Religion and Peacebuilding - Assignment

The “4Rs” and the Role of Religion in Peacebuilding Education
Introduction
In January 2015, Novelli et al., under the auspices of the Research Consortium on Education and
Peacebuilding, published a Working Paper entitled “A Theoretical Framework for Analysing the
Contribution of Education to Sustainable Peacebuilding: 4Rs in Conflict‐Affected Contexts” . The
object of the paper was to present a theoretical and analytical framework which would allow them
to “critically analyse education policy and programmes and provide a framework for visualising
what a sustainable peacebuilding and education system might look like.” (Novelli et al.:2015:3).
In order to develop their framework, the authors have referred to their own previous work as well
as carrying out a review of some of the relevant published literature in the field, situating
themselves as critical of the “liberal peace” thesis which tends to prioritise the introduction of
liberal democracy and market forces as leading to stability in a post-conflict region, relegating such
provisions as education to a secondary consideration. (Novelli et al.:2015:5).
One of the issues identified in the paper is the “...failure of 'state-centric' approaches by
international actors to connect to the agency of local actors within civil society and sub-national
contexts' which the authors find problematic in two respects: it limits the ability to capitalise on
peacebuilding efforts already in place on a local level, arguably also risking undermining those
efforts, and it risks failing to take into account the educational needs of a particular community
(Novelli et al.:2015:7). Conspicious by its absence, however, is any consideration of religious
education, and how it might fit with their framework.
From their studies and analysis, the authors developed a “4Rs” analytical tool for assessing
education for sustainable peacebuilding. In this assignment I will examine the “4Rs” framework,
focusing on the specific issue of engagement with local actors and, using examples from recent
1

conflicts, explore how religious education situates itself within the “4Rs”.
Self-Reflection
As a Nichiren Buddhist and member of SGI-UK, education and self-improvement is one of the
foundations of my spiritual belief. Study, in terms of studying the religious learnings of our faith –
the Lotus Sutra, the Gosho, which were letters written by Nichiren to his followers, and the
writings of the current and former Presidents of Soka Gakkai and the SGI - is one of the “Three
Practices” adherents should carry out on a regular basis to develop and strengthen one's faith.
However, secular education also has a very important role in our practice, in enabling us to make
the very best of our own lives and contribute to society to the best of our abilities. It is not simply
the accumulation of knowledge that is important, but the application of it to create value in
society 1 .
As such I am aware that I view education as vital, and religious education as something that
improves the lives of others. It is clear, however, that religious education has been frequently used
to cause harm and foment violent conflict. R. Scott Appleby's seminal work “The Ambivalence of
the Sacred” contains an entire chapter dedicated to the what he calls “Violence as a sacred duty”.
In summary, he views religious violence coming about at the point where religious extremists use
religious teachings to galvanise religious, or ethnoreligious, actors into violent conflict against a
perceived enemy 2 (Appleby:1999). I must, therefore, be aware that my view of religious education
as always being a benign force may be at odds with much of the evidence I will be examining.
Secondly, in light of my own religious persuasion, I have carefully chosen a definition of religion to
reflect the fact that some religions, including Buddhism, do not have an all-powerful god as their
1 “Persons merely excelling in such areas [as book learning and technology] are nothing more than component parts
of a colossal mechanism of the state and society. Truly desirable people of ability are creative people who untiringly
pursue lofty ideals, who have rich individuality and who can make free and effective use of their knowledge and
skills." (Ikeda:1968)
2 “Religious violence occurs when extremist leaders, in reaction to perceived injustices in the structural environment
of the society, successfully employ religious arguments designed to mobilize religious (or ethnoreligious) actors to
retaliate against their enemies.” (Appleby: 1999, p.282)
2

