society.
  5. Rohingya Crisis: The Rohingya crisis in Myanmar, characterized by ethnic violence and persecution, has proven challenging for Galtung’s strategies. Efforts to address structural violence, promote peacebuilding, and ensure justice for the Rohingya minority have faced significant obstacles due to deep-rooted discriminatory policies, historical tensions, and complex political dynamics within Myanmar.

The reasons for the limitations and drawbacks of Galtung’s strategies in these examples are multifaceted and context-specific. Factors such as deep-rooted historical conflicts, competing interests, power imbalances, lack of political will, ethnic and religious tensions, and challenges in implementing comprehensive peace agreements can contribute to the failure of strategies inspired by Galtung’s theory. Additionally, external factors such as geopolitical dynamics, limited resources, and the involvement of non-state actors can further complicate the implementation process.

While the successful implementation of Galtung’s strategies for resolving conflicts and establishing positive peace can vary depending on the context, there are examples where his principles have had positive outcomes. Here are a few concrete field examples:

  1. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC): The TRC, established in the aftermath of apartheid, aimed to address past human rights abuses and promote reconciliation. It drew on Galtung’s ideas by providing a platform for victims and perpetrators to share their stories, acknowledge wrongdoing, and work towards healing and forgiveness. While the TRC was not without its flaws, it played a crucial role in promoting understanding and fostering a sense of justice and reconciliation in South Africa.
  2. Northern Ireland Peace Process: Galtung’s concepts of peacebuilding and addressing structural violence were instrumental in the peace process in Northern Ireland. The Good Friday Agreement of 1998, which helped bring an end to the decades-long conflict between Catholic and Protestant communities, incorporated principles of power-sharing, respect for human rights, and addressing socioeconomic inequalities. While the process remains ongoing, the peace agreement significantly reduced violence and improved intercommunity relations.
  3. The Philippines’ Bangsamoro Peace Process: The Bangsamoro peace process in the Philippines aimed to resolve the long-standing conflict between the government and Muslim rebel groups in Mindanao. Galtung’s ideas of peacemaking and peacebuilding were central to the negotiations and the resulting Comprehensive Agreement on Bangsamoro in 2014. The agreement established an autonomous region with self-governance for the Bangsamoro people, addressing historical grievances and promoting peace and development.
  4. Community-Based Peacebuilding Initiatives: Galtung’s principles have been applied in various community-based peacebuilding initiatives globally. For example, in Sierra Leone, after a brutal civil war, community-based peace and reconciliation programs, inspired by Galtung’s ideas, played a significant role in healing and reintegrating former combatants into society. These initiatives focused on trauma healing, conflict resolution, and socioeconomic development, contributing to a more stable and peaceful post-conflict environment.
  5. Indigenous Peacemaking Practices: Galtung’s ideas find some resonance in indigenous peacemaking practices worldwide, although the foundation is analytically Eurocentric or more collectively “Westcentric”. Indigenous communities often have their own traditional conflict resolution mechanisms that prioritize restorative justice, community engagement, and holistic approaches to peace. Examples include the Navajo peacemaking courts in the United States and the Gacaca courts in Rwanda, which sought to reconcile communities affected by the genocide. These indigenous approaches align with Galtung’s emphasis on addressing underlying causes and promoting healing and reconciliation.

While these examples demonstrate the positive impact of Galtung’s ideas in certain contexts, it is important to note that the implementation of his strategies may require adaptation to specific cultural, historical, and political dynamics. Successful outcomes often rely on a combination of local ownership, sustained commitment, and comprehensive approaches that consider the complexities of each case of a conflict scenario.

When applying Galtung’s peace theory to situations of sectarian and intercommunal violence, such as those between Hindus and Muslims in India, Shias and Sunnis, or Catholics and Protestants, it is essential to tailor strategies to the specific context. Some broad strategies which can be considered:

  1. Dialogue and Mediation: Facilitating dialogue and mediation between conflicting groups is crucial. Creating safe spaces for constructive communication can help build trust, understanding, and empathy. Skilled mediators can help facilitate discussions and find common ground, while addressing grievances and misperceptions.
  2. Addressing Structural Violence: Galtung’s theory emphasizes the importance of addressing structural violence and underlying systemic factors that contribute to conflicts. This includes addressing socioeconomic inequalities, political marginalization, and discriminatory policies. Promoting inclusive governance and ensuring equal access to resources and opportunities can help alleviate tensions.
  3. Peace Education and Awareness: Promoting peace education and awareness can be instrumental in overcoming religious or sectarian prejudices and fostering a culture of tolerance and respect. This can involve incorporating peacebuilding and conflict resolution education in schools, organizing interfaith dialogue programs, and promoting cultural exchanges that foster mutual understanding.
  4. Interfaith Initiatives: Encouraging interfaith initiatives and fostering interreligious dialogue can promote understanding and cooperation between different religious communities. Interfaith organizations can facilitate joint projects, community service, and cultural events to create opportunities for interaction and collaboration.
  5. Community Engagement and Empowerment: Engaging local communities affected by sectarian or intercommunal violence is crucial for sustainable peace. Supporting community-led initiatives for reconciliation, economic development, and social integration can help address grievances, rebuild trust, and promote a sense of belonging among diverse groups.
  6. Legal and Policy Reforms: Advocating for legal and policy reforms that protect minority rights, promote religious freedom, and ensure equal treatment under the law is important. Strengthening laws against hate speech, discrimination, and violence can help deter and address sectarian and intercommunal tensions.
  7. Leadership and Role Models: Encouraging religious and community leaders to promote peace, tolerance, and nonviolence is vital. Influential figures who advocate for inclusivity, respect, and peaceful coexistence can have a significant impact in reducing sectarian and intercommunal tensions.
  8. Addressing Xenophobia and Religiophobia: Strategies to combat xenophobia and religiophobia should include awareness campaigns, legal protections, and community outreach. Promoting diversity, inclusivity, and celebrating cultural differences can help challenge stereotypes and foster a sense of shared humanity.

It is important to recognise that each situation is unique, and a comprehensive approach that combines multiple strategies may be required. Flexibility, adaptability, and collaboration with local stakeholders are key for the effective implementation of these strategies.

Peace disruptions in communities can arise from various factors, often interconnected. While the specific causes can vary depending on the context, some common factors known to contribute to peace disruptions are:

