7#]&y8"Cf#%%%% 1 ; EEEEE eee {beegkoqutable of contents table of contents 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 5 1.0.1 Research Topic 5 1.0.2 Objectives Of This Analysis 6 1.0.3 Structure Of This Analysis 7 2.0 ASSESSING THE RESEARCH QUESTION 9 2.0.1 Context In Which The Research Problem Has Emerged 9 2.0.2 The Resolution of Intra-State Conflict by Pacific Means 11 2.1 ESTABLISHING THE RESEARCH PARAMETERS 12 2.1.1 The Existence of An International Civil Society 12 2.1.2 On Peace and Violence 13 2.1.3 On National and International Security 15 2.2 CONCLUDING REMARKS 16 3.0 OVERVIEW OF THE PEACE-BUILDING DOCTRINE 17 3.0.1 Objective Of The Peace-building Doctrine 17 3.0.2 Peace-building Doctrine and Conflict Resolution 18 3.0.3 Existing Conceptions of the Peace-building Doctrine 21 3.1 A THREE TIER TASK MODEL 23 3.1.1 The Conflict Overlap Tasks 24 3.1.2 The Transformation Tasks 25 3.1.3 The Mode Of Thought Tasks 25 3.2 UTILISATION OF PEACE-BUILDING DOCTRINE BY THE United Nations 26 3.2.1 The Democratic Peace Phenomenon 26 3.2.2 The Role of States In The Peace-building Doctrine for Intra-State Conflicts 27 3.3 CHALLENGES TO PEACE-BUILDING DOCTRINE AND UTILISATION 29 3.3.1 State Sovereignty As A Legal Challenge to Peace-building Doctrine in Intra-State Conflicts 30 3.3.2 Enforcement Capabilities Of The United Nations For Peace-building Initiatives 32 3.4 Peace-Building Case Studies: Application And Assessment 33 3.4.1 The Case of Cambodia 33 3.4.2 The Case of El Salvador 35 3.4.3 The Case of Somalia 35 3.4.4 Assessing The Future Of Peace-building Applications 37 3.5 The Problematic Of Agreement At The Top 38 3.6 Concluding Remarks 38 4.0 THE CULTURE OF PEACE DOCTRINE 41 4.1 A Culture Of Peace Or Cultures Of Peace 42 4.2 Unesco And The Culture Of Peace Doctrine 43 4.3 Culture Of Peace Concept Clarification 44 4.3.1 Stimuli For The Emergence Of Culture Of Peace Doctrine 45 4.3.2 Influencing Change For A Culture Of Peace From The Bottom-up 46 4.3.3 Objectives of Culture of Peace Doctrine 48 4.4 A Culture Of Peaces Partnership With Democracy 50 4. 5 Four Principles Of a Culture Of Peace Doctrine 51 ( a ) Non- Violence and Respect for Human Rights 51 4.6 Justifications For United Nations As The Means By Which To Operationalise A Culture Of Peace. 55 4.7 Operationalising Culture Of Peace Doctrine 56 4.7.1 Transformation via Reconstruction and Empowerment 59 4.7.2 Transformation via Education 60 4.7.3 Transforming The Military 61 4.8 INFUSING a CULTURE OF PEACE INTO THE PEACE-BUILDING CASES 62 4.8.1 The Case Of Cambodia 63 4.8.2 The Case Of El Salvador 63 4.8.3 The Case Of Somalia 66 4.9 Culture Of Peace Doctrines Unique Contribution To Post-Conflict Peace-Building Doctrine 66 4.10 Concluding Remarks 69 5.0 CHALLENGES in applying the CULTURE OF PEACE DOCTRINE AND Peace-Building alliance 71 5.1 Transforming The Abstract Nature Of Promoting A Proposed Cultural Characteristic To Embodied Realities 72 5.2 Peace-building Tasks Align To Culture Of Peace Principles: The Peace-building For A Culture Of Peace Alliance 74 5.2.1 non-violence and Respect for Human Rights 74 5.2.2 Intercultural Tolerance/Understanding 75 5.2.3 Sharing and Free Flow of Information - Transformation 77 5.2.4 Participation/Empowerment of Women Transformation/Mode of Thought 78 5.3 Reconciliation Through Peace-building For A Culture Of Peace 79 5.3.1 The Root Causes of Conflict 80 5.4 The Economics Of Peace The Cost Benefit Efficiency Of Peace 82 5.4.1 Targeting the Producers 84 5.4.2 Targeting the Recipients 86 5.4.3 Expenditures for Peace 86 5.5 State Sovereignty as a Challenge to peace-BUILDING for a Culture of Peace Doctrine 87 5.5.1 The Peace-building Case Studies as indicators of Sovereign Rights Regarding the Presence of Peace-building for a Culture of Peace Initiatives 89 5.5.2 Capabilities of the United nations in peace-building for a Culture of Peace 90 5.6 The Ideological/ Political Challenge Presented By Peace-Building For A Culture Of Peaces Partnership With Democracy 91 5.7 Concluding Remarks And The Prognosis For The Viability Of Peace- Building For A Culture Of Peace In The Current Global Environment 92 6.0 Research conclusions 95 6.0.1 The Unique Contribution of Peace-building for A Culture Of Peace 95 6.0.2 Critical Issues Challenging Peace-building for A Culture Of Peace 98 6.0.3 Feasibility Analysis for Peace-building for A Culture Of Peace 100 6.0.4 Recommendations for Future Research 101 6.0.5 General Conclusions 102 1.0 INTRODUCTION The world today spends billions preparing for war: shouldnt we spend a billion or two preparing for peace. Kofi Annan Address To The National Press Club, Washington D.C. Jan 1997 1.0.1 Research Topic A register of the state of world conflict in 1998 reveals 16 high-intensity, 70 low-intensity and 114 violent political conflicts (PIOOM). The numerical criteria for distinction between the various levels of conflict are widely accepted in the field of conflict and peace studies and will not be challenged here. Reduction of these occurrences and the eventual elimination altogether of violent conflict endeavours to actualise what has to present been unrealisable. This most recent decade has witnessed the subtle emergence of a discourse for the creation of a culture of peace in response to the above stated concerns. It can not be asserted that this trend in peace concepts has flooded the international scholastic or activist sectors, however, as a development for the coming century, it is gaining attention. This proposed cultural occurrence is to be understood and created in post-conflict situations in which peace-building has been taking place. Most simply, a culture of peace is such that collectivities and individuals alike resolve conflict through non-violent means. It is the belief in the ability and desire for cultures to incorporate into their cultural fabric tendencies for non-violent conflict resolution. A culture of peace is to be indigenous creations and emerge out of historic, cultural and temporal characteristics. The abstract and logic encompassing a culture of peace and its placement within the pre-existing concept of peace-building are the purpose of this study. The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) commenced its culture of peace programme in 1992 to encourage discussion and action for nurturing the cultural occurrences of non-violent resolution. The trends and aims of this programme are key to the global movement and intellectual theorising which has resulted from the collaborative efforts of UNESCO to promote the emergence of a culture of peace in the coming century. An alliance between a culture of peace and peace-building mandates is for the purposes of creating non-violence in interactions in intra-state communities previously affected by war. 1.0.2 Objectives Of This Analysis The undertaking of this study is for the purpose of asserting United Nations missions and principles of post-conflict peace-building must come to include the concept and practice of a culture of peace. The mutual benefit peace-building and a culture of peace may receive from such an alliance will illustrate their potential to create non-violent conflict resolution. In scope, both a culture of peace and post-conflict peace-building are multi-disciplinary in concept and operationalisation. Thus their comprehensive natures make them target for much scepticism and resistance as they operate in unconventional manners for the aim of creating durable peace in post-conflict communities. Selecting the United Nations as the level at which a culture of peace is to be implemented is based on the assumption that it is the most extensive and influential international organisation active in missions for conflict resolution. The research in this thesis acknowledges that the shortcomings and suggested reforms to the United Nations are challenges for growth and adaptation to represent its constituent members. Responding to the challenge for change, the United Nations must incorporate a culture of peace into its peace-building strategy in order to make it effective. The justifications for this assertion comprise this analysis. Due to the increase in intra-state conflicts, conflicts within states, and relative reduction in inter-state conflict, it is necessary to focus this analysis on the ability of the United Nations post-conflict peace-building operations in internal conflicts. Do not let the discussions herein be confused with those which would deal with international inter-state conflicts, those between states. The changing nature of conflict makes the implementation of a culture of peace and peace-building best suited to address current needs. As the United Nations is not formally structured to intervene in the domestic affairs of its constituent states, the trend in intra-state conflicts is frustrating its acting capabilities. The lack of legal obligations of member states to partake in the processes of what this study proposes as peace-building for a culture of peace is one challenge to its ultimate success as a universally accepted and implemented strategy. The research in this thesis highlights the need for empowerment of United Nations operations in order to empower civil society to create self-sustaining peace. 1.0.3 Structure Of This Analysis This analysis will commence, in the first chapter, with an assessment of the research question in order to facilitate the defining of parameters to a topic which is holistic and requires clarification of pre-existing concepts. First, the context in which the opportunity and idea of peace-building doctrine and a culture of peace doctrine arose will illustrate the environment in which it has developed as well as have influence upon. Secondly, a consideration of relevant concepts will specify the research confines. The purpose of this portion of the study is to lay the foundations in which both doctrines are to be placed. The second chapter, devoted to post-conflict peace-building, will commence with an examination of post-conflict peace-buildings emergence and current status and then proceeds with a normative analysis of the United Nations peace-building efforts to date; in the process illustrating its ultimate short comings. The target of this portion of the research is to understand what peace-building encompasses in order to highlight what is currently lacking and thus subjecting peace-building to peripheral successes; its inherent inability to create self-sustaining peace. The deficiency will be proven to be the result of a failure to fully incorporate a key actor in the processes of peace-building, civil society. A three tier task model will be invoked to illustrate the different objectives certain tasks aim at as well as the link to major conflict resolution processes to date. The understanding of the principles of post-conflict peace-building facilitate in the practical application of the doctrine within the United Nations system. A brief outline of the challenges to such an operationalisation will acknowledge the pressures against the emergence of a practice of peace-building. Invoking the three case studies which have come to represent United Nations peace-building mission in conflicts with different stimuli, outcomes and influences. The cases of Cambodia, El Salvador and Somalia are cases originated in three major regions which suffer from of intra-state conflict: East Asia, Latin America and Africa. The experiences of these cases are an indication of future developments for a culture of peace alliance with peace-building. The research will proceed, in the third chapter, with the introduction and infusion of the principles and practices for a culture of peace. The culture of peace proposed is not in wide practice or existence at present, however, its creation and promotion seek to solidify its function in the solution of conflicts. It will be proven that a culture of peace is capable of legitimating post-conflict peace-building and providing it with the necessary elements for self-sustaining peace. Only once such practices to promote resolution and ingrained non-violence are initiated can post-conflict regions possess the potential to transgress their histories of violence and war. The fourth and final chapter of this investigation will close with the critical analysis of the implications of implementing a culture of peace into post-conflict peace-building strategies. This analysis of the fusion of peace-building with a culture of peace will reveal the international community is not poised to undertake such doctrines and practices, despite the potential for mutual gain. There would necessitate a revolution at the level of ideology, economics, and politics in order for such an occurrence to be realised. Despite the advantage to the resolution of conflict, the viability of operationalising a culture of peace within the as yet unrealised doctrine of post-conflict peace-building is thus unrealistic given present international and domestic structures. The transformation of these very structures into cultural norms of a culture of peace is the objective; thus it is limited in its ability to convince of its own viability. The difficulty in producing communities which live a culture of peace is during its proliferation when imbalances based on unequal application exist. Post-conflict peace-building for a culture of peace is a long-term and ongoing process which would require significant transformation at all levels of interaction for an open awareness and understanding of the mutual advantage and sustainable security which it can bestow. 2.0 ASSESSING THE RESEARCH QUESTION The Hobbsian assumption regarding the true nature of humankind as a war of all against all, is opposed to the civilising process that seeks to constrain and limit such warring impulses (Mayor, 21). The continuation of armed strife gives ammunition to the suggestion that there is a natural element to conflict at all levels of interaction. Countering this, there are also attempts to stop conflict, or at least solve them in time to reduce the negative impact and harm caused. In 1986 the convergence of an international team of scientists convened to deliberate on the assertion that violence is inherent in human nature and therefore that war is inevitable (Adams, 29). The resulting Seville Statement on Violence is the result of the multi-disciplinary contributions, with a reliance on the scientific. It is crucial to acknowledge the lack of any biological explanation for violent responses to conflict. The presumption that non-violent conflict resolution is possible is basic to a culture of peace and post-conflict peace-building, in isolation and in their alliance. This study will not concern itself with the discussion of the content of the Seville Statement on Violence, however, it will acknowledge its findings as the basis for creating doctrines to promote non-violence. 2.0.1 Context In Which The Research Problem Has Emerged As the twentieth century is coming to a close, reflection on the transformation in the structural organisation of the international arena, as well as a real change in the nature of conflict, seem inevitable. There exist two major trends which have contributed to the emergence of doctrines for the promotion of non-violence in resolution to become a linking culture of humankind. The transformation of the nature of conflict and the transformation of the global power arrangements are the two circumstances which have created a readiness for an innovation. The end of the Cold-war era thawed the member states of the United Nations from the virtual deep freeze the bipolar power structure of the preceding half century had encased their acting capacity in. Following this release, peace research became hostage of the post cold-war optimism for a newer more peaceful world order of relations between and within states. Now, precisely one decade later, the unleashing of prospects for peace struggles toward attainable and self-sustaining peace. Growing international attention is now being paid to the prospects of developing peaceful and non-violent interactions amongst states and collectivities in response to the opportunities of a new era. An interdependent international and domestic security has emerged, and the impact of various actors must now be acknowledged (Hassner, 20). It must be questioned, what function would serve beyond ideals of co-existence and utopian global community existence. Peace has an undeniable relation to development (Adams, 17). Will lasting peace then have a more promising relation to sustainable development? The answer to such questions of benefit and gain from non-violent interaction have not been positive for advocates for a more peaceful world order, however, only because insufficient attention has been granted to the realisation of projects to support this assertion more specifically peace-building and a culture of peace. Expenditures for peace can be more difficult to guarantee as its aims and objectives may appear abstract and unrealistically visionary, despite scholastic research and international organisational objectives granting more attention and credibility to the notion of creating peace (Castillo, 36). The grim statistical and eventual accounts of military might as key economic actor, overshadow the existence of a culture of peace (Castillo, 35). The second development is the more frequently occurring cases of intra-state conflict as opposed to inter-state conflict. There is significant research which points to the conclusion that there is not a blurring of the traditional distinction between international and domestic conflicts. International conflicts are having increasingly serious consequences at the domestic level, and domestic conflicts are having greater repercussions at the international level (Delmas, 59). Ethnic disputes, secessionist movements and struggles to rid the shackles of colonialism have created much internal strife in many nations, particularly those of the developing world. Peace research and international relations are disciplines covering the same subject concerning war and peace and political violence (Nobel, 13). Peace researchs commitment to peace, and international relations history of diplomatic manoeuvrings combine for an enlightened study of the current construction of attempts to achieve non-violent resolution. In assuming the task of evaluating tendencies toward peace, this study undertakes the definition of the complexities and intricacies of such a phenomenon. This analysis will, at its pace, necessitate categorising and outlining conceptions and abstractions such as: a culture of peace, peace-building, conflict resolution, violence, conflict, peace and security - despite the inherent nature of these concepts to defy static definitions. However, do not be lured into dependence on these broad specifications which would ultimately hinder the concept of a universal culture of peace existing within the legitimate international systems and organisations of states - these threaten to distract on the journey towards comprehension of both the abstract and practical elements of these concepts. 2.0.2 The Resolution of Intra-State Conflict by Pacific Means As this research concerns itself with the resolution of intra-state conflict by peaceful means becoming both a component of an international culture of peace and the subsequent institutionalisation of this cultural development in the United Nations, attention must be granted to the compulsion of communities to do so. The underlying logic compelling the international community to become involved in such instances of violent conflict, is the notion that if nothing is done to bring peace to devastated post intra-state conflicts the cycle of violence will continue to sap the strength of the international system (Han 878). Codifying this moral pursuit, the Charter of the United Nations devotes Chapter VI to the pacific settlement of disputes. Article 33 of Chapter VI compels Member States to independently resort to peaceful measures in the resolution of disputes before any subsequent actions can be taken. No mention is made to whether these disputes may be intra-state or inter-state in nature and the ambiguity can thus be used to consider intra-state conflicts as much a threat to international security as conflicts between states. Article 33 empowers the Security Council to call upon Member States to resolve conflicts by peaceful means as it deems necessary. The conservative stance of the Security Council in relation to forwarding pacific settlement of disputes is considered more wholly in the upcoming sections of this study devoted to challenges to the proposed doctrines. What is important to note at present is the existence in the United Nations of prescriptions for non-violent resolution of conflicts, however under-utilised. 2.1 ESTABLISHING THE RESEARCH PARAMETERS Before pursuing the complexities and critical issues, it is necessary to take a few moments to diverge to the pursuits of international and national resolution of conflict and violence. The central assumption that there are commonalties which an international civil society is in pursuit of is not a universally accepted principle. Furthermore, what type of peace and security are desired, and how are these concepts to be distinguished for their counterparts are critical components of this research. The need to have an understanding of what peace is to involve whether any violence constitutes designation as acceptable and what kind of security the international community seeks compared to national aims and pursuits will now be considered. The research in this study is based on the following foundations for post-conflict peace-building and the further entry of a culture of peace. 2.1.1 The Existence of An International Civil Society Most significantly, this analysis is based on the assumption that an international civil society exists in which there emerge common traits and desires. The local civil societies are those which are acknowledged to be marginalised in the processes of reconciliation and resolution and thus empowerment. The promotion of civil society suggests that there are common inputs and values which can be contributed by this portion of society. The question presents itself, are there universal principles which can be said to apply to all communities, such as the right to peace. An international civil society presupposes an existence of such common drives and organising principles which transcend political organisation. The benefit of security in a multi-disciplinary sense could be a motivation of the international community to protect its own interests while promoting the development of its global neighbours. The values which would be deemed important by advocates of an international civil society are likely to receive considerable resistance as there is no singularity of organisation at any level. There does not appear to be one form of state, view of human rights or ideological persuasion: so why then would there be a collective pursuit for peace? The quest for common goals and objectives of humankind is based on a belief that such commonalties exist. The assumption in the alliance an international civil society has with the value of a concept is viewed as universal in desire and content. The universality in thought of creating a durable peace is not to present a truth as there is considerable counter effort which suggests that the civil social values are placed elsewhere. Developing a peace culture is based on the universal values of respect for life, liberty, justice, solidarity, tolerance, human rights and equality between men and women (Adams, 19). 2.1.2 On Peace and Violence It must first be noted that peace carries with it ambiguities which will not be statically categorised but will be regarded for the entirety of its direction (UNESCO Ruel, 113). The constitution and content of peace is contrary to that of violence; it is then the non-violent reaction to disputes and tensions. Peace, defined as the absence of violence, termed negative peace, does not include practices of structural violence or the threat of violence that which positive peace comprehensively incorporates. Negative peace is therefore simply the absence of war. Much scholastic attention has been paid to the concepts of positive and negative peace and the role and aspirations of each. For the purposes of this analysis, positive peace is the end goal of post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace and will be understood as: dynamic, peace is a just and non-violent solution of conflicts. It generates an equilibrium in social interactions, so that all of the members of society can live in harmonious relations with each other. Peace is good for society. Where there is violence there is not peace. Where there is injustice and absence of liberty, there is no peace. In order for there to be an equilibrium in the dynamic of social interactions, peace must be founded on justice and liberty (Adams, 91). Such a comprehensive definition includes the lack of any threat of violence and the removal of structural discrimination in the face of tension and hostilities. The discourse surrounding positive peace could easily consume the entirety of this research, however, such a discussion is not the purpose. It is merely acknowledged that there are existent two objectives in creating peace, and that this study will progress with the aspiration of a comprehensive positive peace. The practical extension of this principle, as an inalienable right to peace, will be explored in the coming sections. The above consideration of peace has placed it in contrast to violence, and it is necessary to give brief mindfulness to this concept. Violence culminates as the contradiction to peace as its, defining feature is as large-scale, organised violence (Starr, 154). A pictorial depiction of the cycle of violent is incorporated into Annex III to illustrate the various layers of overlap and interconnection between the cycle of conflict which complicate the creation of peace. The highlighted components of Annex III are the target of creating positive peace in order to eliminate the violent occurrences of the remaining entries. Peace-building and a culture of peace seek to transcend the culture of war in which all mentalities and bodies are poised for the worst (Mayor, 6). The methods in which to alter mentalities are a considerable portion of this research, however, at present the culture of war is dominant (Mayor, 8). When faced with deprivation, discrimination and any number of negative stimuli, it is not common to expect an active non-violent response. The likes of Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King and the Dhali Lama are promoters of non-violent protest in the face of conflicting interests and desires. In these cases, although moderate levels of success where achieved, the ultimate self-sacrifice in life was the price for such advances. In order for active non-violence to be as effective as the violence culture is, it must root itself as a norm and as a culture. 