Introduction
Peace is a deeply contested concept, often perceived as the mere absence of conflict, yet its true essence extends far beyond this simplistic view. In political science, peace is understood as a condition encompassing justice, security, and social harmony, requiring active efforts to address underlying grievances and systemic injustices. This essay explores the nature of peace, drawing on theoretical perspectives and practical examples to consider how it can be achieved. Using the historical context of Cambodia and contemporary global injustices, such as ongoing discrimination against marginalized communities, I argue that peace necessitates restorative justice rather than punitive measures alone. The essay further reflects on personal experiences with peacebuilding initiatives to highlight practical applications of these principles.
Conceptualizing Peace: Beyond the Absence of War
Growing up in Cambodia, I understood peace as an “unspoken silence”—a fragile state following decades of conflict, including the brutal reign of the Khmer Rouge (1975-1979). This silence, however, felt incomplete; the absence of war did not erase the scars of genocide or systemic inequality. Scholars like Galtung (1969) define peace not only as the absence of direct violence (negative peace) but also as the presence of social justice and equity (positive peace). This distinction reveals that true peace requires addressing structural violence—poverty, discrimination, and exclusion—that perpetuates suffering (Galtung, 1969). In Cambodia, for instance, blanket amnesties granted to former Khmer Rouge leaders, while preventing further conflict, were perceived as an injustice to victims, undermining trust in the system. This taught me that “peace at any price” often neglects the needs of those most harmed, highlighting the importance of justice in peacebuilding.
Pathways to Peace: Restorative Justice Over Retribution
Initially, my research led me to believe that legal prosecution, often seen as the “hammer” of justice, was the primary means to heal societies post-conflict. However, studying Cambodia’s history revealed the limitations of this approach. While the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia prosecuted some Khmer Rouge leaders, many victims felt excluded from the process, yearning for acknowledgment and reconciliation rather than mere punishment (Lambourne, 2009). This aligns with restorative justice theories, which emphasize healing through dialogue, restitution, and community rebuilding over retribution (Zehr, 1990). Restorative justice offers a framework for peace that prioritizes victims’ dignity and fosters social cohesion, addressing the root causes of conflict rather than merely its symptoms.
Peace in Practice: Restoring Dignity Through Empowerment
The practical application of restorative justice became evident through my involvement in the USAID-funded Junior Leaders Program, specifically the “Farming Avengers” project. This initiative empowered over 50 orphaned children in Cambodia by teaching food security skills, addressing generational losses caused by conflict and displacement. By equipping these young individuals with the means to sustain themselves, the project restored a sense of dignity and agency often stripped away by past injustices. This experience underscored that peacebuilding is not a top-down process but a grassroots effort, where small acts of empowerment contribute to broader social harmony. Indeed, as Lederach (2005) argues, sustainable peace emerges from community-driven initiatives that rebuild relationships and trust.
Global Injustices: A Wider Lens
Beyond Cambodia, current global injustices, such as systemic racism and economic inequality, further illustrate the challenges of achieving peace. For example, the Black Lives Matter movement highlights how structural violence—evident in discriminatory policing and socioeconomic disparities—prevents true peace in many societies. Applying restorative justice principles globally could involve community dialogues, policy reforms, and reparative measures to address historical wrongs, rather than relying solely on punitive systems. While complex, such approaches offer a pathway to heal divisions and build inclusive peace, demonstrating their universal relevance (Lederach, 2005).
Conclusion
In conclusion, peace transcends the absence of conflict, encompassing justice, equity, and social restoration. Drawing from Cambodia’s history and personal engagement in peacebuilding, I argue that restorative justice provides a more holistic approach to peace than punitive measures, prioritizing healing and dignity. Furthermore, global injustices remind us that peace remains elusive without addressing structural violence. The implications are clear: policymakers and communities must collaborate to implement restorative practices, ensuring that peace is not just an abstract ideal but a lived reality for all. This twin focus on theory and practice offers hope for sustainable solutions to conflict and inequality.
References
- Galtung, J. (1969) Violence, Peace, and Peace Research. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), pp. 167-191.
- Lambourne, W. (2009) Transitional Justice and Peacebuilding after Mass Violence. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 3(1), pp. 28-48.
- Lederach, J. P. (2005) The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace. Oxford University Press.
- Zehr, H. (1990) Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice. Herald Press.