  1. Structural Violence and Inequality: Structural violence refers to systemic and institutional factors that perpetuate inequalities, such as socioeconomic disparities, discrimination, and exclusion. When marginalised groups face systemic injustices and lack access to resources and opportunities, it can lead to social unrest and conflicts, such as the genocide in Palestine.
  2. Political Instability and Governance Challenges: Weak governance, political instability, and corrupt or repressive regimes can undermine peace and stability. Lack of effective institutions, inadequate rule of law, and absence of mechanisms for inclusive decision-making can create tensions and foster conflict within communities.
  3. Identity Politics and Ethnopolitical Divisions: Divisions based on ethnic, religious, or cultural identities can contribute to peace disruptions. Identity politics, the manipulation of identity for political gain, and the mobilization of communities along identity lines can fuel conflicts, tensions, and violence.
  4. Economic Injustices and Resource Scarcity: Economic disparities, unequal distribution of resources, and competition over scarce resources can be drivers of conflicts. When communities struggle with poverty, unemployment, or lack of access to basic services, it can lead to grievances and conflicts over resources.
  5. Historical Grievances and Unresolved Conflicts: Lingering historical grievances, unresolved conflicts, or lack of transitional justice processes can undermine peace. When past injustices, such as human rights abuses or ethnic/religious violence, remain unaddressed, they can fuel resentment and perpetuate cycles of violence.
  6. External Factors and Geopolitics: External factors, such as regional conflicts, interference by foreign powers, or geopolitical rivalries, can have a significant impact on local peace dynamics. Proxy wars, arms proliferation, and the influence of external actors can exacerbate existing tensions and disrupt peace.
  7. Polarization and Intolerance: Growing polarization, extremism, and intolerance within communities can undermine peaceful coexistence. Divisive ideologies, hate speech, and the spread of misinformation can fuel animosity between different groups, leading to conflicts and violence.
  8. Environmental Factors: Environmental challenges, such as climate change, natural resource scarcity, or environmental degradation, can contribute to peace disruptions. Competition over land, water, or other vital resources can exacerbate tensions and trigger conflicts, particularly in vulnerable communities.

The above factors often interact and reinforce each other, creating complex dynamics that require multifaceted approaches for sustainable peacebuilding. Understanding the specific context and addressing the underlying causes is crucial in developing effective strategies to mitigate and prevent peace disruptions in communities.

In contrast, Zeno et al and Stoicism is a philosophical school of thought that originated in ancient Greece and later gained popularity in ancient Rome. While its primary focus is on personal ethics, virtue and individual well-being, certain aspects of Stoic philosophy can contribute to promoting sustainable peace and mitigating peace disruptions. Here are some key elements of Stoicism and their potential implications for peace:

  1. Inner Tranquillity: Stoicism emphasizes the cultivation of inner tranquillity and emotional resilience through the acceptance of things beyond our control. This mindset can help individuals respond to conflicts and disruptions with calmness, reducing the likelihood of escalating tensions or resorting to violence.
  2. Virtue Ethics: Stoicism places great importance on the development of moral virtues such as wisdom, justice, courage, and self-discipline. Practicing these virtues can promote ethical behaviour, empathy, and fairness, which are essential for fostering harmonious relationships within communities and reducing conflicts.
  3. Universal Brotherhood[14]: Stoicism emphasizes the concept of cosmopolitanism, which promotes the idea of a global community and the recognition of shared humanity. This perspective encourages individuals to extend their care and compassion beyond their immediate social or cultural boundaries, fostering understanding and empathy across diverse groups.
  4. Rationality and Reasoning: Stoicism encourages individuals to cultivate rationality and exercise reasoned judgment. This can help people critically evaluate situations, examine their own biases, and engage in constructive dialogue and problem-solving, thereby reducing misunderstandings and promoting peaceful resolutions.
  5. Acceptance of Fate and Impermanence: Stoicism teaches acceptance of the impermanence of worldly possessions and circumstances. This perspective can help individuals detach from materialistic desires, power struggles, and the pursuit of dominance, reducing the potential for conflicts rooted in greed, envy, or ego.
  6. Focus on Virtuous Action: Stoicism emphasizes the importance of taking virtuous action in line with one’s values and the common good. Practicing justice, fairness, and kindness in daily interactions can contribute to creating a peaceful and inclusive social environment.

While Stoicism can provide individuals with a personal framework for living virtuously and cultivating inner peace, its application to broader societal contexts requires collective engagement and the consideration of structural and systemic factors that contribute to peace disruptions. Stoic principles can complement broader peacebuilding efforts by encouraging individuals to develop personal virtues and engage in ethical conduct, promoting understanding, empathy, and peaceful coexistence within communities.

It is essential to recognise that the application of Stoicism or any philosophical perspective, including the mini peace theory of Galtung, should be adapted to specific cultural, historical, and social contexts, integrating with other approaches to peacebuilding and conflict resolution.

While there are some overlaps and shared principles between Galtung’s Peace Theory and the Philosophy of Stoicism, there are also notable differences in their approaches to promoting and ensuring peace. Here’s a comparison and contrast between the two:

  1. Focus and Scope:
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Galtung’s theory primarily focuses on analyzing the causes of violence and conflict, understanding structural violence, and proposing strategies for peacebuilding and conflict resolution at various levels (individual, societal, global).
    • Stoicism: Stoicism is a philosophical framework primarily concerned with personal ethics, individual well-being, and the cultivation of inner tranquillity. While it offers insights on ethical behaviour and virtues, its focus is not explicitly centered on societal or structural factors.
  2. Root Causes of Conflict:
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Galtung’s theory emphasises identifying and addressing root causes of conflicts, such as structural violence, inequality, and the pursuit of power. It explores the social, economic, and political dimensions that contribute to conflict.
    • Stoicism: Stoicism does not explicitly delve into the analysis of societal or structural causes of conflicts. It focuses more on the internal and personal factors that contribute to individual suffering and the cultivation of inner peace.
  3. Peacebuilding Approaches:
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Galtung’s theory advocates for addressing conflicts through strategies such as nonviolence, conflict transformation, peace education, dialogue, and addressing structural inequalities. It emphasizes the importance of active interventions and structural changes to promote positive peace.
    • Stoicism: Stoicism primarily emphasizes personal transformation and the cultivation of virtues like wisdom, justice, courage, and self-discipline. While it encourages individuals to act virtuously and live in harmony with others, its focus is more on individual conduct rather than systematic interventions or structural changes.
  4. Concept of Peace:
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Galtung distinguishes between negative peace (absence of violence) and positive peace (presence of justice, equity, and well-being). His theory aims to achieve positive peace by addressing the root causes of conflicts and transforming societal structures to create a more just and equitable society.
    • Stoicism: Stoicism emphasizes inner tranquility, acceptance of the impermanence of external circumstances, and living in accordance with reason and virtue. While it can contribute to personal peace and resilience, it does not explicitly address the broader societal dimensions of peace or structural inequalities.
  5. Engagement with Others:
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Galtung’s theory emphasizes dialogue, mediation, and engagement with conflicting parties to find common ground, promote understanding, and resolve conflicts. It encourages active participation and cooperation among diverse stakeholders.
    • Stoicism: Stoicism focuses more on individual self-improvement and cultivating personal virtues. While it encourages treating others justly and with kindness, it does not explicitly emphasize the need for collective engagement or active conflict resolution processes.

Essentially, Galtung’s Peace Theory offers a comprehensive framework for analysing and transforming conflicts at various levels, addressing root causes, and promoting positive peace through structural changes. Stoicism provides individuals with personal principles and virtues that contribute to inner peace and ethical conduct but does not explicitly address structural or societal dimensions of peace. Both perspectives offer valuable insights, but they operate at different levels of analysis and have different scopes of application in promoting and ensuring peace.