2.1.3 On National and International Security Countering the Westphalian notion of states as possessing ultimate authority, with no higher restrictions of their respective sovereignties, is the granting of influential power to interdependent actors. Both a culture of peace and peace-building create the opportunity to have flexibility in states willingness to accept non-state actors as legitimate for political, social and economic considerations. The transition from war to peace cultures requires a transition from societies dominated by the State, sole organiser of securityIt must welcome and promote citizen participation in national and international affairs (Adams, 19). Security is to be recognised in the research of this study in a multi-disciplinary sense in which several participants and levels of interaction have influence. The spill-over effects of national insecurity to regional and international place the latter two in positions of vulnerability. The growing effect of regional actors, non-governmental organisations, corporate and interests contribute to an interdependent understanding of security. In international law, in the international context, there are many non-military, non-armed aspects that adversely affect peace, the security of states and international security (Goucha 11). It is the basic assumption that domestic conflicts have increasingly international scope and effect, blurring of the traditional distinction between international and domestic conflicts. (Espiell, 57), which leads to the analysis of intra-state conflicts as a significant element of global security concerns. The importance of the relationship between peace and security can be viewed in the United Nations Charter. In the Charter, where the term peace is invoked security is paired with it which leads to the conclusion that: peace is not possible without international security and there can be no international security without peace (Espiell 57). In order for security and peace to be realised, the threat of violence and the appropriate structures for expression will need to be promoted. However, for the co-operation that is required to implement the peace-building for a culture of peace, states can not be concerned with security alone in the conventional sense which is military (Werner, 289). These structures and attitudes are part of the aims of peace-building and a culture of peace which starts with: security to be found in protection from aggression and defence against armed conflict (Smoker, 137). The more extensive reach of social, economic, political and cultural security are, absolutely essential to see security from a global, multidisciplinary perspectivesecurity is a complex, interdisciplinary and global concept (Espiell, 53). 2.2 CONCLUDING REMARKS The most crucial parameters which must be kept in mind at all times in the reading of this study is the comprehensive nature of positive and durable peace. The application of peace-building and culture of peace doctrines is for the purposes of disallowing conflict to re-emerge in intra-state communities. It is certain that there are a multitude of variables, definitions, actors and influences both internal and external in the pursuit for self-sustaining peace, however, the objective is a positive peace and the removal of threat of violence in the interactions between communities. 3.0 OVERVIEW OF THE PEACE-BUILDING DOCTRINE Putting an end to war requires creating a substitute for war. Samuel Payne This portion of the study will commence with a brief normative analysis of the origin of peace-building. Peace-building is interdisciplinary as it involves the political, social, economic, ideological, practical and ideal formations of states and collectivities. The work of peace-building occurs at all levels of interaction, or at least should if it is to achieve any lasting results (Goucha, 10). Comprehension of the political and temporal circumstances which gave birth to such an approach of conflict deterrence and the instillation of principles to guard against a re-emergence of hostilities, is compulsory to shed light on its current existence. The situation in which peace-building dawned, will provide a more fuller understanding of why it has adopted its current structure and character. Following, an examination of the place peace-building inhabits within the United Nations system will illustrate the need for a more prominent role for the concept in terms of international commitments for the long term benefits it can serve. The limitations peace-building faces will be the focus of a brief account of it successes and miscarriages, and will uncover the element lacking in the equation to reduce conflict and violence from collective interactions. The combination of this investigation will disclose the missing link which confines the potential of peace-building; which if left unaltered will sentence its future existence to an under-used and deficient component in the resolution and reconciliation processes. 3.0.1 Objective Of The Peace-building Doctrine Peace-building aims at durable peace. Such an aspiration involves: the restoration and maintenance of civil society, law and order, human rights promotion and protection, arrangements for refugees and displaced persons, the holding of elections, re-establishment of local administrations and government utilities, de-mining, and reconstruction and development (Sollenberg, 73). All of these activities promote lasting peace by finding conclusion to conflict beyond political agreement. In this context, peace-building is a never ending task but one which ultimately save lives and resources (Sollenberg, 73). There exists nowhere a clear delineation at which point in time following conflict the title of durable and peaceful coexistence can be bestowed upon former conflicting communities. The objective is thus void of a clear parameter in which to judge its success and failure rate. The objectives are as Sollenberg, and the SIPRI scholars concede, never-ending in their pursuit. 3.0.2 Peace-building Doctrine and Conflict Resolution Communities emerging from conflict are faced with the daunting task to reassure that conflict does not re-emerge. To comprehend the emergence and form of peace-building one can not do so without a general understanding of the international atmosphere at the time of its inception. Such an understanding will reveal the context in which the doctrine emerged, in the hopes that insight as to the form assumed may be granted. As a new element of United Nations activities for use in the event of conflict in or between its constituent members in which there is a readiness to remodel structurally, peace-building is generally cited to be ten years old, in its formal existence (Bertram, 387). The term emerged from the Secretary General of the time, Boutros Boutros Ghali, in his report on an Agenda for Peace. The many activities which are capable of promoting peace and reconciliation have existed and been in practice for time beyond this, however what we are concerned with here is the formal organisation of such manoeuvres into the practices of international and national governments and organisations. The birth of peace-building coincides unmistakably with the end of the cold-war and the re-energised United Nations mandates in the resolution of hostilities. The desire to see lasting peace become a reality as well as the desire to see positive dividends from the overall processes of conflict resolution, are the driving force. The end of the bipolar security struggle of the cold-war created the sentiment that peace-building could now be possible in an organised international framework (Goucha, 9). The process of building peace is not one existing in isolation. The four components of conflict resolution which dominate the processes of conflict resolution and impediment include preventative diplomacy, peace-making, peace-keeping and post-conflict peace-building. These components involve respectively: measures of early warning, fact finding and prompt diplomacy, attainment of peace agreements and settlements, monitoring the conditions of peace accords, and creating the institutions and attitudes necessary to entrench non-violent resolution procedures into the fabric of a given society. This is an oversimplified summary of concepts which include extensive theorising and practical applications. An in-depth analysis of each is not within the confines or scope of this undertaking. What is crucial to comprehend is that peace-building can only occur once preventative diplomacy has failed and peace-making and peace-keeping mandates have been initiated. Peace-keeping and peace-making are addressing conflict management where as preventative diplomacy and peace-building aim at conflict transformation. As their aims differ, so do their methods and the likelihood of lasting impact. Figure 3.1 was created by the present author and is intended as a summary of the phases of major activity for each of the elements of conflict resolution. As an estimate of the ideal level of activity, the figures are not compiled based on actual performances. The stages of resolution are divided into: Pre-conflict, conflict start, toward resolution, following agreement and long-term. The level of involvement are classified according to activities for: preventative diplomacy, peace-making, peace-keeping and post-conflict peace building. These are field terms which are used in the classification of conflict status. Preventative diplomacy and peace-making/keeping are in antithesis to one another as a failure in one brings forth the requirement of the other. Preventative diplomacy seeks for early warning systems and confidence building measures to alert the international community to impending violence. If these signals are ignored or not given due attention and a conflict does emerge, the resolution aims of peace-making and peace-keeping are invoked in order to seek an end to the hostilities and find equitable agreement, between opposing parties and groups, to their disputes. Furthermore, the objectives of peace-keeping are to implement the stipulations agreed by the relevant parties to commence the earliest objectives toward cease-fire and conflict cessation. Peace-keeping, which was originally developed as a response to the political and military constraints of the cold war years, planted international military personnel to keep the peace between hostile forces while the two sides settled and implemented the terms of a political solution to their conflict (Bertram 388). However, a cease-fire is not enough to claim success. Only when the necessary political, social and economic structures are in place and there is some notion that the root causes of the original tensions have been eradicated can a more fuller and holistic concept of peace be proclaimed, this is where post-conflict peace-building comes in. Peace-building is a reaction to the inability of the other components of the resolution processes to root positive structures and to empower for self-sufficiency and sustainable peace. As stated previously, the objective of disallowing a re-emergence of conflict is the goal. In debating how this could best be achieved, the choice to correct the current components is one option. The aims and objectives for building peace were not, and could not, be infused into peace-making and peace-keeping without overburdening and jeopardising their pre-existing aims. It is entirely too premature at the time of pursuing peace settlements, to initiate institutional changes. In addition, there is a great possibility that anyone seriously trying so would be in mortal danger, despite the fact that such transformations are exactly what such a situation demands. Moreover, progress would likely be the target for sabotage as opposing parties may target such work if they assumed their advantages where being revoked. Therefore, post-conflict peace-building appears to be a more mature occurrence than what peace-making is designed for and is in excess of the objectives of peace-keeping. The conditions which must exist in order for any of the above to be conducted is a logic of compromise. Historically, this has taken place at the point of pending exhaustion by one or more of the parties to the conflict. International progress in the direction of inclusion of peace-building seeks to allow the atmosphere and opportunities for situations of democratic governing, socio-economic stability and independence to occur where they were previously void. There can be no building of a peace without the will to see such an occurrence on the part of those who will have to live under it (Mayor, 59). Based on this understanding of the place for peace-building as a component of United Nations conflict resolution, this analysis will continue. 3.0.3 Existing Conceptions of the Peace-building Doctrine The United Nations released in 1992 its recommendations for pursuing peace and security in the coming age in a publication entitled, An Agenda For Peace. These recommendations where compiled by the Secretary General of the time, Boutros Boutros Ghali. Ghali incorporated the concept of post-conflict peace-building and its potential in the alleviation of conflict and violent interactions. This is where post-conflict peace-building first appeared as a concept in formation. As the first attempt to come to an understanding of both the capacity and confines of what was to encompass this emerging concept, the innovative reasoning therein has directed its later clarification. An Agenda for Peace cites the aims of post-conflict peace-building to embody, comprehensive efforts to identify and support structures which will tend to consolidate peace and advance a sense of confidence and well-being among people (Ghali 1995, 61). To date this has remained the essence of the peace-building doctrine. Boutros-Ghali undertook the aim of adjoining post-conflict peace-building to the processes of the conflict resolution at the level of states to assure international peace and security. The current Secretary General, Kofi Annan, denotes peace-building to be the identification of support structures which will strengthen and solidify peace (Annan, 10). This adaptation does not incorporate the mention of well-being among people as Boutros Ghalis does. This omission is considerable and should be questioned in relation to United Nations objectives. For, it is primarily the reconciliation of civil society which is lacking in current United Nations efforts at conflict resolution, and that which must be embodied within the doctrine if it is to achieve any lasting results. The intent behind the variation in the definitions must be questioned as it may reveal the United Nations attitude toward the levels of interaction and involvement in attempts to eradicate violence. Does the exclusion of the civil society component indicate a reluctance to commit missions of the United Nations to issues of a conventionally domestic nature and thus a response to sovereign challenges. Now, some seven years following the emergence of the concept of procedures which have become internationally recognised, the most widely accepted understanding of what peace-building is to incorporate asserts that the international community must, place achieved peace on a durable foundation and to prevent the crisis from recurring by dealing with the underlying economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems that created the conflict (Han 838, [Ghali, Castillo]). As a comprehensive and holistic theory for the processes by which to attain lasting peace, mandates and imperatives have been initiated in its name. At this point, an understanding of the roots of conflict are incorporated into the pursuits to deter conflict re-emergence as well as development in fields distanced from the critical conflict elements, social and economic most notably. The evolution in these three definitions involves an initial ambiguous position supposing a general need for well-being amongst people, the subsequent removal of the civil component for the purposes of United Nations commitments led to a less committing explication. The dilemma post-conflict peace-building confronts is the recurrence of conflict despite previously agreed conditions and programmes for the cessation of hostilities. The manoeuvres to deny such occurrences through peace-building initiatives may tap into interdisciplinary tactics to accomplish these ends. The objectives of post-conflict peace-building address conflict with the proposition of positive peace as the desired goal and seeks to eliminate the structural arrangements and occurrences of discrimination, domination or denial of sustenance. This is a multi-faceted process which demands a consorted effort on behalf of the communities paralysed by violence and conflict. The reconstruction of entire societies and states is a long-term process which can not be satisfied with short-sighted activities. This most current description of the composition of the peace-building doctrine is encompassing 3.1 A THREE TIER TASK MODEL Based upon the formulation of peace-building doctrine, it is beneficial to present three stages of post-conflict peace-building in order to obtain a broad understanding of all that it is to hold in principle and practice. It is necessary to remain above the issue in order to see its greater potential as a whole concept. This will take into account the challenges of the individual tasks of each stage in the development towards resolution. Let us now proceed further with the anatomisation of post-conflict peace-building. Figure 3.2 outlines some of the practical activities which can take place at the various phases of post-conflict peace-building. The entries within each stage are understood to take place in bulk within its respective category, however, it must be emphasised that the process as a whole involves ongoing work in all elements of the respective categories as there are no definite start and end dates. The graphical depiction is deliberately constructed as there are no strong lines delineating confinement to one paricular period. Each of the three phases combine to form post-conflict peace-building with the same objectives and principles. These are most significantly, the pursuit of democratic peace with actions and processes to entrench non-violent reactions to conflict and disagreement. Figure 3.2 THREE TIER TASK MODEL SPECIFICATION OF ACTIONS CONFLICT OVERLAPTRANSFORMATIONMODE OF THOUGHTRepatriation of Refugees (ongoing).Electoral Monitoring Promotion of Democracy.Advising Judiciary: emphasis on neutrality.Reintegration of Refugees.Development Assistance.Long-term Economic Development.Mine Clearance.Community Empowerment (Dem.).Confidence-building Measures.Demobilisation.Governmental Restructuring.Discover Commonalties via Dialogue.Decommissioning.Economic Empowerment.Truth Commissions.Reintegration of Ex-Combatants. Economic Alternatives to Military Sector Activity.Advising/Training Security Personnel.Confidence-building.Infrastructure Rebuilding.A culture of peace. 3.1.1 The Conflict Overlap Tasks Boutros Boutros Ghali, who coined the term post-conflict peace-building, observed that it often commences prior to the end of conflict (Ghali 1994, 265). This is the time period in which tasks to alleviate the effects of war are undertaken. Table 2.0 illustrates some of the pressing and immediate activities which must be undertaken in order to progress to the later stages of development. Overlap of tasks, at this the first possible stage in which post-conflict peace-building can realistically take hold of is present. The period of overlap thus necessitates significant co-ordination amongst the component parts of any mandate being undertaken for maximum gain. The critical issues of demobilisation and reintegration are examples of assignments which are both necessary for conflict cessation and resolution. Responsibility for these processes, as they extend to various organs of the United Nations and external actors such as NGOs operating for peace-building, is a complication. The need for clear communications between these organs is necessary for effective decision making and action plans. 3.1.2 The Transformation Tasks Once the initial recovery objectives are met, the subsequent task to be engaged in is the modification of institutions and structures to cure them of the impact of violence which has had distorting effects. Involved here are processes of electoral monitoring and restructuring to allow for democratic practices of representative selection: institutional reform to alleviate discriminatory, irregular and prejudiced regimes and practices and development strategies to ensure socio-political stability. What this means practically is the democratic involvement of citizens. Judicial, penal and constitutional reforms are often key elements to embed elements of free choice within an society in the present world system. 3.1.3 The Mode Of Thought Tasks The third and final development involves itself with the restructuring and transformations of mentalities of war towards mentalities of non-violence in resolution. United Nations efforts in post-conflict peace-building to date have focused on the first two of the three stages while leaving this pursuit void. It is ultimately because of the inability to satisfy the requisites at this juncture that conflict is likely to recur. Whatever stimuli threaten the processes of resolution and reconciliation, conclusively it is the inclination to resort to violence to decide between disagreements that nullifies previous developments. When faced with situations of depravity, injustice and inequality individuals and groups alike take up arms in a mentality of justified resistance. The justification is not the issue, however, what threatens security, stability, development and ultimately peace are the means. The objectives of the mode of thought phase are therefore ingrained and lasting social and economic rehabilitation to reduce threats to peace and national reconciliation. The next chapter, and in fact the bulk of this study, are devoted to filling the gap in this component of conflict conclusion in transforming mode of thought. 3.2 UTILISATION OF PEACE-BUILDING DOCTRINE BY THE United Nations The United Nations while faced with a vast range of peace and security issues has continued in the last two years, 1997-1998, the adoption of a conservative stance toward intervention in internal conflicts (Sollenberg, 36). With the hopes that this will not remain the case, evidence of a growing awareness that these are areas [internal] where the activities of the United Nations and its specialised agencies might prove more effective (Hassner, 19). However, as part of the purpose of this study involves uncovering the viability of peace-building, it is necessary to specify the level at which significant efforts have been focused. Organised peace-building has emerged most notably within the United Nations. NGO and international organisations do conduct programmes with mandate for peace-building, however, the distinction lies in the legitimacy in international politics the United Nations receives from its member states. As one of the most active international organisations to date in the resolution and reconciliation of conflict, the United Nations system has developed strategies to promote resolution and encourage capacity building for nations emerging from conflicting situations. United Nations peace-building is cited as having twin goals of securing peace and promoting democracy (Bertram, 396). The coupling of these principles and the assumption of democratic necessity for peace will be critically examined shortly. An inherent challenge lies in implementation of peace-building and the United Nations principles of sovereignty, neutrality and attempts at securing democratic peace. As a collective organisation of states, the United Nations is empowered to deal as arbitrator and mediator of conflicts between states. However, this structure is limited when confronted with the changing face of conflict. 3.2.1 The Democratic Peace Phenomenon As stated above post-conflict peace-building within the United Nations system is linked with a democratic peace phenomenon, the United Nations is active in promoting and assisting in the establishment of democratic electoral processes, something that would have been unthinkable during the ideological stand-off of the cold war (Sollenberg, 73). This ignited activism stems from peace and conflict studies to date having come up with one firm conclusion which is that democracies do not fight one another, or if they do it is very rare (Starr, 153). United Nations peace-building is based and conducted on this premise. United Nations peace-building in addition to pursuing the empowering capabilities of economic and social development, assumes and asserts that democratic organisation of states will best suit these objectives. Peace is thus to be achieved through integration of States into a hegemonic ideology. This trend is termed by Roland Paris as liberal internationalism and is according to him responsible, in part, for the short-comings of efforts to achieve self-sustaining peace to date (57). The risk of directing international attention for the creation of peace to the promotion of democracy could either help or hinder the process as a whole. The resistance of communities to the hegemony of democracy may create insecurities and thus further conflict. Ventures to minimise the destabilising effects of external influence in internal affairs should become a key concern in the rethinking of peace-building in order to avoid rejection of peace along with democracy where it can not survive. As a principle these are noble pursuits, but the practice is not in accordance with these stated objectives. Active United Nations involvement in the democratisation process is also welcomed by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development as they recognise that their decisions can have a significant impact on peace-building (Sollenberg, 73). Such influence over the domestic patterns of development and organising principles of state, contradicts the declaration that democracy can not function if it is the result of non-indigenous creation. The feasibility of democratic integration for the purposes of peace-building for a culture of peace will be considered again in the later portions of this study. 3.2.2 The Role of States In The Peace-building Doctrine for Intra-State Conflicts Crucial to the analysis of the emergence of post-conflict peace-building in light of a shift in the composition of conflict itself, is an understanding of the role of the state at the international level of interaction. To what extent states will remain primary actors in the processes of peace-building depends substantially on their status and the likelihood of continued legitimacy. This commits us here to a intimate dialogue of contending international perspectives to answer the question of validity of states as primary actors, particularly in relation to intra-state conflicts. The assumption that economics and a state-centred rationale (realism or neo-realism) for primacy elusively confirms the worlds major economic powers sustain a substantial proportion of their power and prestige via funding from war production sectors. Digging deeper into the current structures of international and domestic relations reveals the influence of secondary actors, in the processes of reconciliation, as substantial. The Realist school of thought falls into this analysis in that it stipulates that no matter what other concerns exist in the international arena, military security as the main power struggle will always have states act such that they wish to preserve this balance of power. For Realists, the State is always the primary actor which acts to perpetuate the balance of power that would maximise its personal legitimacy. However, in an international system which is being consumed by globalisation, such an explanation can not be deemed legitimate. Arguing against the Realist reliance on the explanation of relations suggesting that there is some objective reality that can be explained in a scientific manner, are those of the Interdependence school. What this means for peace-building is the ushering into the international arena of actors having equal significance as the state. For the purposes of peace-building, the ineffective reconciliation of civil society following enduring rivalries is one such actor which demands international attention as an influential ingredient. Realism with its dependence on the state and military security as the balance of power structure and Neo-Realism with its premature acceptance of economical considerations into the power balance of the international political sphere, are limited in that they both rely on the state as the main factor of interaction and power. The nature of conflict in the contemporary setting once placed within such a system of structures, creates greater insecurity as it is wholly foreign to the configuration of primarily state-centred logic. Although there can be no question that states are trying to maximise benefit from interaction in the international system. The maximum benefit for self-sustaining durable peace is the objective of post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace. To attain the maximum benefit for the international community provided by lasting resolution of intra-state conflicts now more so than in the cold-war era, progress toward comprehensive security and development must be driven by the individuals who comprise the entirety of the system, those with agency. The justifications for a comprehensive approach for enduring results to be realised will consume the remainder of the present study. 