centre of focus. As such, a wider definition of religion has been adopted.
Definitions
“Religion/Religious”
Harrison, in her 2006 paper “The pragmatics of defining religion in a multi-cultural world”
highlights the issues in defining precisely what “religious” means. As such, any of the scholarly
definitions is problematic, but for the purposes of this assignment I have chosen the definition
formulated by anthropologist Clifford Geertz as being, in my opinion, the closest to an allencompassing
explanation of what “religion” means across different societies and cultures:
“According to Geertz, 'a religion is: 1) a system of symbols which acts to 2) establish
powerful, pervasive and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by 3) formulating
conceptions of a general order of existence and 4) clothing these conceptions with such an
aura of factuality that 5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic”
(Geertz:1973, cited in Harrison:2006)
Extrapolating from this definition, “religion” in the context of this assignment means an organised
set of beliefs, symbols and rituals that have been adopted by a community as an explanation for
“life”, and which incorporate codes of behaviour which must be adhered-to. Implicit in my
interpretation is the notion that religious leaders cloak themselves with the authority to determine
the correct interpretations of the codes of behaviour and moral codes and can be considered to be
important local actors in civic society, of the kind identified in the introduction.
“Peace”
What “peace” means is the subject of many volumes of scholarly works. However, I have chose to
adopt Webel's concept of an “Imperfect Peace” or “Strong Peace”. Webel acknowledges that
continuous, absolute peace in the world in which we live may be an unattainable goal 3 . He
3 “Given the history of the recent past and the current parlous state of our world, one might
understandably be tempted to be sceptical about the prospects for enduring peace on earth in
an era (error?) of potential instantaneous global war with weapons of mass and vast destruction.
But it is worth recalling that other political ideals once thought unachievable also came to pass.
It took centuries, even millennia, to outlaw slavery and legitimize human rights. It might take
3

therefore militates towards what he calls Strong Peace, which he defines as a synthesis of those
aspects of Galtung's concepts of “negative peace” (the absence of violent conflict) and “positive
peace” (a sustainable, structural peace involving the full integration of human society
(Galtung:1964) which veer towards non-violence and harmony. (Webel:2007).
“Peacebuilding”
Appleby has formulated a useful, succinct definition of religious peacebuilding as “the
participation by religious actors in a larger, communitywide effort to build structures of civil society
that support non-violent, inclusive, and tolerant civic life” (Appleby: 1999: 295) which, in my view,
sits neatly within the concept of educational peacebuilding on a local level.
The 4Rs
Having come to the conclusion that “peace” must mean “peace and justice”, Novelli et al. take as
their starting point Nancy Fraser's concept of social justice, consisting in “redistribution”,
“recognition” and “representation” (Fraser:2005), to which they add a further element of
“reconciliation”, thus determining these to be the four components of a “socially just post-conflict
society” (Novelli et. al 2015:10). The Working Paper defines each of these components, which can
be summarised as follows:
Redistribution – remedies to social injustices cause by inequalities in distribution of
resources, participation in the economic structures, and lack of equal opportunity
Recognition – addressing inequalities arising from status in local society, be that as a
result of gender, culture, age etc.
Representation – inequalities in participation in the decision-making processes
Reconciliation – truth and reparations, transitional justice, forgiveness, bringing
communities together. (Novelli et al.:2015:12)
at least as long to delegitimize political violence, both from above (by the state) and from below
(by non-state actors). (Webel:2007:8)
4

The authors see education as having a transformative role in conflict-ridden and post-societies,
proclaiming it to “embedded within processes of social justice and societal transformation”.
(Novelli et al.:2015:10). In their view, education is a transformative remedy, one which has the
power to transform the root causes of conflict.
What Role has Religion in the 4Rs Framework?
It is apparent, on the face of it, that the Working Paper is part of a series of academic papers aimed
at establishing a workable approach to education in peacebuilding. However, other than to
acknowlege that religion is an element to take into account 4 when analysing social injustice, the
concept of religious education as a driver of societal transformation in peacebuilding is not
considered. This lacuna arguably renders the authors guilty of one of the key points they raised as
problematic in their introduction to the paper: the failure to connect with local actors. In other
words, religion is treated as a characteristic to be taken into account when establishing
peacebuilding education in a community, rather than a potential driver for peace to be harnessed
and incorporated into the education process.
In the chapter “Ambivalence as opportunity” Appleby briefly examines the role of religious
education and formation as a peacebuilding mechanism (Appleby:1999:284-286). As local
grassroots leaders, religious actors are well-integrated into, and respected by, their local
communities. He sees the involvement of religious actors in, essentially, transmitting the peaceful
message inherent in the religion of the community to be a useful peacebuilding mechanism.
There is no doubt, however, that religious education can be as much a driver of conflict as a driver
of peace. As part of the Innocenti Insight project at UNICEF, Bush and Saltarelli's study “The Two
Faces of Education in Ethnic Conflict – Towards a Peacebuilding Education for Children” (Bush and
Saltarelli:2000) is an important work which identifies the components of “negative” and “positive”
education, and develops the concept of peacebuilding education. Fig. 1 below summarises the
4 See, for example, Table 1 at p. 16 of the Working Paper which indicates that “recognition” requires looking at the
place of religious identity in the education system, but religion does not feature in any of the other categories, and
is, most notably, absent from the “reconcilation” section.
5