Here’s an attempt to combine the essential elements of Stoicism and Galtung’s Peace Theory:

  1. Inner Tranquillity and Emotional Resilience:
    • Stoicism: Cultivate inner tranquillity, acceptance of external circumstances, and emotional resilience through the practice of Stoic principles.
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Emphasize the importance of individual well-being and mental resilience as a foundation for promoting peace and engaging in conflict resolution.
  2. Virtue Ethics and Ethical Conduct:
    • Stoicism: Foster virtues such as wisdom, justice, courage, and self-discipline in personal behaviour, treating others with fairness, kindness, and compassion.
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Advocate for ethical conduct at individual and societal levels, promoting justice, respect, and empathy as guiding principles for peacebuilding and conflict resolution.
  3. Analysis of Root Causes:
    • Stoicism: Encourage introspection and self-reflection to identify and address personal flaws and biases that may contribute to conflicts.
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Analyse and address the structural and systemic factors that perpetuate violence and inequalities, including social, economic, and political dimensions.
  4. Focus on Structural Change:
    • Stoicism: While Stoicism primarily focuses on personal transformation, it can complement Galtung’s emphasis on structural change by encouraging individuals to advocate for justice and equity in society.
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Highlight the importance of transforming societal structures to address root causes of conflicts and create a more just and equitable society.
  5. Dialogue and Engagement:
    • Stoicism: Encourage open-mindedness, active listening, and respectful dialogue to foster understanding and resolve conflicts at the individual level.
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Promote dialogue, mediation, and engagement among conflicting parties to build trust, find common ground, and work towards peaceful resolutions at societal levels.
  6. Pursuit of Positive Peace:
    • Stoicism: Foster personal well-being, harmonious relationships, and virtue-based living as contributions to individual and interpersonal peace.
    • Galtung’s Peace Theory: Strive for positive peace by addressing inequalities, promoting justice, and creating conditions that enable individuals and communities to thrive.

By combining these elements, we can integrate the personal and ethical dimensions of Stoicism with Galtung’s focus on structural change, conflict analysis, and peacebuilding strategies. This holistic approach acknowledges the importance of personal transformation, ethical conduct, dialogue, and systemic change in promoting sustainable peace at both individual and societal levels.

n the absence of interparty trust in a conflict situation, several factors may contribute to its disappearance, including external factors. Here’s an analysis of how external factors can impact interparty trust:

  1. Historical or Current Interactions: Past or ongoing negative interactions between parties can erode trust. Instances of betrayal, deception, or violence can create deep-rooted mistrust and scepticism about the intentions of the other party.
  2. Power Imbalances: Power imbalances, whether political, social, or economic, can undermine trust. When one party has significantly more power or resources than the other, it can create a perception of unfairness, marginalization, or exploitation, leading to a breakdown of trust.
  3. External Influences and Propaganda: External actors or forces can manipulate narratives, spread misinformation, or promote divisive ideologies that fuel distrust between parties. Propaganda campaigns or external interference can exacerbate existing tensions and contribute to the erosion of trust.
  4. Cultural or Religious Differences: Cultural or religious differences, when exploited or misunderstood, can create barriers to trust. Stereotypes, prejudices, or lack of understanding about different cultural or religious practices can contribute to miscommunication and mistrust.
  5. Incomplete or Failed Peace Processes: Previous attempts at peace negotiations or agreements that have not been fully implemented or have failed can erode trust. If parties feel that their concerns or grievances were not adequately addressed in previous peace processes, it can hinder future trust-building efforts.
  6. External Threats or Involvement: The presence of external threats or involvement, such as regional conflicts, proxy wars, or interference by foreign powers, can further undermine trust. Parties may perceive external actors as biased or pursuing their own interests, leading to suspicion and diminished trust.
  7. Socioeconomic Factors: Economic disparities, resource scarcity, or competition over limited resources can strain trust between parties. When livelihoods or basic needs are at stake, parties may view each other as rivals rather than potential partners, hindering trust-building efforts.

To rebuild interparty trust in the face of these external factors, several strategies can be employed:

  1. Mediation and Facilitation: Utilize neutral third-party mediators or facilitators to create a safe and inclusive space for dialogue, helping parties address concerns, clarify misunderstandings, and rebuild trust.
  2. Transparency and Accountability: Foster transparency in decision-making processes and promote accountability for past actions. Openness and accountability can help restore trust by demonstrating a commitment to fair and just practices.
  3. Confidence-Building Measures: Implement confidence-building measures that showcase goodwill and a commitment to addressing concerns. These measures can include actions such as ceasefire agreements, prisoner exchanges, or joint development initiatives.
  4. Track II Diplomacy and People-to-People Exchanges: Encourage unofficial diplomacy initiatives, track II dialogues, and people-to-people exchanges to foster understanding and build trust at the grassroots level.
  5. Address Root Causes: Address the underlying causes of the conflict, including structural inequalities, power imbalances, or historical grievances. By addressing root causes, parties can work towards creating a more equitable and inclusive environment conducive to trust-building.
  6. Long-Term Commitment: Rebuilding trust takes time and consistent effort. Parties should demonstrate a long-term commitment to sustaining peace and actively engaging in trust-building activities.

Rebuilding interparty trust, within the warring parties, requires a comprehensive and sustained approach which considers both internal and external factors influencing the conflict. It is crucial to address the underlying causes, promote understanding, and foster an environment where parties can gradually rebuild trust through dialogue, cooperation, and mutually beneficial actions.

Rebuilding interparty trust and achieving sustainable peace is certainly a challenging task in the complex and dynamic world we live in today. It requires the commitment and effort of multiple stakeholders, addressing deep-rooted issues, and navigating a multitude of factors. While it may seem idealistic to some, it is important to recognize that progress towards peace has been made in various conflicts around the world, demonstrating that it is not solely a utopian proposition.

In reality, peacebuilding processes can be complex, lengthy, and nonlinear, with setbacks and obstacles along the way. However, it is crucial to strive for progress and work towards peaceful resolutions, even if complete peace may not be immediately achievable in every context.

There are numerous examples of successful peacebuilding efforts that have led to significant positive changes in societies, including reconciliation processes, negotiated settlements, and the establishment of sustainable peace. These examples highlight the potential for progress and transformation, even in seemingly intractable conflicts.

Moreover, it is important to note that peacebuilding is not an all-or-nothing outcome. Even incremental steps towards peace, such as reducing violence, fostering dialogue, or building trust at a local level, can have profound impacts on individuals and communities affected by conflict.

While the path to peace may be challenging, it is essential to recognize the agency and resilience of individuals, communities, and organizations working tirelessly to promote peace and reconcile differences. By learning from past experiences, engaging in dialogue, and implementing strategies grounded in conflict resolution and peacebuilding theories, it is possible to make tangible progress towards peace in the present world.

It is important to maintain a realistic perspective while remaining optimistic about the potential for positive change. Achieving sustainable peace requires long-term commitment, collaboration, and a multifaceted approach that addresses the underlying causes of conflict. While it may not be an easy or straightforward endeavour, the pursuit of peace is both a moral imperative and a practical necessity in our interconnected global society.

Resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and achieving Galtung’s vision of positive peace requires a comprehensive approach involving political, social, and economic measures. While the conflict is complex and deeply entrenched, here are some remedial measures and actions that can contribute to the peace process:

  1. Dialogue and Negotiation: Encourage sustained and inclusive dialogue between Israeli and Palestinian representatives to foster understanding, address grievances, and negotiate a mutually acceptable solution. The parties should engage in direct negotiations and be supported by international mediators or facilitators.
  2. Two-State Solution: Advocate for a two-state solution that respects the rights and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians, leading to the establishment of an independent and viable Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel. This solution should address key issues such as borders, settlements, Jerusalem, refugees, and security arrangements.
  3. Confidence-Building Measures: Implement confidence-building measures that promote trust and goodwill between the parties. These can include prisoner releases, easing of restrictions on movement, joint economic projects, cultural exchanges, and humanitarian initiatives.
  4. Addressing Human Rights Concerns: Ensure the protection and promotion of human rights for all individuals affected by the conflict, regardless of their nationality or ethnicity. This includes addressing issues such as access to water, freedom of movement, housing rights, and the cessation of violence against civilians.
  5. Economic Development and Cooperation: Promote economic development and cooperation between Israelis and Palestinians, creating opportunities for shared prosperity and reducing economic disparities. Encouraging trade, investment, and joint ventures can contribute to building mutual interdependence and fostering positive relationships.
  6. Education and Peacebuilding: Support educational initiatives that promote peace, tolerance, and understanding among Israeli and Palestinian youth. Encourage programs that provide opportunities for interaction and dialogue between students from both sides, fostering empathy and breaking down stereotypes.
  7. International Support and Diplomatic Engagement: Garner international support for the peace process, with active involvement from regional and global stakeholders. International actors should provide political, diplomatic, and economic support to the parties and play a constructive role in facilitating negotiations.

As an ordinary citizen, there are several ways to contribute to the peace process and form a solid foundational base for positive outcomes in the conflict:

  1. Educate Yourself: Learn about the historical, political, and cultural dimensions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to gain a deeper understanding of the complexities involved. Seek diverse perspectives and engage in critical thinking.
  2. Promote Dialogue and Understanding: Foster respectful and constructive conversations about the conflict with individuals from different backgrounds. Encourage empathy, active listening, and the exchange of ideas to bridge divides and promote understanding.
  3. Support Peacebuilding Initiatives: Contribute to organizations and initiatives that promote peace, dialogue, and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians. These can include grassroots peace movements, interfaith dialogue groups, or humanitarian organizations working in the region.
  4. Advocate for Peaceful Solutions: Engage with policymakers, elected representatives, and relevant stakeholders to advocate for peaceful resolutions to the conflict. Write letters, participate in peaceful demonstrations, and support campaigns that call for dialogue, negotiation, and a just resolution.
  5. Foster People-to-People Connections: Support initiatives that facilitate people-to-people connections between Israelis and Palestinians, such as exchange programs, joint cultural events, or cooperative projects. These interactions can help build trust, challenge stereotypes, and promote positive relationships.
  6. Contribute to Humanitarian Efforts: Support organizations providing humanitarian aid and assistance to communities affected by the conflict. Addressing immediate needs, such as access to healthcare, clean water, and education, can contribute to stability and lay the foundation for peace.

Individual actions, no matter how miniscule, can have a ripple effect and contribute to a broader culture of peace and understanding. By promoting dialogue, empathy, and constructive engagement, ordinary citizens can play a vital.

Writing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict[15] and the challenges it faces can be a valuable contribution to raising awareness and fostering understanding. Sharing well-researched, balanced, and informed perspectives can help shed light on the complexities of the conflict and stimulate dialogue among readers.

However, it is necessary to realise, that writing alone may not be sufficient to bring about substantial change or directly impact the remediation efforts on its own. While writing can be a powerful tool for advocacy and education, it is often most effective when combined with other forms of action and engagement.  This has to be a holistic approach in all the aspects of this peace crusade.

If an individual is passionate about making a more substantial impact, consider complementing your writing efforts with other tangible actions, such as:

  1. Engaging in Dialogue: Actively participate in discussions and forums where diverse perspectives on the conflict are shared. Listen attentively to different viewpoints, ask questions, and contribute constructively to promote understanding and empathy.
  2. Supporting Peacebuilding Organisations: Identify and support organizations that work directly on peacebuilding initiatives, humanitarian efforts, or dialogue facilitation between Israelis and Palestinians. This can include donating funds, volunteering your time, or contributing your skills to support their work.
  3. Participating in Advocacy: Engage in advocacy efforts by joining or supporting organizations that advocate for peaceful resolutions to the conflict. This can involve contacting policymakers, attending rallies or demonstrations, and amplifying messages of peace through social media or other platforms.
  4. Promoting Grassroots Initiatives: Explore opportunities to support grassroots initiatives that foster dialogue, cooperation, and understanding between Israelis and Palestinians. These initiatives often work at the community level, addressing immediate needs and building relationships that contribute to long-term peace.
  5. Facilitating Interactions: If feasible, actively seek ways to facilitate or participate in people-to-people interactions between Israelis and Palestinians. This could involve volunteering with organizations that organize joint activities, cultural exchanges, or peacebuilding workshops.
  6. Continuing Education and Learning: Stay informed about the evolving dynamics of the conflict and the efforts being made towards peace. Continually educate yourself by reading books, attending lectures, or participating in online courses to deepen your understanding of the issues at hand.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict [16]is a complex and deeply rooted issue that requires multifaceted approaches to address. Combining ones writing efforts with tangible actions that support peacebuilding, dialogue, and understanding can contribute to the broader efforts aimed at remediation and positive change.

The question often raised in academic circles is how can a peace negotiator customise the Peace Theory of Galtung and or Zeno of Citicium’s theory of Stoicism in a conflict situation where both the warring factions are not prepared to compromise but are steadfast in their demands, and are not working cohesively towards a peaceful resolution of the conflict. I quote an example, the situation in Palestine where Palestine accuses Israel of expropriating their ancestral land and the Israelis are determined to “kill them in the thousands, if needed”. as reported by the media.

n a conflict situation where both warring factions are not prepared to compromise and are steadfast in their demands, the role of a peace negotiator becomes even more challenging. Customising the Peace Theory of Galtung and the philosophy of Stoicism in such a context requires careful consideration of the specific dynamics and needs of the conflict. Here are some approaches that a peace negotiator could consider:

  1. Establishing Trust and Communication Channels: Facilitate open and respectful communication channels between the conflicting parties. Encourage direct dialogue, even if it seems difficult at first, to foster understanding and create opportunities for compromise.
  2. Creating a Neutral and Safe Environment: Provide a neutral space where both parties feel safe and have equal representation. This can help minimize power imbalances and create a conducive environment for negotiation.
  3. Facilitating Small Steps and Confidence-Building Measures: Focus on small, incremental steps rather than trying to achieve a comprehensive resolution immediately. Identify areas of common interest or shared concerns and work towards confidence-building measures that can lay the foundation for further progress.
  4. Utilising Mediation and Third-Party Involvement: Engage skilled mediators or third-party facilitators who can help navigate the impasse and find creative solutions. These individuals should be trained in conflict resolution techniques and capable of maintaining impartiality.
  5. Highlighting Shared Interests: Identify and emphasize shared interests between the parties to demonstrate that a peaceful resolution can be mutually beneficial. Encourage discussions on long-term stability, economic prosperity, or security, where both sides may find common ground.
  6. Seeking Creative Solutions: Explore alternative solutions that go beyond the rigid positions of the parties involved. This could involve brainstorming new ideas, considering compromises, or proposing innovative approaches that address the core concerns of each side.
  7. Addressing Emotional and Psychological Barriers: Recognize the emotional and psychological barriers that may be hindering progress. Engage in empathy-building exercises, storytelling, or trauma healing processes to address the deep-rooted emotions and narratives that fuel the conflict.
  8. Encouraging Track II Diplomacy and People-to-People Exchanges: Foster unofficial diplomacy initiatives, track II dialogues, and people-to-people exchanges between Israelis and Palestinians. These interactions can help build trust, bridge divides, and challenge stereotypes.
  9. Applying Stoic Principles: Draw on Stoic principles such as emotional resilience, self-control, and focusing on what is within one’s control. Encourage parties to approach the negotiation process with rationality, patience, and a willingness to adapt their perspectives.

