|
An Historical Perspective on Culture of Peace | By David Adams December 2005 |
Sources Early History of Culture of Peace Civil Society Report on Culture of Peace UN Declaration and Programme of Action The Culture of Peace Dialogues Original draft of UN Declaration and Programme of Action UNESCO Debate on Human Right to Peace UNESCO Brochure for Seville Statement El Salvador National Programme
|
It may be said that the culture of peace is "an idea whose time has come" - having arrived on the agenda of history because the conditions were ripe for its realization. The abolition of war had already been on the agenda of history for almost a century - being the objective of the League of Nations and the United Nations and UNESCO. With the end of the Cold War there was a shift in emphasis from war between countries to war within countries, from international peace to intra-national peace, for which the peacekeeping operations were designed in countries such as El Salvador, Cambodia, Mozambique, Somalia and ex-Yugoslavia. By 1992, a number of tendencies converged to place on the agenda the transformation of the cultural basis of war ("culture" in the anthropological sense) into a new culture, a culture of peace. These new tendencies included: the success of the national liberation movements which provided a powerful incentive to call into question the culture of war that had made possible colonialism, as well as a powerful voting block in the UN UNESCO was ideally situated to initiate and promote the culture of peace because of its particular mandate to "construct the defences of peace" in the minds of men and women, and because of its (almost) universal membership as part of the United Nations family, with one-nation/one-vote in its General Conference. From 1992-2000, under the mandate of Federico Mayor, the culture of peace flowered at UNESCO, beginning with national culture of peace programmes (see especially the UNESCO monograph on a culture of peace) and culminating in the International Year for the Culture of Peace and the Manifesto 2000 with its 75 million signatures. At the same time, however, resistance was developing from the European Union, as indicated by their opposition to the human right to peace and their insistance that one could not mention of the culture of war. It seems likely that the powerful member states were coming to realize that some of the underlying implications of the culture of peace could call into question the basis of their power. After the mandate of Federico Mayor came to an end at UNESCO and the United States returned to dominate the organization, the culture of peace was abandoned by UNESCO. However, by this point, the culture of peace had been taken up by the UN General Assembly and by organizations of civil society around the world as a Global Movement for a Culture of Peace. By the midpoint of the Decade for a Culture of Peace, there is a widespread consciousness about the culture of peace and many initiatives, most by civil society organizations and a few by Member States and local authorities. Although UNESCO is giving no leadership at this moment, in my opinion, we should not give up on them, but continue to press the organization to return to its mandate of "building the defences of peace in the minds of men" - for which the culture of peace is the contemporary expression.
A dialectical view of history suggests that consciousness, while it may not seem important most of the time, can become determinant at certain historical moments of rapid change. Consider, for example, the importance of consciousness in the events of 1789, 1850, 1917, 1946 and 1989. The true test of a culture of peace will come at the next dramatic historical juncture. Will we be ready for it?
|
Issues National Programmes for a Culture of Peace Definition of Culture of Peace UN Declaration and Programme of Action International Year and Manifesto 2000 Main Actors for a Culture of Peace 6. Understanding, Tolerance and Solidarity 7. Free Flow of Information and Knowledge 8. International Peace and Security
|