3.3 CHALLENGES TO PEACE-BUILDING DOCTRINE AND UTILISATION The changing face of conflict, that to which the United Nations system must now adapt, raises concerns of involvement in situations contrary its foundations. A compromise must ensue from any reform to the United Nations system which would allow for activity within states for the purposes of peace-building. As stated earlier, the Charter of the United Nations provides for both the pacific settlement of disputes in Chapter VI and the empowerment of the Security Council by the Member States to act for the promotion of international security. The availability of establishing subsidiary organs for the promotion of the principles outlined would in principle incorporate structures for post-conflict peace-building and later for a culture of peace. However, any undue involvement in the personal affairs of the more individuated levels of organisation must be protected against concentration and abuse of power and privilege by those yielding it. Sufficient checks and balances are thus necessary to preserve the integrity of the respective communities. The most recent section of this study, dedicated to the role of the state in peace-building doctrine, has shown the tension between conventional positions and the demand for newer and more representative international systems. The increased incidents of conflicts within states do not imply that the international community is influenced less by conflict. The possible consequences of refugee flows, environmental destruction, and conflict spill-over may result in regional and thus international instability. How to protect against these effects while preserving the integrity of the international legal organisation of states is a complicated matter and one of the most significant challenges to peace-building. 3.3.1 State Sovereignty As A Legal Challenge to Peace-building Doctrine in Intra-State Conflicts The issue of sovereignty presents itself as a challenge to the assumption that in communities torn by years of internal conflict, a United Nations presence is required to bring about a break with the past and provide the necessary assistance in national reconciliation and rehabilitation (Han, 878). In arguing for a more prominent role for post-conflict peace-building in the resolution of conflict, taking into consideration the more frequent occurrence of intra-state than inter-state conflicts, involves innovation in the willingness to transpose sovereignty in the name of security. The inability of the United Nations to protect the domestic populations from internal conflicts is the driving concern. The defining trends of peace-building missions to date include:  they deal with conflicts within rather than between states, the host government is one of the parties to the conflict, their aim is to develop and/or implement a political transition following or accompanying an end to military hostilities, and a central component is the reform or establishment of basic state institutions. Highly invasive by nature, the actions for peace-building manipulate the conventional state-centred rationale. The United Nations was created as an inter-state mediator and is not constitutionally endowed to mingle in the internal affairs of states. The Charter of the United Nations specifically refers to international conflicts and makes no prescriptions for internal tensions (Brownlie, 2-4). Intra-state conflict is to date not subject to legal protection within the United Nations system. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorise the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state (Bertram, 391). States thus have justification in disallowing United Nations access to their domestic situations should they see fit. However, the likelihood that such a process be followed in states weakened in the process of conflict is doubtful (Castillo, 30). Communities coming out of conflict require financial and resource aid from the international community, and are thus subject to the conditions the international community deems necessary. The Declaration On Principles Of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance With The Charter Of The United Nations, is a specification of the principles set out in the Charter in regards to the obligations of States to resolve conflicts by peaceful means. In this document, territorial integrity, obligations to settle disputes by peaceful means and disallowing the use of force as threat are all incorporated. Furthermore, wars of aggression constitute a threat to peace which is held accountable by international law (Brownlie, 43). As every state has the right to determine its political, social and cultural identity systems without intervention on the part of other states, post-conflict peace-building is at risk of alienating this right. The extent of the violation of the concept of sovereign rights depends on the form and execution of peace-building which is invoked. The coming chapter which will introduce the concept of a culture of peace and the subsequent alliance between the two doctrines will reveal the commitment to a voluntary initiation on the part of the targeted communities. The sovereignty debate will be considered further once the full content of the proposed alliance between peace-building and a culture of peace is expounded. In relation to peace-building in isolation, it is significant that legal protections exist for Member States of the United Nations to resist any enforced activity in relation to resolving conflicts within the domestic confines of the State. 3.3.2 Enforcement Capabilities Of The United Nations For Peace-building Initiatives First, to the consideration of to what extent should external actors mingle in the settlement of disputes beyond their immediate concern? More importantly, how far should they, and are they, obliged to remedy situations and facilitate foreign societies? Danger lies in transplanting foreign characteristics and traits into cases in which the donor organs will be rejected by the cultural and situational antibodies of the local recipients. At risk of upsetting the domestic balance of power in regions ravaged by war in such cases, the United Nations must justify its presence and missions to the host country and its Member States. This serves the dual purposes of ensuring that the United Nations does not broach state sovereignty in pursuits for the purposes of post-conflict peace-building. Secondly, there has to be a desire for peace at the level of parties to the conflict. This is founded on the assumption that a restructuring of war-torn areas must be willed. The international community, however, feel their vested interests in the resolution of conflicts in combination with the various forms of investments they have contributed deserve some influence in these events. For instance, a country contributing time, finances, manpower and resources to the process of acquiring a cease-fire does not wish to see these efforts in vain with the resumption of conflict. This is the international interest in the processes of post-conflict peace-building (Han, 878). If the processes of peace-making and peace-keeping have been accomplished, peace-building comes in to ensure the long lasting stability and certainly of the actions of the international and domestic communities. However, based on current sovereign integrity, there is unlikely to be any enforcement of peace-building as it is both against the nature of the objectives of the doctrine and the international legal composition of states. 3.4 Peace-Building Case Studies: Application And Assessment Varied histories, geo-political considerations, socio-economic patterns, cultural tendencies, political and partisan trends, and global positioning make each conflict situation unique. Therefore, there can exist no single equation or formula for success in creating peace or the institutions thereof. We know little really about when and where peace-building succeeds and fails because of its novelty (Bertram 390). However, the events of the past ten years have revealed some trends as well as practised cases. Through heuristic experiments, successes and failures have occurred some of which will be examined following. The trend which will be revealed in the explication of the case studies is that, institution building has so far been of only partial success in creating a world society free of war (Bertram, 381). Han introduces the existence of three trends in United Nations post-conflict peace-building and these will comprise the basic structure of this analysis of application. The cases are enlightening in that they emerge from three different regions and can provide insight into the need for additional activity in order to consolidate peace. These cases emanate, and are entitled, from United Nations mandates in conflict resolution situations in Cambodia, El Salvador and Somalia. The three cases are pioneering initiatives in peace-building not only in that their interest is in the reconstruction of societies to degrees previously unheard of in United Nations involvement; but they are also distinguishing in the manner in which peace-building was invoked. Major external actors can be attributed in these cases for participating in the conflict in various levels. However, the most recent events and those in which the United Nations has been most active involve civil strife and the attempt to appease it. 3.4.1 The Case of Cambodia As the will for peace should ideally be present in order for peace-building to be a likely success, the case of Cambodia should have had the most promising results as it was initiated on invitation of the United Nations for the purposes of peace-building organised in the United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC). This type of situation is ideal when United Nations powers are required in the transition stage or when there is a complete lack of authority amongst contending parties to conflict (Han, 869). Following over 20 years of civil war, the United Nations ran elections in 1993 formed a coalition government between two former adversaries the Cambodian Peoples Party and the Front Uni National pour un Cambodge Independent, Neutre, Pacifique, et Cooperatif. The conflict rendered Cambodias social and physical infrastructure devastated, its population displaced, and its administration ineffective, the task of UNTAC in carrying out its mandate was no less than to rebuild the entire Cambodian society (Han, 847). However, continued distrust has led to the existence of two parallel national governments (Paris, 65). The instability this situation perpetuates has increased fragmentation and not consolidated peace. Despite economic and political liberalisation and the resulting economic growth; it can not be said that Cambodia has emerged from a vulnerable status to a self-sufficient and peaceful society. UNTAC responsibilities included repatriation of refugees, cease-fire verification, elections monitoring and the promotion of law and order to name a few elements. As one of the United Nations most comprehensive mandates, an adjoin aid package of one billion dollars was granted between 1992 and 1993 in order to continue pursuits for peace after the termination of UNTAC (Han, 851). Aiming at activities for civilian sector support, the Cambodian case was the most ambitious and intrusive United Nations mandate for peace-building to date. Unfortunately, unequal distribution of economic growth has most recently been contributing to social unrest. Peace-building did not harm Cambodia, international assistance seems to have been instrumental in bringing the countrys civil war to an end (Paris, 65). In spite of the cessation of active hostility, the aim of reconstructing society by removing the threat of violence appears to be far from complete. Primarily, the objectives of peace-making and peace-keeping have met their objectives while peace-buildings pursuits to create the structures and conditions which remove violent reactions have not been fully realised. 3.4.2 The Case of El Salvador Confined to work within the stipulations of the conditions agreed to by the parties to the conflict, the United Nations in the El Salvador case receives a more restricted realm of activity. The United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) was hailed as the prime example of the need for a fully integrated approach to peace-building (Han, 851). ONUSAL had human rights and reconstructive tasks attached to its mandate, but its ultimate failing was to come from the verification status it held, as opposed to one of enforcement (Han, 855). Han concludes the El Salvador mission is the case of United Nations activity within the sphere of post-conflict peace-building which provides for limitations to power and action and a level of accountability. Following twelve years of civil war between the national government and the Frente Farabundo Marti de Liberacion Nacional (FMLN), a United Nations peace agreement was negotiated in 1992. The peace agreements thus provided for sweeping military, judicial, electoral and constitutional reforms (Han, 852). These are no doubt compulsory for reconstruction and reconciliation, however the critical element of civil society rehabilitation is strikingly absent. United Nations peace-building involved the conducting of elections which until recently appeared to appease former hostilities. Paris finds that recent spending cuts and policies of fiscal constraint are cause for concern, given that economic distress has been a major cause of previous conflicts in El Salvador (p. 67). Compared to the other cases, El Salvador has maintained relative success in its transition to non-violent conflict resolution. Linking its relative success to peace-building alone would be premature considering the influence of a national programme which targeted civil society rehabilitation, a culture of peace programme. The coming chapter is concerned with the doctrine of a culture of peace and its viability. 3.4.3 The Case of Somalia Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter was used in the case of Somalia as an enforced initiative for peace-building mandates was undertaken even before agreement was reached by the parties to the civil war (Han, 861). Initially, United Nations involvement in the Somali conflict existed under the traditional efforts of peace-keeping and humanitarian relief (Han, 861). What led to the radical implementation of Chapter VIIs enforcement capabilities was stated by the Secretary General as the critical need to establish an environment in which humanitarian relief could be undertaken. Widespread starvation in Somalia was the justification for such an intrusive mandate. Aggressive disarmament as could not have existed in either of the two previous cases was undertaken . The inherent violation of sovereignty in this instance highlights the need to have such measures undertaken only in conditions of extremity and is legally questionable based on respect for sovereign integrity. It is striking that Roland Paris does not, in his examination of peace-building operations from 1989 to 1997, include Somalia as it was primarily a peace-enforcement mission rather than to consolidate peace (Paris, 55). There is no questioning the enforcing nature of activities conducted by the UN in Somalia. Determining actions as peace-building operations is at question. United Nations presence in Somalia was primarily devoted to peace-enforcement to stop hostilities and not to peace-building measures to consolidate an existing peace (Paris, 55). Somalia has experienced renewed tensions and the subsequent expression of these hostilities in violent rather than non-violent means. Furthermore, the implementation of structures to promote democratic empowerment have not fully realised their potential as civil society continues to mobilise around violent modes of action in order to pursue their aims. Because of the blurring between peace-building and other mandates for resolution initiated by the United Nations in the case of Somalia, the distinction between the components of conflict resolution is difficult to decipher. The Somalia case was dedicated primarily to demilitarisation and thus was lacking in the other tasks of peace-building. Therefore, in addition to violating the indigenous will for peace-building mandates, the Somalia case further alienated itself from the principles of peace-building in its single minded objective. The comprehensive nature of peace-building was disregarded in Somalia where the conflict resolution remained for the most part in the remedial stages. 3.4.4 Assessing The Future Of Peace-building Applications The future of United Nations peace-building depends on the willingness to learn from the successes and limitations of those initiatives conducted in its first 10 years of operation. Since the end of the cold-war, post-conflict peace-building operations have been conducted in eight states: Namibia, Cambodia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Mozambique, Angola, Rwanda, and Bosnia. Of these eight cases, only one has achieved stable peace to date Namibia (Paris, 54). The manner in which to test the success of peace-building efforts requires patience as time is the main determining factor. If time progresses and violent conflict does not resume, then a clean bill of health can be issued. The problem with testing post-conflict peace-building initiatives is their novelty. After taking off to a modest start, the increased number of United Nations missions partaking in elements of peace-building have occurred with more frequency. Unfortunately, the above named states have not achieved self-sufficient peace. One strategic error is the emerging norm for duration of peace-building operations of one to three years (Paris, 58). The long-term needs of the processes of peace-building can not be significantly introduced in such a relatively short period of time. Unless greater seriousness and attention in terms of finances, personnel and time are granted, it is unlikely that any of the activities and reforms will endure based on a premature foundation. The failure of peace-building initiatives to date is in part wrongly prescribed by Paris in the assertion that the enforcement of liberal internationalism has devastating effects on the recipient states. Paris does state that this is not by any means solely responsive for continued instability (57), however, he misses the simplicity of the problematic. Those affected by the instability of state structures and national economies re-emerging from conflict are most seriously threatened by the cultural and societal acceptance of the use of force to remedy such situations. Part of the problem lies in the inability of localities to adapt to foreign structures and demands which are alien and distorting the indigenous constructions. Likely weak and part of a multitude of factors contributing to the original conflict, elements of local origin must become the solutions for revised structures. The destruction of social systems and integrity by violence has an impact on the sense of self for any community. Reparation must be directed toward healing through creativity, education and communal participation (Lumsden, 381). The addition of a new doctrine to satisfy this requirement is the topic of the coming chapter. 3.5 The Problematic Of Agreement At The Top In debating why in the processes of conflict resolution primarily structural adjustments have been the focus of United Nations mandates, pressure results from desires to see successful results for temporal and financial investments to appease political and voter sentiment. Unfortunately driven by these motivations for short-term change of processes that require long-term gradual adjustment, projects will likely realise only limited benefits. The logic of appeasing public opinion for the support of resolution endeavours is, thanks to advances in public awareness, governments are now under a certain amount of external pressure to be more faithful to, more compliant with, the will of the people in their handling of international relations (Merle 28). To empower is to arm civil society with self-sufficient cultures for the peaceful settlement of disputes (Lumsden, 378). It is precisely because negotiations and settlements have been conducted and agreed for the most part at the level of states and regional organisations that the prematurely celebrated victories have overshadowed the incapacity at the level of civil society to co-exist. The bottom-up approach to conflict resolution is not to be invoked in isolation, however, is to be combined with the already widely practised top down methods of political agreement. Meeting in the middle ground, the combination of these approaches can provide for self-sustaining and durable peace and enduring principles of non-violence at all levels of analysis. 3.6 Concluding Remarks With the emergence of post-conflict peace-building doctrine in this decade, there have existed opportunities to apply and evaluate the potential such a concept has for the long-term resolution of disputes through non-violent means. The limited applications of peace-building has sentenced it to an early existence plagued by inability to promote non-violent resolution structures and practices in societies formerly ravaged by war and violence. The target of modern peace-building doctrine has been the structural implementation of democratic organs of state in regions and areas which may not be ready for the infusion of alien constructions. The inability of programmes of the United Nations to alleviate conflict resumption is due to a lack of understanding of the root causes of conflicts as well as a complete disregard for a component of all societies in which reconciliation must take effect in order for any organisational or ideological manoeuvres to be realised civil society. The current United Nations attempts at peace-building have been undertaken in complete disregard for the force and effect of civil society and root level reconciliation. Insecurity is perpetuated by this omission which paralyses the very objectives peace-building proclaims to uphold. In order to combat the failings of the formation of the peace-building doctrine and practice, it is necessary to uncover the potential in the current international system of relations for the bottom-up motions toward creating systems of non-violent interaction. It is only when the political agreements for peace made at the levels of state are combined with like-minded pursuits from empowered citizenry, that United Nations peace-building will be capable of achieving its ambitions to disable conflict resumption. 4.0 THE CULTURE OF PEACE DOCTRINE You can bring us the culture of war in a plane and humanitarian aid in a truck, but you cant bring us the culture of peace, because it is a tree with its roots deep in our land. Mozambican Village Elder Proceeding from the assumptions outlined in the previous chapter dedicated to an analysis of post-conflict peace-building doctrine; this study will now proceed by making an addition based on its deficiency in disallowing conflict re-emergence. Implementing the theorising and practices of culture of peace doctrine will add the missing element which has hindered United Nations post-conflict peace-building initiatives of the present and past. The aim of coupling the two relatively new doctrines is to make United Nations post-conflict peace-building comprehensive and more effective. To come to an understanding of the scope of a culture of peace in the current international system, it is necessary to first explore its objectives and proposed actions to achieve its desired results. This involves first an investigation of what has come to comprise the principle of a culture of peace. The circumstances as well as the sources from which cultures of peace have arisen will be presented; more specifically from an interdependent world order in which non-governmental or international organisations are having increasing influence over the matters of peace and conflict. Based upon this foundation the second task of this chapter involves linking culture of peace doctrine to post-conflict peace-building doctrine to illustrate the positive contribution the alliance can have. The assertion that United Nations adopt formal programmes of a culture of peace in its peace-building mandates. A review of the peace-building case studies introduced in the previous chapter will illustrate the benefit of creating an alliance in action between the two concepts. Two crucial characteristics which will emerge from this alliance are their long-term and multi-disciplinary nature. The extension of time invested and spheres affected is extensive, however the only manner in which to actually achieve conflict termination. 4.1 A Culture Of Peace Or Cultures Of Peace What limited theorising and conceptualising there has been on the creation of cultures of peace uses the term in the singular sense a culture of peace. Are we to then assume that there is only one cultural manifestation of non-violent conflict resolution and reconciliation. UNESCOs constitution declares: that a peace based exclusively upon political and economic arrangements of governments would not be a peace which could secure the unanimous, lasting and sincere support of the peoples of the world, and that the peace must therefore be founded upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind (Goucha, 10). The many formal and informal organisation of individuals into collectivities are based, in part, on cultural characteristics which are perceived to distinguish groups from each other. This is a particular goal which would produce a singular culture. However, as a prominent premise of culture of peace doctrine is the inability to enforce it or implant it into societies a culture of peace must arise out of the local contexts in which it will have effect (Adams, 16). In this regard, the various forms of cultures of peace which may emerge are distinct from each other in the means they use in order to come to the likeminded end of a culture of peace. The various indigenous forms of a culture of peace are to be regarded as cultures of peace, as there can be no single formula by which to accomplish non-violent resolution. As each community differs in many ethnic, historical and geo-political experiences, so to will their cultures for peace have differing traits for the similar purposes of achieving lasting peace. Therefore, when referring to a culture of peace in the singular sense let it be understood to encompass the overall goal of achieving non-violence in interactions between communities. The term cultures of peace in the pluralistic sense is to then involve the sub-cultures which will have practical organisation for the singular purpose. 