It is noteworthy that every conflict situation is unique, and there are no “one-size-fits-all” solutions. Customising peace theories and philosophies requires a nuanced understanding of the specific context and the needs of the parties involved. The goal is to find approaches that can promote dialogue, understanding, and ultimately, a path towards a peaceful resolution.

Customising the approach of a peace negotiator or facilitator for a particular type of conflict involves a thoughtful and context-specific analysis. While it is challenging to provide a definitive algorithm, I can outline a general framework that considers Galtung’s principles and Zeno’s pillars of peace. The relevant stages in the process are:

  1. Understand the Conflict: Begin by gaining a comprehensive understanding of the conflict, including its historical, political, social, and cultural dimensions. Conduct research, consult experts, and engage with stakeholders to gather relevant information.
  2. Identify Root Causes and Dynamics: Analyze the underlying causes and dynamics of the conflict. Identify the key issues, grievances, power imbalances, and competing interests of the parties involved. This analysis will inform the customization of the approach.
  3. Assess Readiness for Peace: Evaluate the readiness of the conflicting parties for peace. Determine if there are any preconditions or obstacles that hinder their willingness to engage in a peaceful resolution. Consider the influence of external actors, public opinion, and other factors that may impact the peace process.
  4. Apply Galtung’s Principles:
  5. Structural Violence: Examine and address the structural violence present in the conflict. Identify systemic inequalities, injustices, and policies that perpetuate violence or marginalization. Develop strategies to address these structural factors and promote inclusivity and equality.
  6. Cultural Violence: Recognize and address the cultural aspects that contribute to the conflict. Challenge stereotypes, prejudices, and narratives that fuel hostility. Encourage dialogue, cultural exchanges, and mutual understanding to bridge cultural divides.
  7. Positive Peace: Work towards building positive peace by focusing on long-term solutions. Foster reconciliation, trust-building, and sustainable development initiatives. Promote economic, social, and political reforms that address the underlying drivers of the conflict.
  8. Apply Zeno’s Pillars of Peace:
  9. Wisdom: Engage in a comprehensive analysis of the conflict to make informed decisions and develop creative solutions. Foster dialogue, education, and critical thinking to promote wise decision-making among the parties involved.
  10. Temperance: Encourage self-control and emotional intelligence among the conflicting parties. Help them manage their emotions and reactions during the negotiation process. Foster an environment of respect, active listening, and empathy.
  11. Justice: Strive for a just and fair resolution that respects the rights and aspirations of all parties. Address past grievances, promote accountability, and ensure equal representation at the negotiation table. Consider restorative justice mechanisms where appropriate.
  12. Courage: Encourage the parties to demonstrate courage by stepping out of their comfort zones and embracing compromise. Support them in taking calculated risks for the sake of peace. Highlight the potential benefits of a peaceful resolution.
  13. Customise the Approach: Based on the analysis of the conflict, the parties’ readiness, and the principles mentioned above, develop a tailored approach. This may involve selecting specific negotiation techniques, mediation strategies, dialogue formats, or peacebuilding initiatives. Adapt the approach as the peace process evolves and new challenges arise.
  14. Monitor and Adapt: Continuously monitor the progress of the peace process and evaluate the effectiveness of the customized approach. Be flexible and willing to adapt strategies based on changing circumstances, feedback from the parties, and the evolving needs of the conflict.

It must be emphasised that customization requires flexibility and an understanding that each conflict is unique. The approach should be continuously refined based on feedback, lessons learned, and a deep understanding of the context. The ultimate goal is to facilitate a process that enables the conflicting parties to move towards a sustainable and just resolution.

Peace facilitators employ a variety of tactics and techniques in practice to facilitate conflict resolution. The specific tactics used may vary depending on the nature of the conflict, the parties involved, and the stage of the peace process. Here are some common tactics employed by peace facilitators:

  1. Mediation: Mediation involves a neutral third party who assists the conflicting parties in finding a mutually acceptable resolution. The mediator helps facilitate dialogue, manages communication, and guides the negotiation process to promote understanding and agreement.
  2. Dialogue Facilitation: Peace facilitators organize structured dialogues or peacebuilding workshops that bring together representatives from conflicting parties. These sessions provide a safe and structured environment for participants to share their perspectives, listen to others, build empathy, and explore potential solutions.
  3. Negotiation Support: Peace facilitators provide guidance and support to the parties involved in the negotiation process. They help clarify positions, identify common ground, bridge gaps, and generate creative options for compromise.
  4. Trust-Building Measures: Facilitators employ trust-building measures to foster an atmosphere of trust and confidence between conflicting parties. These measures may include confidence-building workshops, joint activities, or creating opportunities for informal interactions that help build relationships and enhance mutual understanding.
  5. Conflict Analysis and Assessment: Peace facilitators conduct thorough conflict analysis to understand the root causes, dynamics, and stakeholders involved. They assess the conflict’s complexity, identify key issues, and analyze power dynamics to inform their facilitation strategies.
  6. Problem-Solving Techniques: Facilitators employ problem-solving techniques to help parties address specific issues or obstacles hindering the peace process. This may involve brainstorming, consensus-building exercises, or exploring win-win solutions.
  7. Capacity-Building: Peace facilitators support the capacity-building of individuals, organizations, and communities involved in the peace process. They provide training, resources, and skills development to empower stakeholders to effectively engage in conflict resolution and peacebuilding activities.
  8. Track II Diplomacy: Facilitators engage in unofficial diplomacy efforts, known as Track II diplomacy, which involve non-governmental actors, experts, and influential individuals working behind the scenes to promote dialogue, build understanding, and develop alternative solutions.
  9. Reframing and Communication Techniques: Facilitators assist parties in reframing their narratives and communication strategies to promote constructive dialogue and minimize adversarial dynamics. They encourage active listening, empathy, and effective communication techniques to enhance understanding and reduce tensions.
  10. Monitoring and Evaluation: Facilitators monitor the progress of the peace process, evaluate the effectiveness of their facilitation efforts, and provide feedback to the parties involved. They assess the impact of the strategies employed and adjust as necessary.