“negative” and “positive” aspects.
Negative
Uneven distribution of education –
privileging one ethnic group over
another
A weapon of cultural repression –
particularly evident in post-colonial
societies which have a Euro-centric
educational system
Denial of education as a weapon of war
– destroying the schools of the enemy
Manipulating history for political
purposes
Manipulating text-books – only
teaching texts that give the
representations the government wish
Self-worth and hatred or intolerence of
others
Segregated education, shoring up
inequalities and low self-worth
Positive
Conflict-dampening effect of equal
access to education
Nurturing and sustaining an
ethnically-tolerant climate
De-segregating the minds of those
previously segregated
Linguistic tolerance
Cultivating inclusive citizenship
Disarming history, including history of
conflicts
Educating for peace
Education practices to challenge state
oppression – eg Catholic schools
admitting black children in apartheid
South Africa
Fig. 1: Negative and Positive Education –
(summarised from Bush & Saltarelli: 2000: 9-21)
As is clear from this summary, education can be used as a force for good or a force for oppression,
as well as reinforcing conflicts between different communities, or different sectors of the same
community.
Bush and Saltarelli see the solution to be “bottom up”, not “top down”. 5 Equally, they highlight that
5 “Peacebuilding education – like peacebuilding itself - would be a bottom-up rather than top-down process driven
by war-torn communities themselves, founded on their experiences and capacities. It would be firmly rooted in
6

educational intergroup initiatives with groups of children caught up in opposing sides in the
conflict, that may have, as a result of the “negative” educational practices to which they have been
subjected, formed violent attitudes towards The Other can be effective, although “the
effectiveness of an education initiative increases to the extent that it is flexible and responsive.”
There would also be a requirement for parallel societal structures to support such educational
initiatives. They take as an example the conflict in Northern Ireland and the attitudes between
Protestants and Catholics. (Bush and Saltarelli:2000:25-26)
This, again, reinforces my contention that involvement of religious educators in the peacebuilding
process, rather than simply treating religious actors as subjected to peacebuilding education
initiatives delivered by others, is inherently important.
When Peacebuilding Education Goes Wrong:
1. A Clash of Moral Codes
The nature of the religious education involved in the peacebuilding process can be problematic if it
is not designed to be as inclusive as possible, and as sensitive as possible to the religious beliefs of
the actors involved. Gopin, in his ground-breaking book “Between Eden and Armageddon: The
Future of World Religions, Violence and Peacemaking” gives an example of how adopting a
secular, liberal curriculum in peace education in Israel led to polarization within the community.
The haredi community considered some of the values being taught as alien to their culture. “That
is not to say that these values are wrong, but that the teachers of these values need to acquire a
method of extending these efforts into all segments of the society.” (Gopin:2000:130)
Gopin goes on to criticise what he sees as the “one basis error of universal or social scientific
methods of peacemaking”: a determination to impose what are deemed to be universal moral
codes while failing to have any understanding of, or sensitivity towards, the deeply-entrenched
moral values tied to the religious beliefs of some members of the community – a clash of “moral
immediate realities, not abstract ideas or theories. It would be applied, immediate, and relevant, which means
that it cannot be restricted to the classroom.” (Bush and Saltarelli: 2000: 23)
7