4.2 Unesco And The Culture Of Peace Doctrine Culture of Peace discourse emerges primarily from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) program launched in 1994. It is impossible to separate the development of a culture of peace doctrine from UNESCO, as it has ushered the concept toward international exposure. In this emerging culture, the multiple challenges related to war are addressed by complex and multi-dimensional responses which engage local, regional and international actors (UNESCO 1995, 1). Essentially, the program and concept combine to form a preventative approach to situations of international conflict. In considering the legitimacy of UNESCO as an arm of the United Nations, albeit somewhat less effective than the power of the Security Council for instance, it is necessary to question to what extent the creation of programmes and the furthering of this working concept can affect the functionings of the international arena. UNESCOs fields of competence given its title are: education, science, culture and communication. Therefore, it is within these realms that cultures of peace can first be disseminated in order to ensure later acceptance and operationalisation. According to Federico Mayor, these activities of the human intellect are understood as the windows into a more tolerant and civilised future (p. 9). As can be concluded from the availability of resources, UNESCO has played the crucial role as forefather to the working concept of a culture of peace, which is becoming better situated to assume a more prominent role in the resolution and further prevention of intra-state conflicts at the hands of the politically mobilised United Nations. According to UNESCO itself, its role is of an integral part of overall United Nations responsibilities to the consolidation of peace (UNESCO 1995, 6). As a concept, a culture of peace surfaced through broad based international fora for the purposes of coming to an understanding of the potential for peace. It is necessary to devote considerable attention to the endeavours of the UNESCO Culture of Peace Program, as it is here that many of the intentions and abstractions are being considered. Due in part to its infancy, there is a sufficient lack of academic research devoted to what exactly a culture of peace is to be understood to encompass. The lack of publications independent from the UNESCO programme is consequential for our analysis here. Let it be noted that primarily two works in the sources compiled for this study, Parajon and Lumsden, are not UNESCO publications relating to a culture of peace. However, the concepts of what is required for lasting peace are the topic of several works which simply fail to place their findings within the context of a culture of peace, that which could easily apply. This study has then found it necessary to rely on the so named culture of peace publications with a secondary consultation of works which refer to the concept in content but not in name. With this in mind, let us proceed to the deconstruction of the concept for its clarification and understanding. 4.3 Culture Of Peace Concept Clarification It is essential to note the comprehensive nature of the concept of a culture of peace. The abstract nature of a culture of peace doctrine is in its extension beyond the political domain into the socio-phychological realm of transformation of attitudes and social processes. It is essential to understand that a culture of peace must replace the culture of violence and aggression against the very foundations of international security (Espiell 59). The challenge for the field of international relations is in ushering into the relations stadium, the legitimisation of elements of socialisation and interaction to have effect on the international system. This involves a suspension of conceptions of unit levels of analysis having less to do with the political trends and circumstances and thus paying insignificant attention to civil society. A culture of peace is placed, since its inception, on the defensive as they are confronting existing norms and structures to which transformation appears to come slowly and with difficulty. Assuming the defensive, the definitions and understanding of a culture of peace is therefore explained in relation to the existing systems of resolution to acknowledge their prominence at the same time as recognising their deficiencies. The circumstances and situation in which culture of peace doctrine emerged will be explained, following which an analysis of its aims and objectives will outline how it has taken shape and under what influences. The dissection of the culture of peace doctrine foundations will then turn to an examination of the pursuits to apply the fundamentals of culture of peace doctrine will highlight the addition it seeks to incorporate into the processes of resolution and reconciliation of violence and conflict. 4.3.1 Stimuli For The Emergence Of Culture Of Peace Doctrine Of the infinite number of issues in which disagreement may emerge some examples include: the plethora of competing ethnic identities, ideologies of East and West; economic injustice between North and South, access to common resources, political organisation, workings and effects of power politics, profit seeking, economic security and development. Of these named possibilities, parties to such disagreements are faced with the choice to take up arms in defence of their views and needs, or they may resort to active non-violence. Culture of peace doctrine does not distinguish between the justifications for any conflict, it prescribes the behavioural reactions to disagreement. An underlying assumption of those promoting a culture of peace is that culturally, the international environment is currently socialised to more readily implement violence and war as opposed to pro-active non-violent measures(Adams, 4). It is because of this global culture of violence and war that the machinery of war has been allowed to obtain a paramount position in the affairs of economics, politics and social interactions. What makes the scholars of the culture of peace doctrine assume that the time is ripe for implementation of such an ambitious undertaking? The Current Director General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, has devoted his independent conceptualising on the aptness of a culture of peace in his work entitled The New Page to just this quandary. The end of the cold-war created a sentiment that the world was positioned to pursue more peaceful interactions with the shadow of the bipolar power arrangements removed (Adams, 1). However, as was illustrated in the previous chapter, conflict changed in nature and thus there occurs now a transformation, a sort of evolution, of the character of conflict. As a concept of the 1990s, a culture of peace has emerged in reaction to the military dominance of the cold-war era and the collective will of those seeking to eradicate their localities of the effects of a stance of readiness for violence; the end of the cold-war provides a unique opportunity to separate security from the culture of war (Mayor, 7). In other words, a culture of peace is in opposition to a culture of war. The sense of a readiness for the birth of non-violent conflict resolution as a characteristic of a global culture is a value laden presumption which assumes a significant transformation of the international structure of relations is both possible and ripe. The validity of such an assumption of international readiness for peace is difficult to measure as it is something which exists in the consciousness of the various actors and is dependent on time. According to Adams, the major stimulus for the adoption of culture of peace programmes is that, if we do not act in time, future generations will have no time to act at all (27). Here, the sense of readiness is aligned with urgency attached to a critical fear of the effects of the culture of war and violence if left to grow without serious counter effect by the promotion of a culture of peace. The dual motivations of readiness and urgency are the two main factors which can be concluded to have given birth to the notion for transformation to non-violence in interactions. 4.3.2 Influencing Change For A Culture Of Peace From The Bottom-up The impact of war and violence, regardless of duration, has devastating effects on the structures which function to meet the needs of those under their influence and keep the processes of government in flow (Lumsden, 380). Moreover, the psyche of the citizens is likely scarred by factional, partisan and/or guerrilla warfare (to cite but a few of the infinite possibilities) and has endured the horrors of war and does not easily shed the thoughts and memories they have come to endure (Lumsden, 377). Conceptions of an enemy have psychological, sociological and political functions (Mor, 199). Transforming policy toward an opponent can be slower and more difficult to foster than a drastic change in economic policy (Mor, 199). The task of deconstructing the attitudes and conceptions of the other the opponent can be undertaken from the unit level of civil society as one option. The counter option includes conventional attempts at resolution, primarily peace-making and peace-keeping involving agreement at the top, political agreement. This sort of accord is an integral part of processes of reconciliation and is not to be eliminated with the creation of a culture of peace. What should be aimed at, is a similar degree of effort to accommodate the grass-roots, non-governmental and citizen based movements for non-violence. In reference to the United Nations mission in Cambodia it has been observed that, the United Nations placed little importance on designing a culturally-appropriate peace-building model, or promoting culturally-sensitive behaviour by its personnel (Tennant, 2). This quotation exemplifies the inability of this particular mission and extends to all others, for the United Nations to adequately address the basic unit civil rehabilitation. An additional parameter which is to be placed on this analysis of the creation of a culture of peace is, the scope which is to be assigned to the concept. As we are concerned here with the transformation of attitudes and behaviours through targeting the local communities, more specifically the individual conceptions and perceptions, the processes can extend to every form of interaction between human beings. The processes of socialisation within households, local level interactions, and the social structures of violence which are perpetuated by the media; are all contributing factors to the existence of cultures of violence or of peace. As a whole, culture of peace doctrine addresses the importance of unit level transformation, thus educating the individual to the alternatives to violence and promoting the advantages of non-violent resolution of disagreements. This is a broad based mission which is multi-disciplinary and all encompassing in its target. However, for the purposes of this analysis we will limit this discussion to the interaction amongst formerly warring communities and their perceived enemies. It is essential to be aware during this discourse of the basic level of transformation which is to involve individual processes of perception, need, and attitudes and behaviours must be opened to the belief that active non-violence is a viable option to achieve desired results. The outright elimination of violent interactions is a task which does not at present seem possible nor probable, nor should we hold culture of peace doctrine to such a task which it would inevitable fail at. For the objectives of a culture of peace, to which we now turn our attention, this analysis prescribes a bottom-up level of active involvement in the processes of transformation to non-violence. 4.3.3 Objectives of Culture of Peace Doctrine As will be illustrated shortly, the objectives and practices of a culture of peace should ideally exist in all phases of conflict resolution, whether preventative or remedial, in order for it to achieve its long-term aims. First, it must be understood that the primary objective of both culture of peace and peace-building is the achievement of secure communities with a reduction of violent conflicts. The dyadic relationship between security and peace is both reciprocal and inseparable. Without peace there is no security, and where there is no security there can be no peace (Espiell, 57). Simply stated, culture of peace aspires to solidify both components of this dyad. The manner in which this is to be realised according to the current Director General of UNESCO, is the creation of a demilitarised security which can protect citizens based on rule of law and democratic practices (Mayor, 7). It is not necessary to divulge further into the value states and communities place on security, but be reminded that the intention is to induce comprehensive security. Thus, theory and practice are constructed around the desire to see positive peace, co-existence and thus the removal of threat with insertion of positive structures and attitudes toward conflict resolution. The choice presents itself now, whether to observe the creation of a culture of peace in the broadest interdisciplinary and temporal context or to insert it into pre-existing structures. The four stages of conflict resolution outlined in the previous chapter devoted to peace-building doctrine, are the most widely used and accepted in regard to the international consolidated efforts of the United Nations system. A culture of peace, if implemented in its fullest sense, is to be a long-term frame of mind and interaction which is multi-disciplinary and affects all levels of interaction. Although culture of peace involves preventative efforts, this study will be focusing on the critical programmes of post-conflict peace-building where acute need for resolution and reconciliation in a comprehensive sense is required. We are concerned here for the most part with the first named circumstances of recent conflict as it resolves critical situations, those in most immediate need of transformation as their attitudes and behaviours have been significantly effected by the course of violence and are most vulnerable to resumption of violence as they have lived under the belief in it for the duration of the conflict. The limitation of culture of peace doctrine for the purposes of this study to the realm of post-conflict peace-building is for the purposes of illustrating the affect it can have in areas which are in serious need of transformation and reconciliation. The process is two fold, firstly situations emerging from conflict must initially overcome the patters and attitudes which confined them to conflict. This is an ongoing process which combats stereotypes, and group antitheses. However, in order to convince people of something, they must first be shown that it is true (Merle 33). Difficulty arises in the reconciliation of the unit levels in their situations of despair and frustration that non-violence would have little effect in achieving their aims. So the targeting of the unit levels of interaction must see that the efforts of non-violence can bring forth change as readily as they perceive violence can achieve their goals. The slow change of the international system would not reveal such possibilities speedily therefore a large-scale concerted effort is needed to illustrate such a reality. However, at present there does not seem to be much likelihood of such a development as attention and awareness of the culture of peace doctrine is not extensive. Secondly, nations must have ingrained attitudes toward the non-violent resolution of hostilities in order for the international arena to be transformed for a culture of violence and war to a culture of peace and non-violence. The first component refers to acute regions in which immediate transformation will benefit attempts to disallow conflict reappearing. The second process, not of the concern of this study, involves incorporating a culture of peace into environments not faced with immediate threat of violence or insecurity. It is questionable to what extent communities would be likely to invest resources in such projects which do not address current concerns. The question must be raised to what extent a culture of peace seeks to eradicate violent reactions from international and domestic interactions. It seems utopian and idealistic, not to mention the large possibility that this type of discussion is likely to be termed nave if it is taken on superficially, to be concerned with a discourse on the removal of violent responses to disagreement and threat. It is discussed in the UNESCO reports on a culture of peace and indeed is founded in the principles of the concept itself; that it could only be successful if it were based on shared values, traditions and culture (Parajon, 2). 4.4 A Culture Of Peaces Partnership With Democracy A culture of peace seeks to create positive peace in its comprehensive sense where negative peace has been achieved; the absence of active war or violence. In other words, in situations where war has recently receded, a culture of peace doctrine and practice seeks to further the prospects for peace by removing the threat of violence and implementing the structures and attitudes of positive peace. According to the fundamentals of a culture of peace outlined by UNESCO a partnership with democracy. Political security in a culture of peace be provided by systems of participative democracy is proposed to secure this positive peace (Adams, 17). Democracy is added to the equation of non-violence in order to achieve broad-based security. The justification is that institutions embodying democratic practices and the potential for participation in the processes of representation and expression, are necessary for peace and security. This delicate issue of a culture of peace and the assumption that it can exist and have lasting effect only in situations in which democracy also exists, is difficult to assert in a world system composed of differing forms of political organisation. There have been in the past and continue to be major struggles between competing ideologies and the battle for hegemony; the cold war for example. The end of the cold war has not eliminated competing ideologies and political integration is not a reality at present. The intention of the democratic peace phenomenon is the finding that democracies rarely fight one another (Starr, 153). The institutionalisation of power which allows for procedures and time to reduce the possibility of taking up of arms, or the threat thereof, to resolve any disagreement is the underlying logic. There is a channelling of conflict through structures and procedures which are time consuming and have the effect of reducing the chance of resort to violence. This is of course a generalisation of the democratic peace theory and it by no means extends to every level of interaction under the umbrella of democratic living. One of the presuppositions of the creation of a culture of peace is that it can not be imposed from above and must originate in the indigenous experiences and characters of the communities in which it will exist (Adams, 16). In the next chapter the challenges to implementation will be intensely considered, at which time this problematic will be addressed further. For the time being, it is necessary to be aware of the link which current thinking on a culture of peace has to democracy. 4. 5 Four Principles Of a Culture Of Peace Doctrine UNESCO transcribes four fundamental principles within a culture of peace: ( a ) Non-violence and respect for human rights, ( b ) Intercultural tolerance and understanding, ( c ) Sharing and free flow of information, and ( d ) Full participation and empowerment of women. ( a ) Non- Violence and Respect for Human Rights The principles of non-violence and respect for human rights emanate from founding documents of the United Nations in which the conceptualising on the role of these principles is undertaken. The natural tendency to violence has previously been claimed void by the Seville Statement on Violence. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, promotes activity to alleviate the negative impact of policy and practice as well as the residuals of war which violate fundamental human rights; those which the international community has come to accept as inalienable. The rights to security and peace via non-violence have come out as basic principles for a culture of peace doctrine. The extent to which a culture of peace has to present committed itself to upholding all of the rights prescribed by the universal declaration has only extended to a commitment for the right to peace and security. These rights are not specifically delineated in the Declaration, however, a culture of peace doctrine invokes them as basic principles(Adams, 15). Critical opposition to codified human rights is based on the notion that, such a very wide gap between civilisations can never be bridged by creating more and more standards relating to human rights (Merle 25). In addition, the partnership with democracy re-emerges as, human rights can have no real existence without democracy, and there is no democracy without human rights (Espiell 55). The challenge surrounding this supposition will be critically examined in the next chapter. ( b ) Intercultural Tolerance and Understanding With the end of the cold-war and the changing nature of conflict toward more frequent occurrences of intra-state conflicts, there appear to be a fragmenting of previously cohesive societies into component parts. Culture, language, religion and political perspective are justifications for the disintegration of states into smaller units. It is not within the confines of this analysis to dictate whether or not there is legitimacy to be found in such claims of secession, however the means by which these motivations are pursued are of concern here. It is the violent positioning of opposites that is the target of this second fundamental principle of a culture of peace. A culture of peace would not be viable in a situation in which so-called ethnic criteria are used to determine citizenship in a national or a cultural community (Mayor, 92). What this quotation illustrates is the pursuit for a singular principle of an international civil society striving for common attitudes and behaviours of non-violence. Tolerance is a basic principle of a culture of peace in that it is the justification for non-violence is here adjoined to a uniting culture of humanity. This resonates of utopian thinking and suggests the ultimate deconstruction of the international arena as it currently is structured particularly in the suggestion of devaluing nation-state identities. This radical opinion is adopted by Mayor in his philosophising on the creation of a culture of peace. I assert that the extent of creating a world government with the deconstruction of ethnic identities according to Mayor is too idealistic for any serious consideration of the potential levels of tolerance which can be acquired in international and domestic relations. ( c ) Sharing and Free Flow of Information Freedom of information and expression are western concepts which are subject to difficulty in implementation in light of actual community structures. As the doctrine and programmes for a culture of peace are relatively new conceptualisations, the distribution of information is a necessary first step to foster an awareness that such a principle can be realised. Knowledge can be a tool or a weapon depending on the will of the owner of it, relevant to a culture of peace is the willingness to make information available. Information on the choices that people have in response to conflict and disagreement, the choice to act with the use of force or threat thereof or to opt for active-non-violence. If civil society has access to information concerning the potential of non-violence in conflict resolution, there will be greater possibility for its acquisition. ( d ) Discourse On The Full Participation of Women For a new international security culture to exist it must do so in an inclusive manner to avoid alienation and marginalisation which may be contributing factors to instances of violent conflict. The debate surrounding feminist perspectives on security, as discussed by Ann Tickner in her writings Man, the State, and War: Gendered Perspectives on National Security, cannot accept simply systems level theory. Security discourse can not be polarised to only male or female, a combination of both is required to have a balanced and legitimate portrayal of the international system. To state that such things as gender neutrality would never come into existence would be premature. Multiple factors come into consideration when debating the possibility of a non-gendered concept of security; culture, ethnicity, time, and place to name a few. The notion that human behaviour can be scientifically organised and categorised so as to state that a particular behaviour will or will not take place, is unfounded. Non-gendered security and non-violent cultural characters are instances of concepts not currently in existence, however, neither are they dismissable. The concept of gender, in both theory and practice in the international security dilemma is not something that prediction can dictate. The proposition of reform to the entire socialisation process, is something which although seemingly too ambitious, can occur over a period of time as a culture of peace propose to do. However, future events can facilitate or hinder the process in which feminism and self-sustaining peace are written into the equation of political security. On the most fundamental level, the concept of reformulating security discourse is the ideal initial and necessary target. The statement, little attention has been paid either to gender issues or to womens particular needs with respect to security or to their contributions towards its achievement, (Tickner, 53) is accurate. In order to effectively combat gendered insecurity and imbalances, reform must take place at the root level and extend through out the system as a whole. It is essential to note, that there is not simply one feminist perspective as varying cultures hold differing values to women and their place in society each indigenous culture of peace will incorporate this. There will undoubtedly be numerous versions of the feminist perspective, which can only make the discourse more complex yet complete. When trying to ascertain the realistic implementation of Tickners feminist perspective on security, it must be determined what time frame in which it is to occur. The re-writing of political security discourse and an acceptance of this on all levels can and will likely take numerous generations, as will realisation of a culture of peace. However, despite frustrating the tedious advancements, in order to ensure it is a permanent shift the transformation will have to occur at this pace. The story of masculine security must be re-written in a sense that those currently subscribing to it believe they have a new and better one to live: that of engendered security discourse, theory, and practice. As to how this reform might take place, initially humanity must educate on the validity of an inclusive definition of security until previous masculine notions are slowly broadened to incorporate both genders of humanity. 