the-evolution-of-international-security-studies

structural violence, economics and the environment 125This tradition had its stronghold in Scandinavia and West Germany (Senghaas,1975: 252; Reid and Yanarella, 1976: 329) and the Journal of PeaceResearch, founded by Galtung in 1964, provided the main outlet for itsdissemination (Chatfield, 1979: 174). The link between development andstructural violence was based on a critical Marxist/post-Marxist analysisof global economic, particularly capitalist, structures. Galtung drew uponearly Frankfurt School theorist Marcuse in criticising capitalist consumersociety for promising ‘euphoria’, but this (apparent) providence of ‘pleasurerather than pain’ might be ‘worse in terms of being more manipulatory’than more overtly repressive societies (Galtung, 1969: 170). In laterworks, including ‘A Structural Theory of Imperialism’ (Galtung, 1971),the links to dependency theory were made explicit. Dependencia theorywas developed in a Latin American context by Cardoso and Faletto (1979)and Gunder Frank (1967), and in an African setting by Amin (1972, 1975,1976). It held that ‘underdevelopment’ was not simply a sign of non-Western countries being at a less advanced stage of modernisation, but astructurally determined condition. Third World countries played a particularrole within global capitalist structures as they were the suppliersof raw materials or a few commodities on conditions set by the extractingcountries and companies of the West. As Western capitalism went throughstages of crisis – as predicted by classic Marxist–Leninist theory – thesecrises were transposed onto the global South (Senghaas, 1975; Jackson andSørensen, 1999: 200–201). Broadening the scope of imperialism beyondthe economic, Galtung (1971) argued that political, military, communicationand cultural imperialisms supported an exploitative North–Southglobal structure. Neoliberal regimes would perpetuate and deepen theconditions of structural dependency to the detriment of the populations,if not the elites, of Third World countries.The call for the inclusion of development issues in Peace Research wasfurther supported by the argument that the number of deaths due to malnutrition,hunger and human-induced disasters in the periphery rivalledthe hypothetical body count of a nuclear war – a logic subsequentlyreiterated by many widening perspectives. Moreover, reasoned Senghaas(1975: 252), the poverty of the Third World constituted an ‘explosivepotential for conflict and violence’, and although such conflicts had so farbeen confined to the Third World itself, they were likely to start spreadingto the West and the socialist East. That Senghaas, Galtung and othercritical ‘development’ Peace Researchers were at least partially successfulin setting a broader Peace Research agenda is evidenced by the manyarticles on structural violence, imperialism and development published