codes”. He concludes that “the most important goal of conflict resolution and peacemaking
should be the humanization of The Other” by mutual respect for each other's dignity, but should
not seek to “homogenise” a moral code for all people irrespective of their deeply-held beliefs.
(Gopin:2000:132).
2. Negative Education in Afghanistan
An example of where the failure adequately to incorporate religious education into the
peacebuilding process had a deleterious effect is in post-2001 Afghanistan (Giustozzi:2010). It is
important at this juncture to note that a great many of Giustozzi's references appear to be based
on private conversations with NGO staff, members of the Afghan government, etc., and as such is
not independently referenced. Nevertheless he is a highly respected academic in Afghan studies.
The period under Taleban has entered the public psyche as a time of educational oppression,
where girls were excluded, and schools were turned into madrassas, teaching extremist views.
This is only half the truth, however, and much of the had already set in prior to the Taleban coming
to power in 1996. Years of civil war during the Soviet occupation had meant that by the time the
pro-Soviet regime collapsed in 1992, so had the education system. Attempts under the Rabbani
government stabilise schooling soon fell apart as the civil war between the various Islamist factions
raged. Public funding was diverted to support the conflict. “Education in Kabul collapsed as the
capital turned into a battleground among roaming militias”. (Giustozzi: 2010:12). Manipulation of
the education system took the form of USAID funding and providing highly progagandized and
violent school text-books which focused on the glorification of the Pashtun in Afghan history;
vilification of The Other, especially non-Muslims and Shi'as was rife (Spink:2005 cited in
Giustozzi:2010:13). The Rabbani government had already increased the amount of religious
education in schools, so by the time the Taleban took power, much of the “damage” was therefore
already done.
Spink alleges that “the Taleban had reduced education to Islamic studies to the exclusion of other
subjects” and that “Girls had been forbidden to attend school throughout the Taleban regime”.
8

Giustozzi, however, indicates that the position was somewhat more nuanced, albeit that girls
schools were closed down “leading to a near two-thirds collapse in girls' enrolment”.
(Giustozzi:2010:13). NGOs and private, underground schools still taught girls, but there was no
longer any public education provision for them.
The 2001 occupation heralded an era of new development in education. UNICEF launched a “Back
To School” campaign in 2002 (Spink:2005:200) What is clear from Spink's paper, however, is the
tension between UNICEF, USAID and UNESCO and the Minister of Education in terms of the
content of the school curriculum and, importantly, what text books that were to be used. USAID
had funded and printed millions of text books which were barely-revised versions of those in the
pre-Taleban Rabbani regime. 6 Although they claimed that these books had no religious content, it
was not the case, and much of the hate-creating propaganda went unrevised.
For many Afghans, after decades of civil war, international investment in education was seen as an
opportunity to “lift families out of poverty and enhance social status”. (Giustozzi:2010:15). As a
result in the boost of numbers of state schools, religious madrassa attendance declined and many
were closed down, (Karlsson and Mansory:2005 cited in Giustozzi:2010:15) although a minority of
parents refused to send their children to the state schools on the basis that there was insufficient
religious education. This minority view would soon develop into a theme.
Giustozzi describes the “soft approach” to education during the period 2002-2003 as “nationbuilding
from above”. There was a unified national curriculum, and the focus was on primary and
secondary education. The number of hours of religious education was reduced. Many teachers
who had had experience in the education system in the 70s and 80s had returned to their roles,
some from exile, and were aware of the extent to which education was a useful peacebuilding and
6 “All subject-based books were revised by a team of Afghans working for USAID to remove any direct
reference to violence. References in all the books to the mistrust of the descendants of Ali were not removed.
There was no representation for non-Sunni, non-Pashtun children of their own histories or culture in the books.
The US Government stated that they would only support the printing of the non-religious textbooks, despite
the fact that all books were full of religious references. As a result religious books, that instructed ‘true
believers’ to kill all non-Muslims, were not revised as a part of the USAID revisions. Instead, with significant
pressure from the MoE, UNICEF financed the printing of the Denyat books (religious books). UNICEF and
the MoE were responsible for distributing the books to the schools.” (Spink:2005:201)
9