4.6 Justifications For United Nations As The Means By Which To Operationalise A Culture Of Peace. In contemplating the justifications for including a culture of peace within the United Nations peace-building initiatives, various alternatives appear. Justifying the level of activity UNESCO possesses in this realm, security is not merely a political question for the United Nations, a question of economic or social development: it is a question that is of necessity bound up with the whole of humanitys cultural development. UNESCO is the only organisation in the United Nations system capable of producing and offering to states and to the other international organisations a complete, global conception of security (Espiell 63). The work of many Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs) perform the function of reconciliation of former warring parties. The United Nations is not the only method in which to promote non-violence and reconciliation, however it does provide certain advantages which can not be surpassed by the others. United Nations peace-building initiatives are themselves highly underdeveloped due to their premature status and insufficient training or workers and implementation strategies. Peace-buildings very novelty creates the easy addition of a culture of peace without disrupting structures and processes which have become static in their directives. As a culture of peace is an innovative manner of creating durable peace, the implementation within an international structure which could incorporate its unconventional targets and tools would be easier achieved. A second benefit that United Nations leadership can bring is the international scope and effect it possesses, in terms of its mandate, only the United Nations has the capacity to integrate the many political, humanitarian, military and socio-economic activities relating to peace and development (Castillo, 31). The extensive and multi-dimensional aims of a culture of peace requires collaboration and major efforts towards its realisation. The exposure such a concept would receive within the international organisation of states in the United Nations, would be a significant boost to the primary awareness of it as a viable alternative. In addition, if the international community where to back such a concept, the availability of funds and resources would be far more extensive than the capabilities of most NGOs. The reality of the long-term nature of culture of peace programmes is that finances are crucial to upholding the activities which would bring about interaction and exchanges amongst conflicting parties. The training of facilitators, or peace promoters, would also be a costly process as the comprehensive goals of a culture of peace would demand in-depth training and a comprehensive understanding of the community, its needs and desires. 4.7 Operationalising Culture Of Peace Doctrine Reconciling principle with practice is a daunting task given the all-encompassing aims of a culture of peace. Annex VII is a visual portrayal of the processes from principle to practice in the translation of doctrine to implementable strategies. It is crucial to regard the objectives of the doctrine in a practical light as they are to meet a multitude of challenges upon application. Let a culture of peace not be confused with the plight for a utopian world order in which every need is met and every interaction without difficulty. The application of a culture of peace faces restraint by the norms and attitudes which pre-exist. The aim is unique in that it targets the unit levels for reconciliation, those which have been formally left out of United Nations peace-building mandates, and in fact all processes of formal conflict resolution. It is crucial to keep in mind that this discussion deals primarily with United Nations peace-building attempts to date, and the potential for a culture of peace doctrine to enrich such endeavours. It is true that a culture of peace conceptualisation extends beyond the formal levels of organisation and permeates every component of existence. Now, as the task of implementing a culture of peace doctrine is explored, be aware that the discussion remains in the realm of organised states within the United Nations system as it presently exists. In December of 1996, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted by consensus a resolution calling for the promotion of a culture of peace, thus recognising the concept originating and developing in UNESCO (Sources no86, 7). As has been illustrated, in the concept clarification of a culture of peace, a crucial characteristic of a culture of peace doctrine is that it can not be enforced from above. What then can the United Nations or UNESCO do to facilitate the creation of an awareness of the benefits of a culture of non-violent interactions? The function of facilitator and mediator with little guarantee over influence would likely receive scepticism from both the United Nations and its funding agents. Issuing financial resources to complete the tasks of creating a culture of peace which would not implant external models or trends and thus rely wholly on local stimuli. The ensuing insecurity of the international system would equate with international funding of programmes which would be outside of their control. The role of the United Nations, as an international organisation of states, would be to aid in the processes of reconciliation by highlighting the needs of the community. A knowledge of the given area would thus be compulsory as the unique needs and manner in which a culture of peace is to be undertaken. The nature and impact of international resistance to culture of peace programmes will be pursued in the coming chapter in which the viability of such a concept for implementation will be fully analysed. Creating settings for interaction between all the parties emerging from conflict designs to facilitate the processes of consolidation and construction based on an exchange of views on a community experience (UNESCO 1994, 3). Turning now to the practical application of a culture of peace within peace-building initiatives, it is valuable to discuss a few of the possible manoeuvres which can be invoked, in addition to specifying the targets. Joint participation of former warring factions in the planning and implementation of projects is best accomplished if the projects are constructed around the basis of a mutual goal (Parajon, 2). In order to attain cross-conflict participation, the sense of threat needs to be reduced with a common neutrality of location and leaders. The individuals working with the projects for peace-building for a culture of peace have assumed the title of peace promoters in the UNESCO programme (Parajon, 2). As the doctrine of culture of peace is innovative so too are the tools with which to it is to be implemented with. Culture of peace practices, like its conceptualisation, go beyond conventional procedures to achieve its set objective non-violent interactions. The manner in which current culture of peace programmes have been undertaken are not those typically within the realm of concern or activity of international actors in the promotion of peace. What is striking is their utter simplicity as they aim to create dialogue and interaction amongst groups with histories of distrust and segregation. In the coming section devoted to UNESCOs missions to create a culture of peace, the programme specifics will be investigated. Of the concrete measures which can be instituted for the abolition of violence in response to conflict Vincenc Fisas has categorised the activities into ten base concepts which will provide stronger foundations for peace. The connection between doctrine and application can be observed through the attempt to put into practice the four principles of a culture of peace. These ten principles follow: Prior to this proclamation, several forums where organised to elaborate on the concept and to gather experts in numerous fields to consult on the possibilities and pending construction of a culture of peace. In the application of the doctrine, UNESCO has until present devoted its efforts to the dissemination of information to create an awareness for a culture of peace. This has been further secured with the United Nations General Assembly Resolution of 15 January 1998 proclaiming the year 2000 as the International Year for the Culture of Peace. This year will undoubtedly create a more extensive dialogue on the development of the fundamentals as well as evolution of activities to realise the creations of such cultures of non-violent resolution of disagreements. This analysis makes the addition of placing the ten basic foundations for culture of peace practices within three objected transformation plans. There is no hierarchy to the division of activities and programmes into the three categories, they have been constructed primarily based on the similarities in their means and ends. It is crucial that all three must achieve results in order for the application of a culture of peace to attain any success. The first category involves transformation of existing structures with the tools of reconstruction and empowerment. The second category deals with the methods with which to realise attitude and behavioural transformation with education as its weapon. The third and final category targets the military machine and the construction of communities around military organisation in the transformation of the military. 4.7.1 Transformation via Reconstruction and Empowerment The combined objectives of bases one, seven and ten highlight the need to have self-sustained development and structures to support channelling conflict through non-violent means. The basic assumption is that if communities have their basic needs met for such necessities, for example food stuffs and shelter, that security and peace can have a greater success rate. Here, the reduction of the objects over which conflict can emerge is the target. Many of the projects which would need to be issued to promote development and economic as well as political empowerment threaten current systems and thus conventional functionings of the global and local realms. There would be undoubted resistance by key economic and power actors who benefit from current structures and are unlikely to see a viable future for equal advantage in a culture of peace. For a great part, these portions of applying a culture of peace deal with socialist conceptions. The aim to provide all with the basic needs (base one) is something not as of yet obtained. Whether the reason for this is inability or lack of will, is not within the confines of this analysis but neither are ruled out, but an assumption that a combination of the two factors are the contributing reasons. The prospects for peace to create a viable alternative to the economics which the culture of war has fuelled, will be analysed in the coming chapter, and it is for then that we leave the remainder of this discussion. 4.7.2 Transformation via Education Essentially, all aspects of change and transformation which can be initiated in order to realise a culture of peace are concerned with transformation by education. The use of violence is one of two possible choices communities and individuals are presented with when faced with conflict, the other being non-violence. In order to create a culture in which it is natural to opt for the later of the two involves a logic of compromise from the outset. This compromise holds that there is a mutual advantage to resolving disagreements non-violently. In resorting to violence at least one of the parties believes that it is the best way in which to achieve their aims. If violent reactions are essentially outlawed as foreign to community interactions, whether between states or component parts, then there can be a move in this direction. The viability of this occurring in the present global and local structures will be considered more substantially in the following chapter, challenges to a culture of peace. The education of the potential for non-violence in interactions between communities for the purposes of reducing intra-state conflicts may start with the education of the principles for peace with the youngest generations affected by such conflicts. This results from the conclusion that the negative effects war has implanted into the experiences of the youngest can have the longest effect by the nature of the time in which they will live with these experiences. As there is a long-term process towards removing violence from interactions and creating the institutions and practices which will encourage positive peace, investing resources in youth presupposes that they can overcome the effects of violence. More tolerant citizens can be created from those least affected by the myths and discriminatory practices and beliefs of the generations which are responsible for the current structures. However, the impact that local and familial factors on the present as well as the future can not be ignored. Therefore, programmes targeting awareness of discriminatory practices and the harmful effects of ill-founded myths will need to be undertaken. Such moves presume an open environment in which sensitive and often contested information can be distributed. Here the implementation reverts back to the third principle of a culture of peace, free-flow of information, as well as the concern for the partnership with democratic structures which would promote the freedom of information. Both are necessary if these objectives are to be met with less resistance and thus have positive results. Again, it is necessary to postpone the validity of such an occurrence until the following chapter when both propositions will be critically examined. 4.7.3 Transforming The Military Organised around a stance of readiness to assume violence to defend objectives of a given community, officially recognised military groups are key contributors to the continued existence of a culture of war and violence. The attitudes and perspectives of the military need to be transformed to contribute to a culture of peace (Adams, 77). Change toward non-violent resolution would not necessarily eliminate military organisation, but would at least alter the functions and objectives. The main function, being the threat of force in order to induce consensus is the principle target. Given the current construction of communities around military protection, transformation of the military is likely to be the last of the three principles to realise any real transformation. Culture of peace doctrine does not deal with the possibility of totalitarian regimes emerging once progress has been made toward routine use of non-violent conflict resolution and how it can protect against abuses by communities or regimes which either never fully transform and revert to the past or those simply not conforming. The transformation of the military can not for these reasons alone be equated with the removal of it. The objective here will then have to be as Adams has stated, the creation of more tolerant attitudes which will remove discrimination and abuse of power (31). This would be an adequate atmosphere in which a culture of peace could operate. 4.8 INFUSING a CULTURE OF PEACE INTO THE PEACE-BUILDING CASES The peace-building case studies of El Salvador, Cambodia and Somalia have exemplified the reality that recurrence of violence is not only possible but likely given the current construction of attempts at resolution practically void of any culture of peace mandates. The purpose of invoking these three cases is in proving the application of a culture of peace would facilitate the processes toward durable and self-sustaining peace. The objective is in contrasting the progress in conflict resolution in the three states which have had different levels of influence from culture of peace programmes. The impact of such a programme being introduced in one of the three cases, El Salvador, will be examined for an indication of the contribution which can be made to conflict resolution. Because of the need for unique programmes based on the unique conditions and experiences of a community, the replicability of these cases is not the objective as models cannot be applied however, approaches can. The instability or stability of the United Nations peace-building missions in all three cases has had little time to prove itself, however as the following illustrations will show, varying levels of unrest force the conclusion, peace-building has not been an overall success in its present form. The lack of extensive efforts in line with culture of peace activities, can be given part of the blame for the inability to achieve reconciliation. As a national culture of peace programme has been initiated and applied in El Salvador, it is necessary to analyse the contributions and effects of such efforts on the overall goal of cessation of violence. 4.8.1 The Case Of Cambodia Listed on the PIOOM foundations ranking of twentieth century deaths resulting from internal non-wartime offences, is Cambodia in seventh place with over two million. These figures come out of the period of Khmer Rouges non-democratic reign between 1975-1979 alone and are not accounting for any effects of the period of Vietnamese occupation. The after-effects of such struggles for leadership has reverberated until present. Current political instability results from contesting legitimate government and an inability to appease dissidents. The United Nations has embarked upon both elections monitoring and programmes for the promotion of human rights in Cambodia (Adams, 65). Following the signing of the Paris Peace Agreements between the contesting parties: the Communist Peoples Party (CPP), (KPNLF) and (FUNLINPEC) the UNTAC mission commenced (Tennant, 1). UNTAC was not permitted to use force and was therefore reliant on goodwill and participation. UNTAC was, rapidly undermined by its top-down approach (Tennant, 1), which has not allowed it to achieve durable peace in the country. The Cambodian conflict has had considerable impact by its regional neighbours, particularly the relations with Vietnam considering the invasion which only ended in 1989 when all Vietnamese troops where removed (Tennant, 2). Cambodia since this time has faced internal struggles for legitimate ruling power and, the old warring parties have not reached stability or security without the threat or use of force. Cambodia serves as an ideal example of old cold war and colonial wounds which have not been able to sufficiently heal. 4.8.2 The Case Of El Salvador El Salvadors 1998 political status has been ranked as a violent political conflict which involves less than 100 fatalities (PIOOM). This is a significant reduction from the 63 000 deaths which were a result of political violence between 1979 and 1988 (INCORE). Minor terrorist and guerrilla campaigns are the noted cause for such a ranking. As a pioneering project, a national programme for a culture of peace has been initiated in El Salvador. Ending its civil war with the 1992 Chapultepec Peace Accords, which were mediated by the United Nations sponsored peace process and provided for an extensive peace-keeping and peace-building operations, however, there was no mention in the accord of a national culture of peace programme (Parajon, 3). The peace agreement gave the United Nations the responsibility for verifying the parties compliance with the comprehensive reconstruction of the country (Han, 852). The programme commenced with an alliance between UNESCO and the national government. Several strategic guideline where adopted in addition to the establishment of UNESCO offices in the San Salvador when the programme was launched in 1993 (Adams, 45). These guidelines are: National Programme addressing the needs of Salvadoran society and involving the full participation of national actors. Participative and co-operative programme involving governmental and non-governmental institutions to establish the design, programming and execution of all projects, and to keep them in permanent communication and co-ordination. Teaching-learning programme maintaining at all times a process in which participants learn and teach peace-building values, attitudes and behaviours. Decentralised programme experienced as integral to the daily lives of people with a structure, mechanisms and norms that promote local initiatives. Integrated programme an organic whole rather than isolated projects, co-ordinated by information and communications systems specifically implemented for the purpose. Well-defined programme priorities will be the populations, sectors, institutions and processes that were most affected by the previous conflict, with special provisions for the participation of women and youth. Given UNESCOs development of the concept starting in 1992, and the General Assembly resolution for the promotion of a culture of peace issued in 1996; the work of the El Salvador programme is not within the realm of United Nations peace-building initiatives but, is isolated to secondary organisations. The present results of the programme can be a case in point for the need to recognise the contribution such efforts can make to the resolution process, and thus warrant inclusion within the more formal structures of the United Nations. In El Salvador, one of the three pioneering national programmes for a culture of peace, the first project being implemented is a womens radio programme (Adams, 45). The strategic decision involved prioritising women as victims of the civil war, having endured substantial negative effect from the war. The decision to use radio as the medium for education in the case of El Salvador satisfies the four principles of a culture of peace. The indigenous nature of the El Salvador programme stems from the largely female audience which, has been found to be an effective means of reaching the poorest women, very often illiterate, who are most in need of orientation, information and support (Adams, 45). The El Salvador culture of peace radio station which combines musical entertainment with discussion and information programmes aimed at educating women of their rights and unique opportunities for the creation of a culture of peace in their local communities. The influence of women upon education in the household and amount of work contributed toward society, are the justifications for targeting them for the first major programme in El Salvador. Parajon analysed the El Salvador experiences with the CPP and came up with the following stages of development in a CPP: A process of dialogue and the acknowledgement of the other party, the different one, or the adversary; A process of negotiation of a new set of rules for social living together (which may not yet assume any agreements for concerted action); A process of concentration, in which the actors see their common interest in a national project for a culture of peace and undertake to go beyond sectarian or partisan interests to work for the good of the entire present and future of society. 4.8.3 The Case Of Somalia The victim of a multi-tiered colonial power presence, Somalia has endured tampering with its indigenous structures for organising and interacting. Following independence, there emerged a secessionist movement for the creation of an independent and Sovereign territory in Somaliland. The resulting internal strife is affected by and a result of its earlier period in which external actors did significant manoeuvres which can be given a portion of the credit for current internal instability. Tribal structures in Somalia earn it the role of case representing the concerns for implementing foreign structures and expectations into communities which are negatively affected. The Addis Ababa Agreement of 1993 concluded the first session on national reconciliation. In line with the culture of peace programme, UNESCO has undertaken initiatives in Somalia in accordance with its culture of peace principles. Somalia has not experienced project activity as extensively as El Salvador for the creation of cultures of peace via reconciliation and ingrained non-violence, however, it has had more formal exposure to the concept than that of Cambodia. A culture of peace presupposes the existence of a common moral culture which would oblige non-violence in resolution. The most striking feature which would affect cases similar to Somalia is the negative effect of promoting a concept which may never without such influence come about based on the indigenous composition. 4.9 Culture Of Peace Doctrines Unique Contribution To Post-Conflict Peace-Building Doctrine As culture of peace doctrine and application is cyclical and ongoing in nature, it is necessary to highlight the maximum benefit of its implementation in post-conflict scenarios. The attitudes and behaviours of communities emerging from conflict are theoretically difficult to persuade to non-violence in interaction as they have most recently witnessed violence. The counter argument holds the potential citizens will view the hardships endured not worth the inception of violence for any justification. The loss and turmoil which the invocation of violence can promote, are the critical strings peace promoters need to pull in order to persuade the benefits of tolerance and non-violent reaction to conflict. Those emerging from violent conflict have the furthest to go on the journey toward non-violent interaction, and thus the most vulnerable because of the effects of their experiences and attitudes. Suggestions for moving towards a culture of peace are as follows: In summary of the findings to this point, a culture of peace doctrine endeavours to mobilise all communities to resolve conflict with tolerance and persuasion (Adams, 85). The ambitions of peace-building and a culture of peace are therefore the same; a transformation of the international arena from a culture of war and violence to a culture of peace and non-violence. The two are linked in that post-conflict peace-building aims at not allowing conflict to resume, as it deals with situations newly released from violence or war; whereas a culture of peace doctrine aims for the removal of violence as a manner to deal with conflict. In asserting that post-conflict communities are lacking in the bottom-up resolution efforts of a culture of peace, there is the assumption that the aim of eradicating the behaviours and attitudes which allowed for the initial violence is the most optimal method to do so. This is a never-ending process which will take generations before the effects of attempts at transformation can have affect and lasting results can be observed. In order for such a daunting task to be assumed, it is essential for UNESCO to persuade public opinion that problems are global, that the world in all its diversity is a universe of interdependent factors, that there exists a fundamental solidarity between human beings, and that solutions based on conciliation serve the interests of everyone (Merle, 33). Another difference lies in the levels of political and social organisation targeted to achieve this aim. Post-conflict peace-building is concluded to address concerns of structural transformation without giving adequate attention to the resolution of attitudes and behaviours contaminated through the course of violence. In order to take effect in any region, a culture of peace activities must create positive alternatives to violent conflict by initially targeting: economic security and development, political security and democracy, military security and disarmament, cost-benefit efficiency in economic conversion and the development of global solidarity (Adams, 16). To achieve all this would certainly be no small feat. The reason these initiatives must be simultaneously undertaken is to promote confidence and well-being which are likely absent. Each component is an integral aspect to the creation and establishment of a culture of peace, however an in depth analysis of the multitude of components each is comprised of is not the aim here. The uniqueness is that such steps to achieve the above stated objectives for the promotion of confidence are to be the foundation for a culture of peace. Adams states that programmes to promote the transformation of economic and political turmoil must be initiated first, however the course of action does not stop with these. This is where peace-building has ended in its present mandates. 