It is vital to note that peace facilitators often employ a combination of these tactics and adapt their approach to the specific context and needs of the conflict. The choice of tactics depends on the facilitator’s expertise, the parties’ willingness to engage, and the goals of the peace process.  If one of the warring parties prematurely walks out of the peace process, it can be a challenging situation for the facilitator. Here are some possible reactions and steps that a facilitator may consider:

  1. Remain Neutral and Calm: The facilitator should maintain a neutral stance and remain calm despite the unexpected development. It is essential not to show bias or frustration that could further escalate tensions.
  2. Assess the Situation: The facilitator should assess the reasons behind the party’s decision to walk out. Is it due to irreconcilable differences, frustration, a tactical move, or external pressure? Understanding the underlying motivations can help inform the next steps.
  3. Engage in Individual Consultations: The facilitator can individually consult with the remaining party to understand their perspective, concerns, and willingness to continue the peace process. This provides an opportunity to reestablish trust, address any potential issues, and explore possible paths forward.
  4. Explore Options for Reengagement: The facilitator can explore potential strategies to encourage the party that walked out to reengage in the peace process. This could involve seeking additional meetings, utilizing back-channel diplomacy, or involving influential actors who may have leverage or influence over the party.
  5. Foster Dialogue and Communication: The facilitator should continue to foster open lines of communication between the remaining party and the party that walked out. This may involve relaying messages, facilitating indirect contact, or exploring opportunities for informal discussions to address concerns and bridge the gap.
  6. Reassess and Adjust the Approach: The facilitator should reflect on the reasons behind the party’s decision to walk out and assess whether any adjustments to the facilitation approach are necessary. This may involve revisiting the negotiation agenda, revising strategies for trust-building or addressing specific concerns that led to the walkout.
  7. Seek External Support: If deemed necessary, the facilitator can seek support from external actors such as mediators, advisors, or influential individuals who may have the capacity to encourage the party that walked out to reengage in the peace process.
  8. Maintain Confidentiality and Sensitivity: It is crucial for the facilitator to handle the situation with utmost confidentiality and sensitivity. Respect the concerns and interests of all parties involved and avoid exacerbating tensions or creating further divisions.
  9. Assess the Viability of Continuing the Process: The facilitator, in consultation with the remaining party and any other relevant stakeholders, should assess the viability of continuing the peace process in light of the walkout. This evaluation should consider whether meaningful progress can still be achieved and whether there are alternative paths to pursue.
  10. Consider the Role of External Factors: The facilitator should also consider the influence of external factors that may have contributed to the walkout. These factors could include political pressure, public opinion, or other dynamics beyond the immediate control of the facilitator. Understanding these external factors can inform the facilitation approach moving forward.

Each situation is unique, and the facilitator must carefully consider the specific circumstances and dynamics at play. Flexibility, adaptability, and a commitment to the overall goal of peace and reconciliation are key principles to guide the facilitator’s response in such challenging moments.

The point to be raised, is that noting, that both the Stoic philosophy and Galtung’s Theory are Eurocentric, or Westcentric, will they achieve results in an Afrocentric setting, where the cultures, traditions, hierarchy and the patriarchal society is dominant, with the local Chieftain having the final say in the matter, which might be made with personal, vested interests. What is the solution in this scenario?

When considering the application of Stoic philosophy and Galtung’s Peace Theory in an Afrocentric setting, it is essential to acknowledge and respect the cultural, historical, and socio-political context in which they are being implemented. While these theories may have originated from Eurocentric perspectives, they can still offer valuable insights and approaches that can be adapted to different cultural contexts.

In an Afrocentric[17] setting with dominant cultural traditions, hierarchical structures, and patriarchal societies, it is crucial to take into account the local dynamics and power structures that influence decision-making processes. Here are some considerations and potential solutions for navigating such a scenario:

  1. Cultural Sensitivity and Localisation: Recognize and respect the cultural traditions, values, and norms of the community. Adapt the principles and concepts from Stoic philosophy and Galtung’s Peace Theory to resonate with the local culture and context. This may involve engaging with local leaders, elders, and community members to ensure the strategies and approaches used are culturally appropriate.
  2. Inclusive and Participatory Processes: While acknowledging the influence of chieftains and hierarchical structures, strive to promote inclusive and participatory processes. Encourage the involvement and representation of diverse stakeholders, including women, youth, marginalized groups, and local communities. This helps ensure a more comprehensive and representative approach to conflict resolution and peacebuilding.
  3. Engagement with Local Leadership: Establish constructive relationships with local leaders, including chieftains, to foster their understanding of the benefits of peaceful resolutions and positive peace. Highlight how sustainable peace can serve the community’s long-term interests and well-being. Seek opportunities to address personal interests and concerns while aligning them with broader peacebuilding objectives.
  4. Customisation and Integration: Tailor the strategies and approaches to align with the local context and address specific challenges and dynamics. Incorporate local practices, traditional conflict resolution mechanisms, and indigenous knowledge systems into the peacebuilding processes. This integration can help enhance the relevance and effectiveness of the approaches used.
  5. Empowering Local Communities: Empower local communities by providing them with knowledge, skills, and resources to actively participate in decision-making processes and peacebuilding efforts. Promote education, dialogue, and capacity-building initiatives that enable communities to assert their rights, challenge injustices, and contribute to positive change.
  6. Gender Equality and Women’s Participation: Address patriarchal norms and practices by actively promoting gender equality and women’s participation in peace processes. Recognize and amplify the voices, perspectives, and experiences of women in conflict resolution and decision-making. Engage with local women leaders and organizations to ensure their meaningful involvement and representation.
  7. Long-Term Engagement and Sustainability: Recognise that achieving sustainable peace requires long-term engagement and investment. Peacebuilding efforts should extend beyond the immediate conflict resolution phase and focus on building social cohesion, addressing underlying structural issues, and fostering inclusive development.

It is crucial to approach conflict resolution and peacebuilding in an Afrocentric setting with cultural humility, openness, and a willingness to adapt strategies to the specific context. By recognising and integrating local traditions, engaging with local leaders and communities, and promoting inclusivity, it is possible to work towards positive peace and meaningful reconciliation within an Afrocentric framework.

When a religious philosophy is a significant factor influencing a personal conflict between a couple or a larger geopolitical conflict, such as Iran[18], and its rightful pursuit of development of nuclear power, as a sovereign state and the concern Western nations have, a facilitator faces unique challenges.

Tehran, Iran:  A major water desalination project will be launched at the Bushehr nuclear power plant in south of Iran in the coming weeks. This is the cause of major Peace Disruption for the collective West, noting that Iran has a right to develop nuclear power as a sovereign state, with ongoing sanctions, protracted agreements and numerous meetings. 
Photo credit: Tasnim News Agency 15 Aug 2022

In such cases, the facilitator can consider the following practical approaches:

