{"id":42547,"date":"2014-06-30T12:00:13","date_gmt":"2014-06-30T11:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=42547"},"modified":"2015-05-05T21:33:44","modified_gmt":"2015-05-05T20:33:44","slug":"international-peace-research-association-at-50-10","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2014\/06\/international-peace-research-association-at-50-10\/","title":{"rendered":"International Peace Research Association at 50"},"content":{"rendered":"

Known as IPRA, founded in 1964 in London\u2013and this author, 34 at the time, is the only surviving founder.\u00a0 IPRA rotates every two years from one peace research center to the other, and is now in very competent Turkish hands.\u00a0 And what is more natural than having the 50th anniversary for the hub of peace studies in that hub of the world, Istanbul<\/em>, 10-14 August this year!!\u00a0 Hurry up, register!!!<\/p>\n

\"IPRA<\/a>Today it is hard to believe, but to get IPRA started was as problematic as to launch peace studies in general.<\/p>\n

The Western establishments did not like \u201cpeace\u201d; their favorite was security, absence of violence against themselves in particular and their elites even more particularly.\u00a0 Security studies became academically institutionalized Western paranoia<\/p>\n

And the peace movement establishments did not like \u201cstudies\u201d\u2013what was there to study?\u00a0 Each one knew the one correct answer!<\/p>\n

Like world government<\/em> (what kind of government?), world law<\/em> (in favor-disfavor of whom?), disarmament<\/em> (hand guns, knives, scissors?\u2013how about the ease of rearmament?), democracy<\/em> all over (and when they go to war against each other, and against non-democracies; what kind of democracy, multi-party national election only?), end of capitalism, end of socialism<\/em> (how about non-economic conflicts, over identity for instance); psychoanalysis<\/em>, at least of leaders (what kind? and how will they treat the non-psychoanalyzed?).\u00a0 And so on.\u00a0 And so forth.<\/p>\n

May be some re<\/em>search might help, like it did for health?\u00a0 For instance exploring all of the above, and their combinations?<\/p>\n

Back in 1964 there were not much more than three centers of academic studies of peace: the Peace Research Institute in Oslo-Norway (PRIO) also focused on Gandhi and nonviolence; the center in Ann Arbor, Michigan-USA, more focused on game theory and mathematical models; and the polemology approach associated with George Bouthoul in Paris-France, focused on war.<\/p>\n

All three were in London; Ann Arbor led by the indefatigable Elise Boulding who played a major role in keeping IPRA alive through some crises, PRIO by me, and polemology from the institute in Groningen, Netherlands directed by Bert R\u00f6ling, the youngest judge at the Tokyo Tribunal who became IPRA\u2019s first, very competent, Secretary General.<\/p>\n

The French actually had a very special approach.\u00a0 Their foreign office was less interested in peace and more in French as official language of IPRA on par with English, fully willing to cover all expenses.\u00a0 We said no, given the French focus on war, not peace, and on strategic studies, not peace studies (the situation is about the same 50 years later).\u00a0 As opposed to the Soviet Union which at least had a concept: Litvinov\u2019s \u201cpeaceful co-existence\u201d from the 1930s.<\/p>\n

There was general agreement that we had to meet more often to compare notes and to get more peace centers around the world.\u00a0 How?<\/p>\n

One model that often came up was a social science Pugwash\u2013the conferences across the superpower and bloc divide against nuclear arms. I knew them with much love and sympathy, brilliant nuclear scientists\u2013among them Germans and Jews who had worked on a bomb against Hitler and saw it hijacked to kill Japanese\u2013brilliant, but not in social sciences.\u00a0\u00a0 That broadening of Pugwash came, but the focus was still advocacy and we felt the need for re<\/em>search, not advocacy.\u00a0 Above all for pluralism, having different concepts and hypotheses and approaches meet in mutually enriching dialogues.<\/p>\n

The other model was to found IPRA and apply for membership in UNESCO\u2019s International Social Science Council, together with psychologists, sociologists etc.\u00a0 Very important was a high level UNESCO civil servant, Saul Friedman, very devoted to peace studies.<\/p>\n

John Burton, the former head of the Australian foreign office, was conspicuously absent from the founding of IPRA.\u00a0 His approach was diplomacy.\u00a0 He was against social sciences, a view he later changed.<\/p>\n

The first meetings were in the Netherlands, Sweden, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia\u2013one NATO-North Atlantic Treaty Organization, one WTO-Warsaw Treaty Organization of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance often called the Warsaw Pact, two neutral-nonaligned.\u00a0 IPRA played a role as a forum acceptable to many during the cold war exactly because there was no divisive resolution-making.<\/p>\n

IPRA was liberated from the state system, from East-West and North-South divides, but not from the peace movement system with their single factor, often highly moralistic positions.\u00a0 Put differently, the factual level was low, the moral level high.\u00a0 Gradually this has changed, but it took time to identify researchable problems and a methodology to explore them.\u00a0 IPRA at 50 is very different from the early decades: deeper academically, more pluralistic in approaches. It has much to contribute to a world with much violence, mostly from the states and governments, but also from non-states, non-governments.\u00a0 Victory is their goal, so they dictate solutions.\u00a0 Peace studies have produced insights in conflict resolution, unlike the diplomatic pursuit of national interests, hoping for an equilibrium somewhere.\u00a0 Statesmen and -women of the world, just come to IPRA, we are ready.<\/em><\/p>\n

Problems of health were in the hands of another big institution: the church.\u00a0 The problem was moral, not factual: disease as punishment for sin, and sin as opposition to the Supreme Power, the Lord. Health studies brought in empirical facts and connections, but one moral aspect remained: we must will health, not only know how to get there.<\/p>\n

The problems of peace are still to a large extent in the hands of the successor to the church, the state.\u00a0 In their view the problem is moral more than factual.\u00a0 An aggressive war may be just punishment for the sin of being uppity, opposing superpowers or other warlords. Peace studies have brought in empirical facts and connections, with one moral aspect: we must will peace not only know how to get there.<\/p>\n

IPRA is international: no country dictates anything. It is for, by and of peace. And associative; your new friends are waiting for you.<\/p>\n

(PLEASE CLICK HERE TO REGISTER\/INFO FOR ISTANBUL IPRA GOLDEN JUBILEE CONFERENCE<\/a>)<\/p>\n

_______________________<\/p>\n

Johan Galtung, a professor of peace studies, dr hc mult, is rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University-TPU<\/a>. He is author of over 150 books on peace and related issues, including \u2018<\/em>50 Years-100 Peace and Conflict Perspectives,\u2019 published by the TRANSCEND University Press-TUP<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

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, TRANSCEND Media Service-TMS, is included. Thank you.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Known as IPRA, founded in 1964 in London–and this author, 34 at the time, is the only surviving founder. IPRA rotates every two years from one peace research center to the other, and is now in very competent Turkish hands. And what is more natural than having the 50th anniversary for the hub of peace studies in that hub of the world, Istanbul, 10-14 August this year!! Hurry up, register!!!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[215],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42547","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ipra-2014-50th-anniv-conference"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42547"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42547\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42547"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42547"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}