4.10 Concluding Remarks As has been illustrated in this examination of a culture of peace doctrine, the strategy of empowering civil society toward reconciliation is an integral aspect to achieving self-sustaining and durable peace. The principles of a culture of peace doctrine include creating an awareness of the alternative to violent responses to conflict by instilling in the cultures of each community non-violent resolution. Such cultures must be indigenous creations and embody the fundamentals and uniqueness of each community it is composed from. For this reason, a culture of peace can not be imposed from above and is thus a bottom-up method of transforming the attitudes and behaviours which would have previously relied on violence, or the threat thereof, in the face of conflict. The application of the doctrine has hinted at the varying challenges which surface to its realisation, and it is to these that this analysis will now turn for consideration. 5.0 CHALLENGES in applying the CULTURE OF PEACE DOCTRINE AND Peace-Building alliance Peace can be temporarily negotiated at the top, but ultimately, it is the people who make peace last. (Sonia K. Han) Summarising the content of this research paper to this point, it can be concluded that efforts to stigmatise armed conflict have not been successful, and it is the void in the processes to do so which are at fault. In general terms, the objectives of both a culture of peace and peace-building extend beyond simply disallowing conflict renewal. To satisfying the basic needs of security and peaceful co-existence which requires sustainable development and self-supporting economies in regions typically hindered in their self-sufficiency. Stimulating integration in political structures so that a common aim of non-violence can be embedded in all cultures based on their organisational structures is a second component of the process to non-violence. In rectifying the inability of post-conflict peace-building to disallow conflict recurrence, the addition of principles for a culture of peace has been introduced. The lack of recognition for the effects and efforts of civil society in the creation of self-sustaining peace is responsible for peace-building efforts shortcomings in pursuing its stated objectives. In the assertion that a culture of peace be adopted into the peace-building mandates of the United Nations, it is crucial to acknowledge the challenges which would be faced in their alliance. The method in which to address these confrontations could rely on as many multi-disciplinary elements as are contained within the alliance of a culture of peace with post-conflict peace-building; philosophical, sociological, scientific and politico-economic to name but a few. However, as this is a study in international relations, it is the political and economic considerations which shall receive dominance. This critical analysis of the post-conflict peace-building and culture of peace doctrines will commence with the abstract nature of promoting particular cultural occurrences. Following, the structure of the proposed peace-building for a culture of peace alliance will be given further attention. The critical examination of the viability of peace-building for a culture of peace will include the United Nations capabilities, ability to reconcile, resource limitations, state sovereignty and democratic peace. The need for revolutionary transformation in both international and domestic structures, as well as in the attitudes and behaviours of communities, will illustrate the need for simultaneous adoption of a culture of peace, without which vulnerability and ensuing insecurity would nullify the proposition of non-violence. 5.1 Transforming The Abstract Nature Of Promoting A Proposed Cultural Characteristic To Embodied Realities As a culture of peace does not at present exist, as frequently conflicts are resolved with the use or threat of force, the creation of such a culture is the first process to be concerned with. The durability of a culture of peace is only the concern of this research in the extent to which it can be estimated to be realistic. The abstraction lies in the natural tendencies for non-violence. The legitimacy in promoting a cultural characteristic of peaceful co-existence through non-violence is of concern. We now turn our attention to the consideration of the intrinsic nature of cultural characteristics and the ability to promote particular traits over others. The objective of solidifying in the global culture, a right to peace based on non-violent interactions, is an abstract concept which can not be tested at present in any concrete manner. In essence the programmes and doctrines of a culture of peace and peace-building seek to be the catalyst triggering prospects for lasting peace. Mayor, in a subjective tone describes the potential for cultural change as follows, culture, exists within usit is a sea of memories, significations and fantasies for the future in which we swim all our livesand every woman, child and man has the potential to change that sea by creating new insights, new ways of seeing, doing and beingwe know we are surrounded by boundaries of our own contrivance and that, therefore, we can escape across them and even smash them forever (Mayor, 5). This poetic description of the capabilities of existing cultures to transform is optimistic and a seemingly simplistic prognosis for the ability to change. However, in a scientific manner, the likelihood of such a possibility is neither proved or disproved convincingly. The cultural phenomenon of war which is depicted as even in times of peace, [as the] constant definition of us against them, [the] constant notion that there is a barrier between who we think we are, the people with whom we interact normally and outsiders (Mayor, 7). This is how the world is divided into hostile antagonistic components based on a cultural construct. How such a conception is a construct and not a static reality, can be deduced from the previous quotation by Mayor in regards to the capability for transforming this culture of war to one of peace. Furthermore, the Seville Statement on violence does find that violence is not inherently human, and thus is capable of transformation. A dispute presents itself in the stimulation of cultural characteristics which are at a given time not naturally occurring in a community. The effects of violence and war on the cultural composition also have distorting influence and could be a counter argument to the claim to leave cultural traits out of the process of conflict resolution and reconciliation. However, as the Seville Statement on Violence has found that violence and war are not a genetic predisposition of humankind, can the opposite then be claimed as natural. This discussion ventures into the realm of both sociology and biology. The assertion that culture can be changed through the conscious efforts of individuals will be acknowledged as a possible challenge to peace-building for a culture of peace. According to the works of UNESCO and their respective research conducted to decipher whether such an accomplishment is attainable, such a transformation is not only possible but ripe, the problem of post-war society is to help rediscover or reinvent meaning to the lives and to help social groups rediscover or reinvent shared meaning, these meanings have to be embodied they are not merely abstract ideas (Lumsden, 382). Taking the cultural characteristics of peace and non-violence from the abstract realm to the pragmatic is at the same time the aim of peace-building for a culture of peace, and its ultimate hazard. 5.2 Peace-building Tasks Align To Culture Of Peace Principles: The Peace-building For A Culture Of Peace Alliance It is necessary to specify at what level of intensity, the timing, and level of interaction and dependence the two concepts would adopt in their alliance. Referring back to the three tier task model, Table 2.0, which outlines the various activities which may be initiated: conflict overlap, transformation, and mode of thought. Joining these tasks of the peace-building process with the four principles of a culture of peace doctrine is for the purpose of transforming attitudes and behaviours of violence. The peace-building three tier task model and the four principles of a culture of peace will be combined in an attempt to depict the challenges of applying the alliance to intra-state conflicts. The challenges can occur from international resistance to such initiatives as well as via internal struggles with the specific steps toward reconciliation and the implementation of an active non-violent characteristic within any culture. The structure of this section of the analysis is divided according to the four principles. Each of the four basic principles of a culture of peace involve each level of task activity of the peace-building task models. Therefore, the principles will compose the subsections of this portion of the analysis to which the challenges of implementing the tasks will be addressed. 5.2.1 non-violence and Respect for Human Rights In order to obtain non-violence and respect for human rights, the tasks outlined in the transformation stage are required to be commenced. These tasks involve structural adjustments to principles of democratic representation to reduce the risk of abuse or concentration of power by the ruling parties. Rebuilding and reconstruction are the tasks to be undertaken in the peace-building strategy in order to eradicate vulnerabilities residual from the impact of war. The principle of establishing non-violence and respect for human rights also extends beyond the transformative realm of structures of organisation and interaction to Mode of Thought in an effort to embed the will for non-violent resolution in the structures which have been created. If the structures are to survive, they are to be representative of the will of its constituent members, and thus the empowerment and participation of civil society is to be promoted. It is said of democracy that it can not be imposed from above and be natural and indigenous at the same time; no ideology can progress when it is imposed (Mayor, 59). Good governance must be built from the ground up. It cannot be imposed, either by national authorities or by international agencies. It cannot be created overnight, nor can it take root in one day (Annan, 37). This notion also applies to the creation of non-violence and human rights as a cultural representation of a community. Let there be no doubt: there are some very basic standards of human behaviour, violations of which are simply unacceptable. Fundamental human rights are a product of human nature (Annan, 31). In discussing human rights within the context of peace-building for a culture of peace, the human right to peace is the fundamental right this study will concern itself with. It is the supposition that such a right to peace exists which is the driving force behind the development of a culture of peace. The preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance (Adams, 14). In developing peace-building for a culture of peace in communities recently emerging from intra-state conflict, promoting self-sufficiency in the adjudication and deliberation on accusations of human rights violations would require competent structures. 5.2.2 Intercultural Tolerance/Understanding Eliminating myths which are unfounded and harmful is crucial in advances toward tolerance and understanding. The most significant myth to rid community interaction and organisations of is the belief in violence as an inherent component of human nature. As was introduced earlier in this study, the Seville Statement on Violence refutes the myth that violence is inherent. To achieve this task, and in fact all four tasks, broad based participation in the creation of solutions is necessary to attain mutually satisfactory and accessible resolutions (UNESCO El Salvador, 1994). The interdependent nature of the principles and tasks for the promotion of a culture of peace reveals itself at this point in which the objectives of tolerance and understanding require progress in the other three principles. Tolerance and understanding are dependent upon the dissemination of information which deconstructs myths of the other as well as promoting recognition of commonality between communities. The education highlighting similarities between communities is hoped to reveal shared solidarity. Activities for culture of peace programmes may include, International projects for school children promoting intercultural understanding. Fostering multilingualism and cultural expression by minorities and indigenous people in multicultural societies. Promoting values which consolidate intercultural dialogue for peace and which secure the participation of women and young people. Intercultural projects for dialogue and exchange between cultural areas. The above noted activities targeting tolerance and understanding are concerned with the transformation of the structures which ingrain such myths as well as the attitudes and behaviours within the localities. In a pluralistic world order, must all borders be removed then to assure that a common sentiment of the commonalties of humankind may be attained? This notion of reconstructing the global organisation of communities has not provided convincing testimony of its validity (Mayor, 92). The proposition of a world government and the elimination of differences are not the manner to achieve a comprehensive culture of peace. The challenge lies in co-existing non-violently while respecting differences and not fearing the annihilation of one community by another because of the difference. However, in instances when differences seem so entirely irreconcilable and the pursuits of competing communities are discrepant, the prospects for active non-violence to achieve in the long run what violence may attain in the short run is difficult to justify. Restructuring the mentalities of war with the mode of thought tasks while satisfactorily addressing doubts about why agreement has been reached in the first place is a vulnerable chore. The vulnerability lies, as in all stages of transformation of structures and mentalities, in launching violent responses. 5.2.3 Sharing and Free Flow of Information - Transformation The use of information to ensure secrecy or the pursuit of dominance through profit and power is a contributing factor to the culture of war (Adams, 16). Combating propaganda and the distribution of discriminatory inferences in media which is controlled by subjective actors are the transformative tasks. Programmes for a culture of peace proclaim that a pluralistic and independent media which is accessible to all components of civil society is a necessary component in the development of peace-building for a culture of peace (Adams, 33). The link between this principle for open communication for the dissemination of ideas and the stated opinion of the international community can be found in the statement by the current Secretary General of the United Nations, We at the United Nations are convinced that information has a great liberating power waiting to be harnessed to our global struggle for peace, development and human rightsit is ignorance that makes enemies of men (Annan, 38). Pursuing peace through freedom of the media and thus of individual expression, regardless of content of the message, is not a presently universal belief or norm. Proposing an international network of information and thus awareness, combats the secretive regimes harnessed to construct weapons of warutilised for profit regardless of [the] social consequences (Adams, 33). Arguments for free flow of information are contained within studies of the democratic peace phenomenon which link the existence of such a principle to the effective implementation of democracy for peace (Starr, 159). It is in this realm that theorising on a culture of peace is conducted despite its being held under the title of another discipline, regardless the objectives are the same durable and self-sustaining peace. The promotion of open expression free from censorship unleashes enhanced potential for conflict as the distribution of controversial and delicate issues, the inflated need for a culture of non-violent resolution of hostilities is compelling. It can not be expected that harmony of opinion will emerge with the removal of restrictions on press and media, and thus communities must be prepared to deal with the presentation of contentious suppositions as they will undoubtedly emerge. If communities can react non-violently to disagreements which emerge out of the expression of opinions or ideas to which they disagree, then peace can be concluded to be an active part of their respective cultural fabrics. The elimination of differing opinions, ideologies, and strategies is by no means the objective of culture of peace, however, the response by communities to such occurrences is the target of transformation. Such an alteration in approach to disagreements or defence of ideas, requires considerable change to the acceptable manners to deal with such situations. 5.2.4 Participation/Empowerment of Women Transformation/Mode of Thought Empowerment of women is a much disputed issue as particular ideologies and religions advance antithetic convictions regarding the role and rights of women within society. The experiences and belief systems of localities differ in regard to the status of women, and whether such principles can be imbedded in the existing cultural fabric of their communities. Transformation of social infrastructures which have solidified the status of the female gender as secondary, is something western culture and the culture of the United Nations extension of human rights deems unacceptable. However, as peace-building for a culture of peace can not be imposed from above nor can foreign aims be transposed onto the local communities, if the local community exists in a structure of gender divisions there is little to be done besides the education of alternatives. Here, transforming the mode of thinking about the status of women requires the free flow of information in order to accomplish the aim of educating of the options in empowerment. Pursuing full equality for women means more than the accomplishment of statistical objectives: the culture has to change (Annan, 25). The challenge here is the implementation of universal ethics and morals regarding the status of all individuals within any given society. The justification for a principle of a culture of peace is found in the claim that women are victims of war and violence. The lack of representative influence over the political decisions and the events and conduct of a conflict contrasts with the revelation that in war-torn societies, women often keep society goingthey are often the prime advocates of peace (Annan, 26). Confronting inferiority and inequality of women emphasises improved access to education which would provide practical empowerment as well as stimulating exchange of ideas regarding improving equality for women. The case of the El Salvador womens radio station is a prime example of the belief in the power women possess in the socialising processes of the household. Empowering women in their private situations and in the attainment of rights is the first step to proliferating awareness of their enhanced role within societies. 5.3 Reconciliation Through Peace-building For A Culture Of Peace To comprehend the precise process which must be accomplished at all levels of interaction, the following basic resolution procedures are enlightening. Peace-building for a culture of peace proposes to commence these processes at the level of civil society in order to attain lasting reconciliation. The success or failure of civil society to make the effort toward completion of these procedures depends on the acceptance and implementation of a culture of peace as an international and universally practised characteristic. According to the first and second international forums on the culture of peace, there are seven basic principles to reconciliation. These seven principles are as follows, 1. Acknowledgement of the harm or injury each party has inflicted on the other. 2. Sincere regret and remorse for the injury. 3. Readiness to apologise for ones role in inflicting the injury. 4. Readiness of the conflicting parties to let go of the bitterness and anger caused by the conflict and the injury. 5. Commitment by both parties not to repeat the injury. 6. Sincere effort to redress past grievances and compensate to the extent possible the damage caused. 7. Entering into a new, mutually enriching relationship. Reconciliation is therefore the end result of the process of these seven principles, a new relationship of non-violent conflict resolution. The seven principles are ordered in a hierarchical arrangement in which the completion of near completion of one task creates the opportunity to undertake the subsequent task. Culminating in a new relationship free of the debilitating characteristics of the old style, this process of reconciliation is the concept of a culture of peace, so long as it has lasting effect. The process of ushering communities emerging from conflict through the seven principles is no easy task and is at the same time dependent on other development and political factors. The common thread in the seven principles is the admission of responsibility and the willingness to transform. Following conflict, and the violent events within it, the dialogue between the parties to the conflict concerning their level of responsibility for the conflict can further the vulnerability of resumption of conflict when disagreements occur. The question presents itself here, if the timing and placement of such dialogues can exist without re-igniting the violent aspect of the conflict. To answer the question of vulnerability presented above, it appears as though this is the risk of peace-building for a culture of peace. 5.3.1 The Root Causes of Conflict Dealing with the root causes of a conflict is an area which will bring forth contestation on the part of the parties involved. Parties to a conflict disagree on the justifications of their adversary. Acknowledging the stimuli which compelled the parties to the conflict to take up force as a viable solution can be laden with complexities as the effects of the violence itself can manipulate memory and morality. The underlying causes of conflict may include, Poverty and economic inequalities, Ethnic and religious conflict and nationalist movements, Environmental degradation and the scarcity/misallocation of natural resources, The marginalisation of indigenous populations, The role of the media in perpetuating violence, Irresponsible and unstable political leadership/political institutions with unrestricted war-making powers/ weak civil institutions, The failure to protect all human rights, including civil, political, environmental and socio-economic rights. The above named issues relate to some of the most contested obstacles to peaceful co-existence. In aiming at reconciliation through admission of responsibility for the involvement of each of the parties to the conflict. A key example of the opening of wounds following a cessation of violence, promoting accountability risks the very processes which have been conducted in the name of peace. The timing of such a process is of a sensitive nature, and is a gamble considering the potential for resumption of violence once the contested issues resurface. The UNESCO programme does not prescribe any static guidelines for such processes, as the individuality of each particular case could not withstand such confines. Insecurity may easily arise on the part of peace promoters who are attempting to come to an understanding of the critical needs of the communities in reconciling. Premature initiation of methods to encourage dialogue regarding responsibility for the purposes of reconciliation is a serious risk. With the independent nature of national culture of peace programmes, a stated necessity for long-term success, the decision making processes are subject to local manoeuvring. The challenge lies in the perception of the leadership of the peace promoters to gauge readiness for elevation to the next steps in the reconciliation processes. Sufficient attention will need to be paid to the atmosphere of readiness and this can be conducted by active involvement with the individuals within the communities being targeted for transformation. 5.4 The Economics Of Peace The Cost Benefit Efficiency Of Peace The purpose of the following subsections of the economics of peace is to illustrate the difficulties in transforming the culture of violence and war to a culture of peace in providing a financial substitute to war. The debate surrounds the potential of peace to provide a profitable substitute, one which those currently benefiting from the readiness for war and violence would be willing to tap into. The various programmes necessary to promote a culture of peace and peace-building require considerable financing. Furthermore, the challenge a culture of peace presents to the international political economy which is geared to a position of readiness in the supplying of arms and the machinery of warfare involves convincing those who appear to lose the most financially in such a transformation. The need for financial resources comes from the long-term and ongoing nature of peace-building for a culture of peace. Countries emerging from conflict or crises situations are more likely than not to be in a critical fiscal state (Mayor, 66). The efforts of the peace-building initiatives to reconstruct the government and infrastructure requires considerable investment and aid. As the domestic economies are likely incapable of providing for their own rehabilitation due to the impact of war and violence, such funding will need to come from external sources. The willingness of external sources to contribute to the creation of programmes which are to be wholly indigenous and beyond their manipulation and control is a problem. Not being able to stipulate the conditions in which funds are granted is counter to the current structures of loans and aid particularly by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank (Castillo, 36). These organisations seek to implement foreign structures and conditions onto local communities undergoing reconstruction, the exact processes which a culture of peace seeks to eliminate. Donors are much more inclined to finance infrastructural and environmental programmes than programmes directly related to peace consolidationthe international community in general is reluctant to finance some peace-related programmes, while they fall outside traditional areas of foreign assistance, these programmes are often essential to the success of the peace process, although they may be politically sensitive in donor countries (Castillo, 36). Even if foreign investment for peace is achieved, actively seeking financial independence in order to maintain the programmes that promote and encourage interaction and rehabilitation after the capital flow of aid and foreign investment has subsided is critical. In order for a culture of peace to endure, it must come from local conditions and be supported by indigenous financing and motivations. In order to get to this level of self-sufficiency in programmes which promote the principles of a culture of peace, a global re-allocation of funding priorities in which the present emphasis on military peace-keeping is matched by a commitment at least as great to non-violent peace-building (Mayor, 122). The creation of such circumstances of self-sufficiency will be made possible with the empowerment of the communities. This empowerment requires intense international involvement in the beginning in order to get such an initiative off the ground (Mayor, 59-69). However, because of the increasingly high demand for official aid flows and the serious fiscal constraints faced by many donor countries, they are more likely than ever to cut their financial support and shift their attention elsewhere as soon as the conflict winds down (Castillo, 35). Ceasing the inflow of funds to promote sustainable peace before the community is self-sufficient in its peace-building for a culture of peace activities, jeopardises the entire project to reconcile and resolve. Foreign investments for peace is an underdeveloped area of culture of peace doctrine. It is asserted that such funds are necessary to achieve durable peace, however, the promotion of international gain for their investments is insufficiently tackled. It is the conviction of this study that additional attention must be paid to the education of the international community of the maximum benefit peace may provide if it is to be pursued in any serious extent. The role of the United Nations in facilitating the acquisition of financial resources for the promotion of peace cultures is critical considering, foreign financing is largely decided at consultative group meetings, sponsored by the World Bank and with the participation of other financial institutions and bilateral donors, the United Nations can play a catalytic role in convincing donors of the critical importance of post-conflict peace-building development programmes for the peace process (Castillo, 36). The conclusions that can be drawn from the current manoeuvrings in the financial needs of peace-building for a culture of peace is that a revolution in the attitudes of those responsible for granting funds would be necessary. There is no concrete evidence that such a phenomenon is taking place, nor that one is about to be initiated either. Without the funding for development which would promote security, and thus the removal or a secure environment in which a culture of peace could evolve, its implementation and realisation faces dismal prospects. Both Adams and Mayor call for such a transformation, however, the spark which would ignite the fire of transformation has not been targeted nor does it appear to be in sight. Supposing that such a spark where revealed, the practical steps toward convincing those who gain the most from the current structures of war and violence will now be examined. These conversions are to simultaneously combine education of the alternatives to the culture of war and the practical accomplishment of modification. Beyond justifications for development which would lead to security, lies the conversion from military to civilian production. In order to convert the military sectors, it is necessary to provide alternatives to the arms producers, to the employees of defence plants and to the military itself (Mayor, 61). In an attempt to understand further the reality of the culture of violence it is necessary to turn to an examination of the statistical accounts of readiness for violence. In noting the existence of a culture of violence which is in a state of preparation for conflict, the scope of alternatives needed can be more fully understood. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute compiles a comprehensive study of arms production, more specifically the actors and trends. As this is a school of research focused on military engagements, the statistics incorporated within it are ideal for an analysis of the defence industry. 5.4.1 Targeting the Producers Take for example the results of one major player in the military production sector, of the top twelve arms producing corporations, three quarters are American owned (SIPRI, 1997). An example of a single company with an annual production capacity of $23 billion, compared with a GDP of $US 7 trillion comprises a substantial portion of GDP. The extension of these figures to other countries and longer periods of observation indicates the extensive nature of the culture of violence. To transform the arms industry would mean taking such production into consideration. In order to persuade those currently reaping the benefits from the production of military machinery to transform, the financial benefits would have to be considerable. Structural adjustments of industry are commencing as the arms sales have declined by 2 per cent in 1994 as compared with the 6 per cent in 1993 (Skons 1996, 411). These declines have less to do with a culture of peace and more to do with the end of the cold war. It can be misleading to examine the statistical indications of the declining arms production and transpose the reasons for it to an adaptation away from the readiness for war and violence but as a political trend. What can be achieved by advocates of a culture of peace given the current reconstruction of the machinery of war, is the exploitation of the trend to maximise the attitudes of non-violence which may ensue. Given the lull in the arms industry with the end of the cold war, despite the fact that it is not by conscious choice a refutation of violent responses to conflict, a culture of peace can be strategically undertaken in this opportunistic phase of international manoeuvrings. Do not be led to believe that the effects of a decrease in arms trade has meant a subsequent increase in peace standards and a reduction in the causalities of conflict. As was asserted earlier, conflict has changed, it has not been eradicated. Production of the machinery of war has to be converted to civilian or peace production so as to rid of the tools which promote the existence of a culture of war as a first step. In the long term, simply removing weapons is not enough as the conscious decision to use active non-violence in place of violence to lead to a culture of peace. However, in communities emerging from violence, the decommissioning of weapons and the reduction of availability of new weapons can have significant effect on the processes toward lasting peace. While a culture of peace is being learned, the weapons must be removed in instances where temptation to use violence to achieve an aim is tempting. The manner to deal with the recipients of weapons and thus a culture of violence is the next consideration. 5.4.2 Targeting the Recipients The counter side to the Arms production has its main market potential in four regions of the world. These regions differ substantially in political, economic, and conflict justifications for their expenditures. Nevertheless, they provide an ample, however declining, market for the surviving members of industry. The Middle East continues to be the largest recipient of arms in the world, making up slightly under 43% of the world market (Gallik, 9). The remaining three regions are Europe, East Asia, and North America. These combine to account for 36% of the total market. The remaining 21% is diffused throughout the other regions and countries of the world. The regions experiencing an increase in such domestic situations of inner chaos have sustained market competition - although to a substantially lesser degree than the Cold War environment. The producers are forced to export to these areas and attract sales through finance arrangements. The competitive edge in the new market is to be achieved through a variety of financing methods. It is without doubt a buyers market in the conventional arms industry as, the terms of credit offered, such as interest rates, grace period on payments of principle, and duration of the loan can also make a difference in a countrys decision on from whom, or even if, to buy (Johnson, 114). The market is altering such that purchases are subject to conditions demanded by interesting consumers. Negative growth in expenditures are therefore significantly depleting the potential for countries to support the arms industry at its previous levels. It is with relative ease that the tools of violence can be acquired, and the education of alternative resolution methods is the manner to advocate selecting non-violence. Based on readiness of supplies, it appears as though violence would be the easiest remedy in the short term, however, the negative long-term effects of violence on the social and psychological aspects of communities as well as physical degradation suggest that violence would not be the strategic choice. 5.4.3 Expenditures for Peace In determining whether or not the promotion of peace and non-violence can provide an adequate economical substitute to the key actors currently profiting from war and violence, some future predictions are necessary. The trend in peace-building within the United Nations is in its infancy and the potential financial capabilities of prospects it possesses are not yet realised. One estimate for the peace dividend in the year 2000 is of 200 to 300 billion dollars in the North (Mayor, 60). In the transformation of the Military sector the issue of North and South development and advantage surfaces as a challenge to both economic development for peace and the provision of necessities. Expenditures for peace are not only the pursuits of peace-building for a culture of peace for exchange and interaction, but the infrastructural and developmental expenditures are also included. In addition, the prosperity and security of a particular country will no longer depend solely on its own development and on its friendly relations with neighbouring countries, but on the reduction, on a global scale, of the inequalities and injustice that endanger the whole of humanity (Mayor, 60). In this regard, it would seem as though peace would prove a lucrative business providing profit and development where it would be needed most for the sake of self-sustaining peace. Current sentiment is that aid for peace has not been adequate to prevent cycles of violence (Lumsden, 378). 5.5 State Sovereignty as a Challenge to peace-BUILDING for a Culture of Peace Doctrine Challenges to state sovereignty in the name of peace are of significance considering the previously stated trend of conflicts becoming more intra than inter-state. The right for states to wage war emerged from the Westphalian system of rights of the state, either domestic or internationally (Starr, 154). However, the processes of transformation involve extensive activity on behalf of education for non-violence and the structural adjustments to achieve self-supporting economies. As these mandates will not be enforced, it is necessary to explore the extent to which a national government would be able to invite or dismiss culture of peace activities or programmes. Who should be able to invite into a community, a national culture of peace programme, and to what extent should international organisations and non-governmental organisations be given operating power in the name of peace-building for a culture of peace? It is in these concerns precisely, that the need for an alliance between United Nations post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace reveals itself. The advisory and regulatory role which the United Nations would adopt as the co-ordinator of programme objectives is necessary to achieve a common trend in the activities for a culture of peace. Without a single guiding actor which is capable of both acquiring the necessary resources, both financial and human, and deploying these to the communities most in need of transformation the developments for peace would risk losing sight of the objectives and processes. Security extends to the international legal realm as procedures of the United Nations make legal challenges to sovereignty violations possible, legal security applies both within states and within the international community. It depends on security whether people can live in freedom and order within states and whether states can do the same within the international community (Espiell 54). The United Nations, in forming programmes to build a culture of peace can base such an insurrection on its own founding charter. Chapter V, article 29 of the Charter of the United Nations provides the Security Council with the power to establish subsidiary organs to perform its functions. These functions consist, amongst others, the maintenance of international security which is also noted in Chapter V, article 24. Further, the Security Council is to represent the concern of the General Assembly regarding international security (Chapter IV, article 11.3). Therefore, should the will exist amongst the member states to lobby for the establishment of a peace-building for a culture of peace subsidiary organ, the legal basis is present. If the culture of war and violence were deemed a threat to international security by the Member States of the General Assembly, and the accord of the Security Council could be achieved the force of a peace-building mandate for a culture of peace could be initiated. Examples of the broad based international activities which may be central to such an organ could include, the introduction of truth commissions and war crime tribunals could facilitate reconciliation if paced properly and introduced at the opportune moment. These would be subject to the local will and readiness of the affected communities to endure such procedures, and the inability to enforce any action would make such a will compulsory. 5.5.1 The Peace-building Case Studies as indicators of Sovereign Rights Regarding the Presence of Peace-building for a Culture of Peace Initiatives International security and national sovereignty become competing consequent elements. If a state resists peace-building for a culture of peace, there is little the international community can do despite any apparent need for such activities. The peace-building case studies are enlightening here as they were initiated on three difference circumstantial occasions. The United Nations was invited to perform peace-building in Cambodia, where there was an apparent will for peace. El Salvador was a more restricted case in which the United Nations could only work within the stipulations of the parties to the conflict, and was thus not as empowered in the activities it would pursue for self-sustaining peace. Somalia is a case of enforced chapter VII peace-building initiatives, and thus in contrast to the doctrine of peace-building for a culture of peace which denotes that such practices can not be a part of the indigenous creation of peace. One proposition to facilitate in the creation of a culture of peace is to rid the international system of sovereign states and thus open to acting ground (Payne, 265, Mayor). This line of arguing is negative in its removal of the organising components but not the tendencies. Disintegrating the state system would also not eliminate clashes between communities, it may only rid the formal conflict between sovereign states, it speaks to nothing of intra-state resolution. It may allow easier access for culture of peace manoeuvrings but does not uphold the principles of tolerance and it would succeed only in creating uniformity. Furthermore, the inability of governments to keep the peace is hinted at with this form of reasoning. However, as governments are often parties to the conflict themselves, they are targets of the cultural transformation. 5.5.2 Capabilities of the United nations in peace-building for a Culture of Peace Membership in the United Nations is an assumption in the promotion of non-violent resolution following conflict by peace-building for a culture of peace. The United Nations sources of influence come from the moral authority of the international community, the military power of member states and the political and financial backing provided by the members themselves (Bertram, 401). The ability then of the United Nations to accomplish any given task is relational to the will and effort of the members themselves. The members can limit or elevate the processes for peace-building for a culture of peace themselves (Bertram, 401). Considering the promotion of principles of peace-building for a culture of peace, as has been stated earlier, can not be enforced the success then relies on will. According to the current Director General of UNESCO Federico Mayor in his work dedicated to the concept of a culture of peace, targeting the United Nations as the promoter of this concept is in, striving to create the moral force of the United Nations, not a United Nations of military forces (Mayor, xv). What role then, can the United Nations have in transferring its energies to peace-building for a culture of peace? The assertion that, international law cannot, in isolation, bring about peace (Dupuy, 68), affirms the need for innovation in creating unconventional approaches to create peaceful co-existence. In order to assume a more prominent role in the processes of peace-building for a culture of peace, the United Nations has the opportunity to initiate a consultative status with both UNESCO as developer of the practice and with NGOs whom conduct work in this field. This would allow for consistency in approach, with the main criteria being a belief in the principle of cultivating and nurturing a culture of peace based on local experiences and not international criteria. The responsibility for ensuring adequate attention is paid to the timing of developments in the processes of reconciliation for a culture of peace, must not lie strictly within a single organisation. Consultation of NGOs with the United Nations and UNESCO would be useful in calculating readiness. This addition of NGO activity is for the purposes of spreading the responsibility and scope of culture of peace programmes. The comprehensive nature of mandates for peace-building for a culture of peace would face difficulty if placed solely within a single organisational framework. A culture of peace involves a rethinking of the international arena and in response to this, the international system of relations, will slowly give up the stage to the non-governmental, private and voluntary communities (Mayor, xiv). Governments will carry out the watchtower functions of ensuring that certain basic rules are followed. This notion extends to the United Nations activities as co-ordinator for peace-building for a culture of peace. 5.6 The Ideological/ Political Challenge Presented By Peace-Building For A Culture Of Peaces Partnership With Democracy In the examination of both emerging concepts of post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace, democracy arose as a critical aspect in the trend toward these types of resolution. Peace is attainable through the integration of ideologies to a hegemonic order, democracy (Starr, 154).The justification for the connection between democracy and peace stems from the observation that democracies do not fight one another due to structures which promote non-violent resolution (Mor, 200). United Nations peace-building has twin goals of securing peace and promoting democracy (Bertram, 396). The UNESCO culture of peace initiatives highlight the partnership with democracy of pursuits for durable peace. The practices of transparency, open political processes and availability to the information regarding the communities political, social and economic are some of the structures which are claimed to facilitate non-violence (Starr, 154). The inability to enforce structures or activities upon communities does stipulate that requiring communities to adopt democratic procedures should be promoted. However, the discrepancy between theory and practice can be harmful in this respect due to both ill directed attention and the promotion of structures which may cause more harm than good in communities currently living under differing political forms. The western proliferation of democracy to newly emerging states and those formerly under the ideological guise of differing structure, can by no means be upheld as a universal and enduring conception, to which all other ideologies and forms of organisation should abandon their own strains. A second problematic is the direction of attention in culture of peace programs to the democratisation of regimes which may be best suited to other political organisation principles despite aims to advance the four principles of a culture of peace. Fear that regimes other than democratic ones, do not uphold the basic principles of tolerance, human rights protections, and equality are the driving force behind the push for democratic integration. Democracy, like a culture of peace, is believed to be impossible in situations where it has not emerged from indigenous creation (Mayor, 39). 5.7 Concluding Remarks And The Prognosis For The Viability Of Peace- Building For A Culture Of Peace In The Current Global Environment The consolidated effort of the top-down method which presents itself in the conflict resolution strategies of peace-making and keeping, and the bottom-up approach of peace-building for a culture of peace provide the adequate solution to meet in the middle ground of non-violent resolution. However, the challenge of the current configuration of the international system does not appear to be fully open to such a proposition. The radical change required of all communities, as truly effective transformation to an international culture of peace has an all or nothing intonation, does not appear to be at hand, despite the claim by UNESCO of the readiness for such an altered culture. This section of the study has been dedicated to reveal the blemishes which could render the process of peace-building for a culture of peaces unsuccessful. The readiness for the international system and the capabilities of peace-building for a culture of peace have been illustrated. What is lacking in the analysis and research has been an indication that a spark will occur which will ignite a culture of peace. Additional difficulty presents itself in the observation that, cultural change, the transformation of our own values and attitudes, has been even slower than economic processes, lagging far behind political events (Mayor, 84)." The long-term nature of the change which all cultures must undergo to bring about a culture of peace is a limiting factor as the desire to see results of efforts in the short term threaten the progress for durable peace. The political will to appease constituents is at risk of manipulating progress toward a culture of peace and thus threatens its lasting effect and impact. Unless significant effort is made to promote awareness that a viable alternative to violent resolution can be realistically attained with the universal drive for a culture of peace, peace-building for a culture of peace will remain peripheral and under-utilised. The transformation of attitudes must precede those of behaviour to attain lasting and self-sustaining comprehensive peace. 6.0 Research conclusions since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed. Constitution of UNESCO The intent of the research in this study has been to uncover the emerging concepts of peace-building and a culture of peace and realise their commonality. The subsequent proposition that the two align in order to attain their mutual objectives is based on their apparent insufficiency to accomplish their goals in isolation. The objectives are first resolving conflict at the level of civil society to create a compromise in which bottom-up reconciliation and top-down political agreement meet in the middle ground of durable and self-sustaining peace. The line of thinking which initiates this reasoning seems logical in the assertion that the constituents of political decisions can not be marginalised from the resolution and reconciliation processes, and it is because this has not been the approach to resolving conflicts that United Nations efforts at conflict resolution have been subject to limited and brief success. The dilemma presented itself, as to how to remedy the fact that conflict resolution on the part of the international community, mobilised in the United Nations, has not been able to create a series of principles and programmes which triumphantly resolve conflict and transform communities of violence to non-violence. The solution presented in this research has been to add the doctrine of a culture of peace to the United Nations post-conflict peace-building doctrine to create a comprehensive and indigenous approach at conflict resolution. This structure of the research in this study has presented a case for peace-building for a culture of peace, the main findings follow. 6.0.1 The Unique Contribution of Peace-building for A Culture Of Peace Greater International Security: The international justifications for the approach of peace-building for a culture of peace lie in the logic of regional and international security being dependent on the internal cohesion of local, regional and international communities. Security is in this sense an interdependent concept. The fixed relation between internal security and international security are both a justification for and a result of efforts for ingrained non-violent responses to conflict. Reduction in Conflict Occurrences Providing Benefit in all Conflict Resolution Procedures and Development Strategies: If peace-building for a culture of peace realises success, the end result will be a gradual decline in instances of violent resolution of conflicts. The use of culture of peace will dissuade future conflicts and thus in the long-term reduces the need for peace-keeping/making following violent conflicts, as fewer would occur. There could still be room for peace-making as a mediation between non-violent conflicts to confirm the chance to successfully resolve conflicts non-violently. Furthermore, advances for non-violence in intra-state conflict will extend without effort to the international arena as the cultural behaviour of communities will be collectively represented in the activities of state. Main Objective Is Durable And Self-sustaining Peace: With the tools of Dialogue and Tolerance aims at durable and self-sustaining peace. This has been lacking in attempts at resolution of intra-state conflicts which have been plagued by renewal of conflict as political and structural transformation alone have been insufficient to remedy the impact of war and violence on the mentalities of communities. Active Non-violence as Natural Response to Conflict: The promotion of a peace-building for a culture of peace on the formal level of the United Nations and the informal work of non-governmental organisations will transform, over an extensive period of time, mentalities of violence to active non-violence. The manner to achieve the above criteria is through the cultural characteristic of non-violence as the only acceptable method of conflict resolution and the upholding of this principle by civil society. Bottom-up and Indigenous Creations: These characteristics of peace-building for a culture of peace are by far its most innovative addition to the processes aiming at disallowing conflict re-emergence. As aspects which contribute in an organised setting something new to the international efforts for durable and self-sustaining peace, the invocation of these traits allow for the actual resolution of intra-state conflicts because the solutions are created from the communities involved themselves. Empowerment: Civil society which often endures the negative impacts of violent conflict are empowered to remove these influences from community interaction and replacing them with means to resolve tensions which does not threaten their existence. Having a serious contribution to the political process of state representation and the local interactions, mentalities and tolerant behaviour of abstinence are the weapons with which civil society defends itself from war and violence. Communities are empowered as collectivities which deny the use of force, or threat thereof, as a feasible means by which to pursue desires of defend causes. Comprehensive: In order to empower with the indigenous creations of non-violent communities for peace, inclusive mandates are compulsory. If non-violence is attained, it will require likeminded reduction of stimulants for conflict while the cultural transformation of mentalities moves through its most vulnerable initial stages. Peace-building for a culture of peace requires extensive involvement in the transformation of: political structures, political representation, civil society involvement in the political processes of state, infrastructure investment, institution building to provide adequate sources to channel conflict through (both financial and representative), tolerance and understanding, education, human rights for peace, self-sustaining production and trade, methods to promote patience in the processes of transformation to peace. Addition to Existing Legitimate Structures: Linked to an existing mass organisation of representation (the United Nations) contributes an innovative approach to conflict resolution. The benefit of a formal organisation of states allows for the proliferation of peace-building for a culture of peace on a global scale, so that in its practice reciprocity of non-violence will facilitate in its positive dividends. 