  1. Cultivate Interreligious Dialogue: Encourage open and respectful dialogue between the conflicting parties that acknowledges and explores their religious perspectives. Facilitate discussions that promote understanding, empathy, and the recognition of shared values across religious boundaries. Seek common ground that can serve as a basis for resolving the conflict.
  2. Engage Religious Leaders: Seek the involvement and support of religious leaders or figures who hold influence within the respective communities. Religious leaders can play a vital role in promoting reconciliation, emphasizing peace, and interpreting religious teachings in ways that encourage harmonious resolutions. Their endorsement and guidance can help bridge gaps and encourage cooperation.
  3. Promote Shared Values and Humanitarian Principles: Highlight shared values and humanitarian principles that exist within different religious traditions. Emphasize concepts such as justice, compassion, forgiveness, and the dignity of every individual. By focusing on these shared values, the facilitator can help the parties find common ground and explore solutions that align with their religious beliefs.
  4. Utilize Faith-Based Mediation Techniques: Faith-based mediation techniques incorporate religious and spiritual elements into the mediation process. Facilitators can integrate rituals, prayers, or other faith-based practices that are meaningful to the conflicting parties. These techniques can provide a sense of spiritual support and guidance, fostering a conducive environment for dialogue and resolution.
  5. Encourage Interdisciplinary Approaches: In complex conflicts where religious perspectives are central, it may be beneficial to involve experts from multiple disciplines, such as religious scholars, theologians, conflict resolution practitioners, and psychologists. This interdisciplinary approach can provide a comprehensive understanding of the religious dynamics at play and inform the facilitation process.
  6. Address Misinterpretations and Misconceptions: Religious conflicts often arise from misinterpretations or misconceptions of religious teachings. The facilitator can work to clarify misunderstandings and promote accurate understanding of religious doctrines, emphasizing the peaceful and inclusive aspects within each tradition. Providing educational resources and opportunities for interfaith learning can help challenge stereotypes and foster a more nuanced understanding.
  7. Seek to Separate Political and Religious Dimensions: In conflicts with political and religious dimensions intertwined, it is crucial to navigate the complexities and distinguish between political goals and religious beliefs. The facilitator should encourage a separation of the two, focusing on the personal and interpersonal dimensions to find common ground and build trust.
  8. Build Trust and Foster Reconciliation: The facilitator should prioritize trust-building measures that promote reconciliation and healing. This may involve creating opportunities for shared experiences, dialogue, and cooperative projects that transcend religious divisions. The facilitator can help the parties recognize the benefits of peaceful coexistence and explore ways to rebuild relationships based on mutual respect and understanding.

In situations where a religious philosophy strongly influences a conflict, the facilitator’s role is to create an environment that respects religious beliefs, encourages dialogue, and seeks to find solutions that are compatible with those beliefs. By incorporating religious perspectives into the peacebuilding process, the facilitator can navigate complex dynamics and work towards sustainable resolutions.

Professor Johan Vincent Galtung
The Academic Definer and Modern Crusader of Global Peace

Often a statement is made, “Zeno et al from antiquity versus Galtung. Whoever wins, is a victory for humanity,” seems to suggest a comparison or competitiveness between Zeno and Galtung. However, it is important to note that Zeno and Galtung come from different time periods and philosophical frameworks, so it might not be accurate or meaningful to pit them against each other directly. Both Zeno’s Stoicism and Galtung’s Peace Theory offer valuable insights and perspectives on peace, but they address different aspects of it. Zeno’s Stoicism focuses on personal peace and inner tranquillity, while Galtung’s Peace Theory delves into the structural and societal aspects of peace, aiming for social justice and conflict resolution.

Rather than framing it as a competition, between the theory from antiquity it would be more appropriate to recognise and appreciate the contributions of both Zeno and Galtung to our understanding of peace. Their ideas and philosophies can complement each other, offering a more comprehensive approach to achieving peace at both individual and societal levels. Embracing multiple perspectives and philosophies can enrich our understanding of peace and contribute to its attainment in different dimensions of human life.

Another point often raised and necessary to expand on, is how Galtung’s Peace Theory interfaces with:

  1. The Peace initiatives as espoused by the Abrahamic Prophets, from scriptural times,
  2. Zeno’s Stoicism, as promulgated by Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

To summarise, as to how Galtung’s Peace Theory interfaces with the peace initiatives of the Abrahamic Prophets and Zeno’s Stoicism:

  1. Galtung’s Peace Theory: Galtung’s Peace Theory focuses on addressing the root causes of conflicts and promoting sustainable peace. It emphasizes the importance of structural, cultural, and direct violence as factors that disrupt peace. Galtung suggests that peace can be achieved through positive peace, which involves addressing the underlying inequalities, injustices, and social divisions that fuel conflicts.
  2. Abrahamic Prophets’ Peace Initiatives: The Abrahamic Prophets, including Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, sought to promote peace among their respective communities and societies. Their teachings emphasised principles such as love, compassion, justice, forgiveness, and reconciliation. They advocated for peaceful coexistence, respect for human dignity, and the resolution of conflicts through peaceful means.

The Abrahamic Prophets’ [19]peace initiatives align with Galtung’s Peace Theory in that they both emphasise the importance of addressing root causes and promoting peaceful coexistence based on values of justice, compassion, and reconciliation.

  1. Zeno’s Stoicism: Zeno’s Stoicism, as promulgated by Marcus Aurelius, focuses on cultivating inner peace and tranquillity through personal virtue and acceptance of the natural order. Stoicism teaches individuals to control their emotions, live in accordance with reason, and find inner peace despite external circumstances.

While Stoicism primarily focuses on individual peace, it can complement Galtung’s Peace Theory by providing individuals with the inner strength and resilience needed to actively engage in peacebuilding efforts. The Stoic principles of self-discipline, emotional control, and acceptance of the world as it is can contribute to personal peace and resilience, enabling individuals to work towards creating a more peaceful society.

In summary, Galtung’s Peace Theory, the peace initiatives of the Abrahamic Prophets, and Zeno’s Stoicism can intersect in their shared focus on promoting peace, addressing root causes of conflicts, cultivating inner peace, and advocating for values such as justice, compassion, and reconciliation. Together, they provide a holistic framework for understanding and working towards peace at both individual and societal levels.

While referring to the Abrahamic Prophets, collectively, it is often related that Religions are the major cause of Peace Disruption[20]. However, it is necessary to appreciate that religions themselves are not the principal causal factor in peace disruption. It is important to differentiate between the teachings and principles of religions and the way they are interpreted, practiced, and sometimes misused by individuals and groups. Religion can be a powerful force for peace, promoting values such as compassion, justice, forgiveness, and harmony. However, like any ideology or belief system, religion can also be misinterpreted, politicized, or manipulated to justify violence, discrimination, and conflict.

Peace disruption often arises from a complex interplay of factors, including socio-political, economic, historical, and cultural dimensions[21]. While religion can be one contributing factor in some conflicts, it is rarely the sole or primary cause. Conflicts often arise from a combination of power struggles, resource disputes, identity politics, historical grievances, nationalism, and other socio-political factors.

It is important to approach the topic of religion and peace with nuance and recognise that the actions and behaviours of individuals and groups, influenced by various factors, shape the impact of religion on peace or conflict. Additionally, it is crucial to engage in interfaith dialogue, promote understanding, and work towards the shared values of compassion, respect, and peaceful coexistence that are present in many religious traditions.

The Bottom Line is that while the different theories of Peace Propagation formulated over the eons, synthesising the peace theories of Stoicism, the Roman Emperor wise counsel, the teachings of Abrahamic prophets, the strategic preparedness to ensure peace and Galtung’s peace theory can provide a holistic approach to peace that integrates personal, societal, and global dimensions.  The key elements which can be synthesised are:

  1. Inner peace and personal transformation: The Stoic philosophy emphasises cultivating inner peace through self-discipline, acceptance of what is beyond our control, and the development of virtue. This focus on self-awareness, mindfulness, and personal growth can be integrated with the teachings of Abrahamic prophets, which emphasise love, compassion, forgiveness, and seeking a close relationship with the divine. Together, they promote inner peace, moral development, and spiritual transformation.
  2. Social justice and peace-making: Galtung’s peace theory addresses structural violence and the root causes of conflicts, highlighting the importance of social justice, equality, and nonviolence. This aligns with the teachings of the Abrahamic prophets, who emphasized social responsibility, care for the marginalized, and pursuing justice for all. By integrating these principles, one can work towards creating a just and equitable society that prevents conflicts and promotes peace.
  3. Conflict transformation and reconciliation: Galtung’s conflict transformation approach, which seeks to address underlying tensions and transform conflicts into opportunities for positive change, can be combined with the principles of forgiveness, reconciliation, and conflict resolution taught by the Abrahamic prophets. This synthesis encourages dialogue, empathy, and understanding, fostering a path towards healing and reconciliation in personal and societal relationships.
  4. Global peacebuilding and cooperation: Galtung’s peace theory also emphasizes the importance of addressing global structures and systems that perpetuate violence and inequality. By integrating the principles of Stoicism, Abrahamic teachings, and Galtung’s theory, one can promote global peacebuilding efforts, such as fostering cooperation, advocating for human rights, supporting sustainable development, and addressing the root causes of conflict at an international level.