nation-building tool, so were fully supportive of the Ministry of Education's curriculum. However,
as indicated in Spink's paper, there was contention around the teaching of religion, and the
content of religious text books. Already in 2002 extremists were protesting against “international
involvement” in schools. Hand-in-hand with the neo-Taleban insurgency, teachers were
intimidated and schools were closed down. By 2006 670 schools had been closed.
(Giustozzi:2010:17).
A contrasting, less Western-centric, view of the problem can be gleaned from Shirazi's paper “
Islamic Education in Afghanistan: Revisiting the United States' Role” (Shirazi:2008). His paper is
critical of the role the US has played in Afghanistan's education system, especially during the
period of the Soviet occupation era, which he sees as entirely in the geo-political interests of the
US to the detriment of Afghanistan. According to Shirazi, US involvement in Afghanistan's
education including USAID “(underwriting) the printing of explicitly violent Islamist text-books”
with the goal of demonising not on the Soviets but also, in response to what they saw as increasing
Iranian interference, Shi'a muslims. (Shirazi:2008:222-223). Arguably the US were complicit in
teaching Islamist extremism to pre-Taleban era Afghan children for their own political ends. These
are the same text-books that continued to be used, barely-revised, well into the post-2001 era.
When Peacebuilding Education Has Worked Well
The Northern Ireland peacebuilding educational model is an example of how, when properly
funded and administered, a religious education peacebuilding initiative can work well. McGlynn et
al. examine the impact of integrated schools for mixed Catholic and Protestant pupils. (McGlynn et
al.: 2004).
The first school of its kind was Lagan College, which was opened in 1981 by a group of parents, and
following changes in the law in 1989 which imposed a duty on the Department for Education to
work towards integrated schooling, numbers increased, although as of 2003 they still only made
up approximately 5% of the school places available (McGlynn:2003a cited in McGlynn et al.:2004).
10

In parallel, the Department for Education in Northern Ireland (DENI) also introduced a policy of
using education as a peacebuilding tool, and the Council for Curriculum, Examinations and
Assessment has introduced peacebuilding subjects into the national curriculum, so that even those
children who do not attend integrated schools are nevertheless taught about peace and
reconciliation. ( McGlynn et al.:2004:151).
The paper highlights four areas of impact: identity, out-group attitudes, forgiveness and
reconciliation. The overall conclusions are that:
▪
▪
▪
▪
There is an overwhelmingly positive effect of integrated schooling on sectarian
attitudes which emanates more from the actual cross-community contact itself
rather than from the ethos being taught. In other words, being in school with
people from the “other” community is what softens sectarian attitudes.
Similarly, the sharing of an educational space, rather than the peacebuilding ethos,
is what drives an improved attitude to the “out-group” and the ability to forgive.
The evidence appears to show that, as a result, integrated schooling promotes
reconciliation.
The effect of the education programmes should not be underestimated.
(McGlynn et al.:2004:156-158)
Lessons to be Learned?
There are key contrasts to be highlighted between the peacebuilding efforts that failed and the
one that shows success:
1. In both the Israeli and Afghan cases, there were top-down solutions involving outside
influences that were not sufficiently religiously “sensitive”. In the case of Israel, the
democracy programme, part-sponsored by members of the US Jewish diaspora, was taught
around a liberal, secular moral code which was at odds with that of the Israeli haredi
11

population. In short, the haredi population's beliefs and moral code were ignored in the
rush to disseminate liberal, secular moral principles. Gopin's criticism of this approach is a
valid one. If one wishes to build a Strong Peace, one cannot disregard the sensibilities of
one part of the community while privileging another part and expect a positive outcome.
2. In the case of Afghanistan, while some “softer” clerics were integrated into the Ministry of
Education post-2001, many of the teachers coming back to the profession during that
period had originally been teachers in the 70s and 80s and were happy to support central
government's drive to reduce religious education in schools. Many of the madrassas, which
in rural areas had been the mainstay of education in local communities, disappeared
altogether. Arguably, the US wish to secularise education in the middle-east highlighted in
by Shirazi (Shirazi:2008:224-225), with the view to stabilising the region and,
simultaneously, encouraging a Western-centric moral code based on democracy and
security, influenced the leaders of post-2001 Afghan regime. As a result, in the initial
period, religious education was comparatively side-lined. Given the volatility of a country
that had been in a state of civil war for decades, we cannot with any accuracy predict what
would have happened had local religious educators been incorporated more fully into the
transition, but there is sufficient evidence to make a reasonable guess that it would have
improved the situation and, arguably, may even have had a conflict-dampening effect.
3. In Northern Ireland, although it could be said that there was a top-down imposition of
curriculum subjects based around mutual respect and reconciliation, the integrationist
movement came from parents and religious actors in the communities themselves – in
other words, a grass-roots movement. Local actors were instrumental in pushing for
integrated schooling.
Coming back to Appleby's vision, set out at the start of this essay, of harnassing local religious
actors and developing them to teach the peaceful message at the core of their religious beliefs as a
way of healing broken societies, had that principle been considered in either the Israeli or the
Afghan examples, there is evidence to suggest that it could have had an effect in building a Strong
12