6.0.2 Critical Issues Challenging Peace-building for A Culture Of Peace Based on the concept clarifications of post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace in isolation and in their alliance, several critical issues have been presented. The challenges to operationalising peace-building for a culture of peace are significant and are credited for its as yet unrealisable stance. Insecurities regarding the potential of peace-building for a culture of peace to provide for stability, economic prosperity and advancements as a substitute for the finances of war and violence and most critically the ability of parties to achieve their desires or defend their pursuits as effectively with non-violence as with the quick impact violence appears to provide. Doubts of the Effectiveness of a Cultural Construct: Attitudes for the potential of peace-building for a culture of peace as a realisable concept are challenged by both the belief by communities that such a doctrine and practice is realistic and its potential as a suitable substitute for violent means of goal attainment. The current reality of relations between and within communities sees violence as the means through which to forcefully attain results to a situation irregardless of long-term negative effects. Time and Financial Resources: Contentious issues regarding the long-term time frame and immense financial resources required are contradictory elements in the viability of peace-building for a culture of peace. Time and Money are the contributions of a substitute for the economics of war, but also are a psychologically limiting element for attainment. The desire to see quick results can not be met by the long-term process of cultural change. Perceptions of limited progress could threaten progress and evolution toward ingrained cultures for non-violent responses to conflict as communities seeking change would deem resumption of violence as a more effective manner to obtain results. Conventional State Sovereignty: Peace-building for a culture of peace is to be initiated from the United Nations and is thus subject to the legal protections for state integrity in its application. Once a programme of peace-building for a culture of peace has been launched, should the community lose its desire for the programme, there is little the United Nations would be able to do to guarantee its activities and would be at risk of dissatisfaction for time and resources expended with no return. Ideological Obstacles: A partnership with democracy presents a challenge of promoting a hegemonic ideology for adoption by systems which currently operate under minority ideologies. Resistance to such proliferation of democracy, despite the principled claim of peace-building for a culture of peace to refrain from enforcement of any activity for its own sake, could jeopardise implementation. The principles of tolerance are challenged by an assertion of integration in political organisation, in a sense the partnership presents a contradiction. The willingness of peace-building for a culture of peace to operate in systems organised other than democratically would be difficult to gain support for. Bottom-up and Indigenous Creation: Educating peace-promoters and programmes of peace-building for a culture of peace to work with the local character in the creation of a culture of peace is a daunting project. The knowledge of the local culture, experiences, and vision is no simple achievement and the potential for the diversified organisation of the United Nations to co-ordinate for these efforts is bureaucratically challenging. Economic Realities: The actors who are benefiting financially from the economic transactions made possible by the existence of violent conflict have a vested interest in continuing availability of the machinery of warfare. The existence of such actors and a production sector, the arms industry, and their unwillingness to lose their profitable stance is a crucial hazard to peace-building for a culture of peace. Veto Power: The power of any single actor to sabotage the process if they feel they are not gaining their aims via non-violent resolution in the earliest stages makes the entire doctrine vulnerable. In the long run, the objective is to stigmatise the use of violence to deal with conflicts, however, in the long process of getting to this level reversion to the old cultural character can encase the acting capacity of non-violent agents in doubt. Attitudes of Fear: The unwillingness to remove the threat of force from interaction is the current cultural construction. In this category the challenges to implementation, which are of the most significant, are restraining factors. This study has dedicated itself to the analysis of why peace-building for a culture of peace is needed to attain fuller peace, and the threat this aim has been acknowledged based on the method of this study of observing the situations in a general sense in order to come to some conclusions regarding the trends of resolution. This has been for the sole purpose of arriving at some basic conclusions to which intra-state conflicts can analysed. The challenges of demobilisation, reintegration, repatriation and the plethora of post-conflict rehabilitating activities may have paralysing effect. The inability to surpass the periods of impasse in action as well as mentality, poses a serious threat to peace-building for a culture of peace. This failure to proceed toward cultures of peace, could limit the attitude of attainable cultures of peace and thus subject humankind to reigning culture of violence interactions. 6.0.3 Feasibility Analysis for Peace-building for A Culture Of Peace There is not concrete evidence that a sudden surge toward a culture of peace is to be undertaken. The reasons that a culture of peace is not currently attainable requires continued research into its possibility in addition to the dissemination of information regarding alternatives to violence in the resolution of conflicts. Peace-building for a culture of peace involves a psychological transformation in the mentalities of civil society and political representatives alike to actively choose non-violence as a tactic to deal with tensions. The subsequent economic, political and social methods which are adopted depend solely on the belief that such a cultural occurrence can be brought about and provide substantial benefits as the alternative to violence. Only such a development in mode of thought can prepare for the future attainment of peace-building for a culture of peace. It has been proven that the economics of peace, as a long-term and multi-faceted assignment can foster the financial substitute for war. The programmes which must be commenced for peace-building for a culture of peace involve social and financial development, infrastructure investments, institution building, democratic evolution, rehabilitating programmes and cultural aid to name a but a few. The end result is to be self-sustaining economies which will be capable of responding to economic difficulties with non-violence which is solidified in the institutions which are more capable of filtering challenges than those of weak communities emerging from war. 6.0.4 Recommendations for Future Research The novelty of peace-building for a culture of peace demands further and more extensive research regarding the feasibility of translating doctrine to attainable practices for self-sustaining peace. This study has dedicated itself to a concept clarification of two relatively new doctrines in the field of international relations, and subsequently has proposed an alliance in order to achieve the objectives of disallowing conflict recurrence and ingraining non-violent resolution in all cultures. Further research specialising in two contentious issues, demand extensive research in order to address the critical challenges which may be directed at peace-building for a culture of peace. The first concern is for the economic justifications which necessitate the calculation of the cost-benefit equation to expound the maximum financial gain of peace-building for a culture of peace. The basic reality of the value of economic predominance as deciding factor in international trends and practices is the driving force behind the need for a clear economic analysis of the viability of the doctrine. The second issue which requires a more detailed analysis for viability extends to the realm of sociology and the ability to promote a particular cultural characteristic, namely non-violence, over others. The benefit of both comprehensive studies of economic principles and sociological potential for a culture of peace would in theory confirm the mutual benefit which can be attained by communities interaction non-violently and reaping the financial benefits of economies supported by endeavours to secure non-violent resolution. The presupposition is that the economics of peace can surpass the benefits of war and violence as they provide never ending missions and programmes to finance. The challenge is in the radical transformation of the international system of political, financial and social interactions to arrive at this stage. 6.0.5 General Conclusions Following the explication of the principles and operational methods by which the peace-building for a culture of peace alliance, provocation to the two doctrines, both independently and as a dyad, has accentuated the strain in executing comprehensive agendas for peace. The aid of the case studies of Cambodia, Somalia and El Salvador have been useful in the illustration of the need for an alignment in doctrines in order to fully achieve resolution, which can be deemed a success when conflict has not re-emerged and attitudes and behaviours of war and violence are transformed to non-violence and co-existence. The varying involvement of the United Nations peace-building mandates in these three communities has realised differing successes. The case of El Salvador is exceptionally enlightening as it is one of the pioneering cases of culture of peace programmes and its path to peace has been somewhat smoother than those of its case counterparts, credit is granted to the programme for a culture of peace and is a justification for likeminded activities in the resolution of conflict a the hand of the United Nations. Essentially, the conclusion of the research in this study is that the theoretical need for an alliance between post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace in the United Nations endeavours to resolve intra-state conflict is real. The operational attainment of this alliance for durable and self-sustaining peace is however doubtful given the current mentalities regarding economic and goal oriented gains favouring violent conflict. The necessary catalyst which would require such a massive transformation toward mentalities and behaviours of non-violence for the creation of positive peace does not appear to be on the horizon. The question of what stimulus could provoke such radical transformation is a topic of speculation, the answers to which are not currently attainable. Although the process of transformation is long-term, the provocation which will ignite the desire to see programmes of principles of peace-building for a culture of peace will need to be brisk in order to promote the sense of urgency necessary to compel the international community to undertake peace-building for a culture of peace.  The World Conflict and Human Rights Annual report distinguished high-intensity, low-intensity and violent political conflict as encompassing respectively: 1 000 or more deaths from armed conflict; more than 100 but less than 1 000 deaths from armed conflict; and less than 100 deaths from armed conflict.  The proclamation of the year 2000 as the international year for a culture of peace by the UN provides a forum for concept development.  See Annex I for the five key propositions of the Seville Statement on Violence.  See Annex II for the full reproduction of the portions of the Charter of the United Nations relevant to this discussion of pacific settlement of disputes.  This statement was created at the International Congress of Peace in the Minds of Men, held at Yamoussoukro, Cote dIvoire 1989 as an urging for UNESCO to become involved in the promotion of such a concept.  The discourse on positive and negative peace is a multi-faceted dialogue which is not within the scope of this present study. For more extensive insight into the dialogue see Smoker and Davies Reader in Peace Studies.  For the sake of conservation, the term positive peace will be abbreviated in this research as, peace. When the term peace is invoked, understand it to involve the positive and comprehensive nature delineated above.  See Hector Espiells work Universal International Security and Regional Security 1996 for a detailed discussion of the multi-disciplinary security dialogue.  The term comprehensive includes multi-disciplinary, extensive and integrated approaches. See Castillo for a detailed discussion of the need for an integrated approach to peace-building based on the multi-faceted needs of communities emerging from conflict.  The term civil society is invoked from this point forward to refer to the non-military citizenry of a community  The term communities is invoked to describe; nation-states, regions, areas, ethnic groups, and groups organised around any commonality finding themselves distinct from others based on their commonality.  See Annex IV which contains A/RES/47/120 B of September 1993 which acknowledges the usefulness of post-conflict peace-building and affirms the readiness of the United Nations to support and appropriate such projects. This is the emergence of post-conflict peace-building as a formal element of United Nations conflict resolution procedures.  The democratic peace principle is a western construction which has saturated academic and UN discussion on post-conflict peace-building alike. The absolute need for this ideological base is not founded in its pre-eminence but more so in a global trend to see all states interact based on the same formation.  Samuel Payne undertakes the debate surrounding the abolition of the nation-state in favour of a world government headed by the United Nations which would be responsible for assurances for peace and security. See The Conduct of War for a more in-depth analysis of this debate.  Summaries of each theory are at the base level in order to get a generalised perception of the content and construction of each and the relational impact on the status of the state.  See Annex II for the full reproduction of the portions of the Charter of the United Nations relevant to issues of peace and security for this discussion of the challenges to peace-building implementation.  Findings reproduced from Bertram 388  See Annex V for the full reproduction of the portion of this document in relation to sovereign rights of the state.  Although it provides evidence of the consensus among member states, it is a document of first importance, it is not, of course, an amendment of the Charter (Brownlie, 36)  Overall GDP was stable at 6.1 % per annum in the period between 1991-1995. (Paris, 65)  See Annex II in which Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations is reproduced.  Quoted from 1993 SG Report , supra note 9, at 83 in (Han, 861).  According to UNESCO this is to incorporate creating an environment for living that is consistent with human dignity, where all those excluded, isolated and marginalised would be able to genuinely be a part of society (UNESCO sources, 9).  A transdisciplinary programme with high priority in UNESCOs medium-term strategy; to invoke activity and dialogue exchange to promote the faithful defence of views without violence (Adams 5,11).  The Works Cited of this study reveals that UNESCO publications are the majority of works dedicated primarily to a culture of peace.  The idea of a culture of peace was first elaborated for UNESCO at the International Congress on Peace in the Minds of Men in Yamoussoukro, Cote dIvoire, July, 1989 (UNESCO manila 1995).  Refer to Brown, Hall and Mor for such instances.  Active non-violence is employed through communication, dialogue, peaceful protests and channelling conflict through representative and judicial structures.  The increased number of intra-state conflicts and the relative decrease in inter-state conflicts.  See Jaap Nobel for an extensive history of peace research.  Be aware that this is always coupled with the threat of violence and the actual use of force as both are coercive measures to acquire accommodation.  For an in-depth account of the democratic peace phenomenon see Starr 1997.  Cited from Adams page 27.  Adopted and proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948; See Annex VI for reproduction of Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Opposites based on the self-invoked group identity characteristics which position one organisation against another as the sentiment that such differences do not permit co-existence within a single state.  An Examples of such an organisation is the International Committee Of The Red Cross  The study by Parajon is based on psychological findings of small scale test versions of this notion, however no investigation has been conducted at the level of complex communities (Parajon, 2).  Cited from Defence Alternatives and Culture of Peace, by Vincec Fisas of the UNESCO Centre of Catalunya (in Adams, 40).  (a) non-violence and respect for human rights, (b) intercultural tolerance and understanding, (c) sharing and free-flow of information and (d) full participation and empowerment of women.  The First International Forum on the Culture of Peace was held in El Salvador, February 1994; the Venice Deliberations were held in May 1994; and the Second International Forum on the Culture of Peace was held in the Philippines in November 1995.  52nd Session General Assembly Resolution - A/RES/52/15  See section 4.4 The Four Principles of A Culture of Peace (c).  In representative statistics, 63 000 deaths equal 1.2 % of the nations total population. These figures are a report of the average numbers from various other estimates.  This programme targets broad based participation, dialogue and co-operation of all parties to the conflict. Cited from UNESCO working paper, 1995.  The following guidelines are cited from Adams page 44.  Mozambique and Burundi both commenced CPP in 1994.  The following points are cited from Parajon page 11.  Concluded from the observation that no formal programmes promoting cultures of peace have been adopted in Cambodia whereas the remaining cases have had limited exposure to the concept.  Reproduced from Adams UNESCO and a Culture of Peace page 104.  The term peace-building for a culture of peace is from this point forward used as the designation of the proposed alliance between the doctrines of post-conflict peace-building and a culture of peace.  See Adams and Mayor for further discussion on the cultural phenomenon of war and violence.  See section 4.5 Four Principles of A Culture of Peace Doctrine  The following four points are cited from Adams page 30.  The first Forum was held in El Salvador 1994, and the second in the Philippines in 1995.  The seven principles for reconciliation are taken from the final report of the Second International Forum On the Culture of Peace (UNESCO Philippines 1994, 16).  The delineation of root causes of conflict are cited from the Culture of Peace Programmes correspondence and dialogue communications See UNESCO  Cited in Mayor from a report Common responsibility in the 1990s. The Stockholm Initiative on Global Security and Governance. study group chaired by Swedish Prime Minister Carlsson in 1991.  See Annex II for the full reproduction of the portions of the Charter of the United Nations relevant to this discussion of sovereignty.  Reference to Men is presumed to be a figurative representation for a pluralistic definition of mankind: all ages, ethnicities and gendres are included.  }h„9ErKOL,x + X * Y -Jqzjq;< /0&&77?%V%0 07086)6A=A=B=l=>a>d@@EFGEH}LLM<MMMN NNO;O<PwPxU9X4J J J @@J J J J J J J   GX4YYZ0Z\aSacchhn\n||wxz|gh,vwx} <=pcdfghi'dfgřӿبة=>J J J J J J J J J J J J J F>=>ەۖ)*<>\   -         5   de')CD$(%_++//W/J J J J @@@@@@J J J J J J F/779:?>yGGIbIKKNO+VXX]w]x]z]|]]^B^D^^dgdop%xy{{{{5)+df b; )3Q~J J J J J J J J K~Κ1>?A֖=+DbceYZ\35k57Z,.;   8   hjbdz(*34L@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@J J GIK]#$*/*\1226x::<<<<<<==>Y>Z?7?8@@@@AAB'B(BBDNDOEEFFGVGWH%H&HLHMHHIoIpIIJ!J"JcJdKSKTJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J @@<KTLLLLM^M_MMN/N0NNNNOgOhOOOOPPQRQSQQRnRoRRSSTTTTTTUUUUV_V`VVVVWWWWXXXXJ J J J J J J J J J  J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J 8XY)Y*YlYmYYZZZZ[9[:[[\\]] ]!]$]&@J J J J J J J J &9RyErK?cOL,]x||||wwogbl!D!D!D!D!D!D!D!D!D!D !D!D& + m X * g  : Y - EvJqzjq'rļ{{skkkkk!D!D!D!D!D!D!D!Dl!D!D!D*O  01"f&&&&)_/2r77777===C=DFIOMMN NTTTTX1X4XlXm____c+egbh hh!D<gbm6m7m8mgmhsxxx6x7zzzzzzzzzzzzz{ { 89MNB,;Kƽ:KLp/Mkl|˦qhaa<3,,$l( ", $l( ", $l( ", $l( ",III Lrs01R˦qhaa<72$l( ", $l( ", $l( ", $l( ", RS$%GH !cď̶̷̍̎fg`ޛ`a6sEF1   JKLmn23%U%V0 hh0vC%V%%+C0 0 08096'6(6)6A6B=@=A=B=C=D=E=F=G=H=I=J=K=L=M=N=O=P=Q=R=S=T=U=V=W=X=Y=Z=[=\=]=^=_=`=a=b=c=d=e=f=g=h=i=j=k=l=>c>dEEFFGEH}MMMMMM >HMN N U9X4Z/Z0Z\Z]aQaSaaf{jPn[n\nnu||||,-x =>pcdfg'cdefgſ>>h;NŘř9B\]^_`abcdefghijklmn<=>\]        hh h>@'$(%_+++..........................................h> hhM.......///W//4799:?:@>y@CI`IaIbIINNO+O,VXXXX]y]z]^B^__dfdgddkoop%p&uCxxyy{ºh hh00>B7{||M|}}<}}56)d bc;;Z )*34h< hh< h882QRΘΙΚ12>?@A֖֗Y<=r      !"#$h0P$%&'()*+DbcYZ2345+,     gh}xmb hh hh hh hh hh hh hh hh hh hh%hab'(HI##$$*/*0*\*]1226x::<<<=>Y?7@@AB'BDNEFGVH%HLHIoIJ!JcKSLLM^MN/NNOgOOPø hh hh hh hh hh hh:PQRQRnRSTTUUV_VVWWXXY)YlYZZ[9[\]] ]"]#]$]%]&hEBody Text Indent 3 Body Text 2 Body Text 2 Body Text 3Body Text IndentBody Text Indent 2 toa heading Normal Indent index heading  @@       !Dhh       9 r @  < < < <  x h   p xx);:/N]`dnvY qK;>>LM;NwWafwgvѿ֨==ٕ) dC5EI[wyy~[&3|Z4J q y H o Dv=Ru <'$L$ \!!"B"C[&]&]&]&=/BABSTRACTAnthony Vercillo+Times New RomanArial Courier NewSymbolTimes HelveticaCourierGenevaTimes Helvetica MS Serif MS Sans Serif New York Osaka| WingdingsTahomaVerdana BlacklightD Bremen Bd BT Arial BlackImpactCG TimesUniversUnivers Condensed Antique OliveAlbertus MediumAlbertus Extra Bold Letter GothicMarlett Comic Sans MSFreehand591 BT Parisian BT SerpentineDBol!Freehand575 BT" Impress BT# FlamencoD$Kids% NevisonCasD&Freehand521 BT'OkayD( Oranda BT) Seagull Md BT* DomCasual BT+DomDiagonal BT, Bremen Blk BT- Freefrm721 BT.Egyptian505 BT/FormalScrp421 BT0BernhardTango BT1 Brush455 BT2LibertyD3 Lydian BT4 Liberty BT5BrushScript BT6 Belwe Lt BT7EngraversGothic BT8HorndonD9 VictorianD:AdLib BT; BibleScrT< Brush738 BT= HoratioDMed> Kaufmann BT?Freehand471 BT@ News701 BTASwis721 BlkRnd BTB AlgerianBasDC Broadway BTDBroadwayEngraved BTE DiskusDMedFUmbra BTG TechnicalH Amazone BTIBalloon XBd BTJHobo BTKMurrayHill Bd BTLPhyllisDMPiranesi It BTNRibbon131 Bd BTO Stencil BTPStaccato222 BTQStaccato555 BTRTypoUpright BTSWeddingText BTTAmerType Md BTUBernhardMod BTVBenguiat Bk BTW Allegro BTXBernhardFashion BTYSouvenir Lt BTZBankGothic Md BT[ CommonBullets\OzHandicraft BT]ShelleyAllegro BT^ Serifa Th BT_AvantGarde Bk BT`AvantGarde Md BTa Serifa BTbLithographLightc Kabel Ult BTdSwiss911 XCm BTe Kabel Bk BTfCopprplGoth Bd BTg Wingdings 3hArial Rounded MT Boldi Beesknees ITCj BraggadociokBritannic BoldlCurlz MTm Engravers MTn Felix TitlingoFlexurepFrench Script MTq HarringtonrImprint MT ShadowsLucida CalligraphytLucida Handwritingu Maiandra GDv Mead BoldwMercurius Script MT Boldx Modern No. 20yOCR A ExtendedzStencil{Tempus Sans ITC| Matisse ITC} Vacation MT~Viner Hand ITC Wingdings 2 Bauhaus 93Bradley Hand ITCBrush Script MTForteKino MT Wide LatinLucida BlackletterMatura MT Script CapitalsMistralMonotype CorsivaMonotype SortsSigns MT Juice ITCSnap ITC Almanac MT Arial NarrowBernard MT Condensed Bon Apetit MT Cooper Black Directions MTGaramondHaettenschweiler Holidays MT Lucida Bright Lucida FaxNews Gothic MTOnyx Parties MTRansom Sports Two MTSports Three MT Transport MT Keystrokes MT Book AntiquaBookman Old StyleCentury GothicCentury SchoolbookGeorgia Trebuchet MSMT Extra Map Symbols MS OutlookBookshelf Symbol 3WebdingsBoutiqueDisplayCapsPoornateBilly Bear's Crayons decadence EDB Indians FlyingPenguinGroupSexLong Cool Woman Night SkyPeace Speed Bowling SuperglueRodeo UniversityHighNoonAlstraleRomanaXLAlstraleRomana SilverPlateVangardRamonaBlackoutGanglyDisplayCapsBrunswyk Transylvania GeckoVerticalAirCutMono Comic StripCocaCola BlackAdderIIJacquesDiner& Tahoma CE' Tahoma Cyr) Tahoma Greek* Tahoma Tur+ Tahoma Baltic, Verdana CE- Verdana Cyr/ Verdana Greek0 Verdana Tur1Verdana Baltic6BlacklightD Tur<Bremen Bd BT Tur>Arial Black CE?Arial Black CyrAArial Black GreekBArial Black TurCArial Black BalticD Impact CEE Impact CyrG Impact GreekH Impact TurI Impact BalticzComic Sans MS CE{Comic Sans MS Cyr}Comic Sans MS Greek~Comic Sans MS TurComic Sans MS BalticFreehand591 BT TurParisian BT TurSerpentineDBol TurFreehand575 BT TurImpress BT TurNevisonCasD TurFreehand521 BT Tur OkayD Tur Oranda BT TurSeagull Md BT TurDomCasual BT TurDomDiagonal BT TurBremen Blk BT TurFreefrm721 BT TurEgyptian505 BT TurFormalScrp421 BT TurBernhardTango BT TurBrush455 BT Tur LibertyD Tur Lydian BT TurLiberty BT TurBrushScript BT TurBelwe Lt BT TurEngraversGothic BT Tur HorndonD Tur&VictorianD Tur, AdLib BT Tur2 BibleScrT Tur8Brush738 BT Tur>HoratioDMed TurDKaufmann BT TurJFreehand471 BT TurPNews701 BT TurVSwis721 BlkRnd BT Tur\AlgerianBasD TurbBroadway BT TurhBroadwayEngraved BT TurnDiskusDMed Turt Umbra BT TurAmazone BT TurBalloon XBd BT Tur Hobo BT TurMurrayHill Bd BT Tur PhyllisD TurPiranesi It BT TurRibbon131 Bd BT TurStencil BT TurStaccato222 BT TurStaccato555 BT TurTypoUpright BT TurWeddingText BT TurAmerType Md BT TurBernhardMod BT TurBenguiat Bk BT TurAllegro BT TurBernhardFashion BT TurSouvenir Lt BT TurBankGothic Md BT TurOzHandicraft BT TurShelleyAllegro BT TurSerifa Th BT Tur AvantGarde Bk BT TurAvantGarde Md BT Tur Serifa BT Tur"Kabel Ult BT Tur(Swiss911 XCm BT Tur.Kabel Bk BT Tur4CopprplGoth Bd BT Turb _Toc447004542 _Toc447004543 _Toc447004544 _Toc447004545 _Toc447004546 _Toc447004547 _Toc447004548 _Toc447004549 _Toc447004550 _Toc447004551 _Toc447004552 _Toc447004553 _Toc447004554 _Toc447004555 _Toc447004556 _Toc447004557 _Toc447004558 _Toc447004559 _Toc447004560 _Toc447004561 _Toc447004562 _Toc447004563 _Toc447004564 _Toc447004565 _Toc447004566 _Toc447004567 _Toc447004568 _Toc447004569 _Toc447004570 _Toc447004571 _Toc447004572 _Toc447004573 _Toc447004574 _Toc447004575 _Toc447004576 _Toc447004577 _Toc447004578 _Toc447004579 _Toc447004580 _Toc447004581 _Toc447004582 _Toc447004583 _Toc447004584 _Toc446308724 _Toc447004585 _Toc447004586 _Toc447004587 _Toc447004588 _Toc447004589 _Toc447004590 _Toc447004591 _Toc447004592 _Toc447004593 _Toc447004594 _Toc447004595 _Toc447004596 _Toc447004597 _Toc447004598 _Toc447004599 _Toc447004600 _Toc447004601 _Toc447004602 _Toc447004603 _Toc447004604 _Toc447004605 _Toc447004606 _Toc447004607 _Toc447004608 _Toc447004609 _Toc447004610 _Toc447004611 _Toc447004612 _Toc447004613 _Toc447004614 _Toc447004615 _Toc447004616 _Toc447004617 _Toc447004618 _Toc447004619 _Toc447004620 $5;KRV4]k8vx1%!ʎaL#V. 4);lCKX0_Sl\z=>gÙ>)-7GbLVbgmv  ̚A=+ !(0/[&  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNO/$5;AL RVk]kfv5x7L QFbʵdk0#.74@;D KX[_lz+oo[)-U8=GM)Vbn$w4a(2P/Ԕ~Ca "([0[&"E"E