To practice this synthesised body of knowledge, individuals can engage in personal introspection and growth, cultivate virtues of compassion and forgiveness, advocate for social justice and equality, engage in peaceful dialogue and conflict resolution, and work towards global cooperation and peacebuilding. It requires a commitment to personal transformation, social engagement, and a deep understanding of the interconnectedness of individual well-being, societal harmony, and global peace.

The possible reasons for the three Abrahamic religions expressing inter-religious acrimony and aggression, with one another and each demonstrating Religiophobia for the other.  The reasons for conflicts and tensions between the three Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, are complex and multifaceted. It’s important to note that not all followers of these religions engage in hostility or demonstrate religiophobia towards one another. However, historical, political, social, and theological factors have contributed to conflicts and misunderstandings between these faiths. Here are some possible reasons:

  1. Historical conflicts: Throughout history, there have been periods of religious and territorial conflicts between different groups, including those aligned with the Abrahamic religions. These conflicts have often been fueled by political, social, and economic factors, with religious differences being used to justify or exacerbate the tensions.
  2. Theological differences: While there are shared beliefs and values among the three religions, there are also theological differences and interpretations of sacred texts that can lead to disagreements and misunderstandings. These differences can sometimes be manipulated or exploited by individuals or groups for political or personal gain.
  3. Political and social factors: Conflicts between the three religions have often been influenced by broader political and social dynamics, such as power struggles, nationalism, colonialism, and socio-economic disparities. These factors can create fertile ground for interreligious tensions and conflicts.
  4. Lack of understanding and stereotypes: Ignorance, prejudice, and stereotypes about other religions can contribute to fear, mistrust, and hostility. Misconceptions about the beliefs, practices, and intentions of followers of other faiths can perpetuate animosity and contribute to religiophobia.
  5. Manipulation by extremist groups: Extremist individuals and groups within each religion can exploit religious differences to advance their own agendas and fuel conflict. They may use distorted interpretations of religious texts or propagate hatred and intolerance, leading to further divisions.

It’s important to remember that these conflicts and tensions are not inherent to the religions themselves but rather the result of complex historical and socio-political factors. Interfaith dialogue, education, fostering empathy, promoting tolerance, and addressing root causes of conflicts are crucial steps toward overcoming religiophobia and promoting peaceful coexistence among different religious communities.  The three Abrahamic faiths, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, emphasise the importance of personal peace as a foundation for promoting peace in society.  In all three faiths, individuals are encouraged to cultivate inner peace through acts of piety, prayer, meditation, and adherence to spiritual teachings. This inner peace is believed to contribute to a person’s well-being, harmony with oneself, and a sense of spiritual connectedness.  By focusing on personal peace, individuals are better equipped to foster peaceful relationships with others and work towards peace in the broader community. The teachings of these faiths often stress the values of love, compassion, forgiveness, justice, and reconciliation as essential for creating a peaceful society.  While there may be differences in specific practices and beliefs among the three faiths, the overarching goal of achieving personal peace as a means to promote peace in the world is a shared value.

Globally, there are also several “analogous” theories and philosophies of Peace from African and indigenous cultures which promote peace, tranquillity and harmony. Some examples are:

  1. Ubuntu[22] Philosophy (Southern Africa): Ubuntu is a traditional African philosophy prevalent in many Southern African cultures, including Zulu, Xhosa, and Nguni. It emphasizes the interconnectedness of humanity and the importance of community and compassion. Ubuntu promotes values such as empathy, respect, cooperation, and reconciliation as essential for maintaining peace and harmony within society.
  2. Maat[23] (Ancient Egypt): Maat was a central concept in ancient Egyptian culture and religion. It represented the principles of truth, justice, balance, and harmony. Maat guided social order and ethical behaviour, and it was believed that upholding Maat would ensure peace and stability in society.
  3. Iroquois Great Law of Peace (Native American)[24]: The Iroquois Confederacy, a Native American confederation of tribes, developed the Great Law of Peace as a governing system. It emphasised the principles of unity, consensus-based decision-making, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. The Great Law of Peace aimed to establish a harmonious society based on mutual respect and cooperation.
  4. Maori Philosophy of Whakapapa[25] (New Zealand): Whakapapa is a fundamental concept in Maori culture and represents genealogy, interconnectedness, and ancestral relationships. It emphasizes the interconnectedness of all living things and the responsibility to maintain balance and harmony with nature and one another. Whakapapa provides a framework for resolving conflicts and fostering peace within Maori communities.

These, general philosophies listed above are samples of cultural dictates which ensure community cohesion and sustainable peace. There are many more indigenous and cultural philosophies around the world that promote peace and harmony within their respective contexts. Each of these theories and philosophies offers unique insights and approaches to peacebuilding, rooted in the cultural, historical, and spiritual traditions of their communities. However, individuals in pursuit of materialism, name and fame, may knowingly break these social, moral, as well as ethical codes of conduct, as often demonstrated by leaders, politicians, megalomaniacs, monarchs, dictators and oligarchs, causing great peace disruptions in previously peaceful communities.  The reader only has to reflect on the global disharmony to realise the modus operandi of such humanoids and the enormous peace disruption they cause in their pursuits of greed and self-glorification.  The West has not learnt anything from the peace philosophies of the past, nor the present and the future indeed looks grim for humanity, devoid of Peace.

There were five nations in the original Iroquois Confederacy: the Mohawk, Seneca, Oneida, Onondaga, and Cayuga tribes. Later a sixth nation, the Tuscarora tribe, joined the confederation. This Great Law of Peace aimed at establishing a harmonious society based on mutual respect and cooperation.
 For the Iroquois, the clan is the basic unit of social organisation, ensuring internal peaceful coexistence and harmony.


[1] Personal quote by the author, June 2023



























Professor G. Hoosen M. Vawda (Bsc; MBChB; PhD.Wits) is a member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace Development Environment.
Director: Glastonbury Medical Research Centre; Community Health and Indigent Programme Services; Body Donor Foundation SA.

Principal Investigator: Multinational Clinical Trials
Consultant: Medical and General Research Ethics; Internal Medicine and Clinical Psychiatry:UKZN, Nelson R. Mandela School of Medicine
Executive Member: Inter Religious Council KZN SA
Public Liaison: Medical Misadventures
Activism: Justice for All

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 3 Jul 2023.

Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: Stoicism: Unveiling the Elusive Path to Peace (Part 2), is included. Thank you.

If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.

Share this article:

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.

Comments are closed.