Peace. In the case of Afghanistan, in particular, one cannot help but wonder whether, being
painfully aware that their involvement in the 70s and 80s had “created a monster”, the US
government saw a soft, multi-tiered approach which would have included engaging with local
religious actors as too onerous and frightening a task. As Shirazi commented: “..the place of
Islamic education has remained a difficult topic to address and has produced debate on whether
the United States supports Islamic education in Afghanistan at all.” (Shirazi:2008:227).
Conclusion: The Role of Religious Education within the 4Rs Framework
As Novelli et al. state, there are tensions between the global agenda for NGOs such as UNICEF and
other international state and non-state actors and their policies and strategies versus what is
needed on the ground in a conflict/post-conflict community resulting in local needs being sidelined.
(Novelli et al.:2015:7). Going back to their table at page 16, (attached) the following
observations are important:
▪
▪
▪
Under “recognition”, the role of religious identity in the education system is taken
into account. Citizenship and civic education as a means of state-building is also
considered. Religious education as a means of state-building could act in parallel to
citizenship and civic education in nurturing positive education, through the criteria
set out in Fig 1 (above).
Under “representation”, again, religious education is absent when it could be
deployed in a positive way. It is notable that the extent to which the education
system supports “fundamental freedoms” is highlighted, however. How those
“freedoms” are defined could arguably give rise to the type of tensions created in
the Israeli example, where a section of the community feels aggrieved at the “clash
of moral codes”. Co-opting religious actors into the education process would go
some way to addressing this problem.
Finally, in the category of “reconciliation”, religious education is, arguably, vital in
determining how historic and contemporary injustices are addressed, social
cohesion, and teaching about the past and its relevance to the present and future –
the ideal opportunity to put in to practice Appleby's vision of changing the religious
13

narrative by focusing on the core peaceful values inherent within the religion.
In summary, there is an important role to be played by religious educators in building a Strong
Peace, and one that should be given greater prominence in the “4Rs” analytical framework, which
would go some way to bridging the gap between the global, top-down imposition of education
“solutions” and the need to have a flexible, responsive approach to peacebuilding education at a
local level.
Bibliography
Appleby, S.R., 1999. The ambivalence of the sacred: Religion, violence, and reconciliation.
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Bush, K.D. and Saltarelli, D., 2000. The two faces of education in ethnic conflict: Towards a
peacebuilding education for children. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.
Fraser, N., 2005. Reframing justice in a globalized world. New Left Review 36, 79-88
Galtung, J., 1964. An Editorial, Journal of Peace Research, 1 (1), 1-4
Geertz, C., 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays (New York: Basic Books,
1973), Chapter 4.
Giustozzi, A., 2010. Nation-building is Not for All. Kabul: Afghanistan Analyst Network.
Gopin, M., 2000. Between Eden and Armageddon. The Future of World Religions, Violence
and Peacemaking.
14

Harrison, V.S., 2006. The pragmatics of defining religion in a multi-cultural world.
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 59(3), pp.133-152.
Ikeda, D. 1968. "Dai 31 kai honbu kanbu kai [The Thirty-First Headquarters Leaders
Meeting]." Seikyo Shimbun, May 3. available from
http://www.daisakuikeda.org/main/educator/edu/edu-03.html
Karlsson, P and Mansory, A., 2007. An Afghan Dilemma: Education, Gender and Globalistion
in an Islamic Context, (doctoral thesis in international education at Stockholm university,
Sweden 2007), 200.
McGlynn, C. W. (2003a) Integrated education and critical multiculturalism, paper presented
at the Educational Studies Association of Ireland Conference Belfast, 10–12 April.
McGlynn*, C., Niens, U., Cairns, E. and Hewstone, M., 2004. Moving out of conflict: The
contribution of integrated schools in Northern Ireland to identity, attitudes, forgiveness and
reconciliation. Journal of Peace Education, 1(2), pp.147-163.
Shirazi, R., 2008. Islamic Education in Afghanistan: Revisiting the United States' Role. CR:
The New Centennial Review, 8(1), pp.211-233.
Spink, J., 2005. Education and politics in Afghanistan: the importance of an education
system in peacebuilding and reconstruction. Journal of Peace Education, 2(2), pp.195-207.
Webel, C, 2007. Toward a philosophy and metapsychology of peace. - Webel, C. and
Galtung, J. eds., 2007. Handbook of peace and conflict studies. Routledge
15