|
| |
The following extract by Michael Zürn addresses the so-called
civilizing hexagon and, as such, highlights a core element of the approach taken by the
pre-eminent peace researcher Dieter Senghaas. As far as its place in the war-peace continuum is
concerned, the civilizing aspect plays a core role and is referred to continually throughout this basic
course:
|
 |
But what does civilizing actually
mean? Senghaas attempted to answer this question. His peace theory understands peace as a civilizing project and is explained in the following
extract:
"As far as this configurational way of thinking is
concerned, successful government, in the sense of achieving or approaching a situation in which the fundamental values of society are met, and the peaceful coexistence of people become
one. The objectives of government (...) are one and the same with the conditions for
peace. The different state objectives and aims encompassed by government are linked up to
the Senghaas' peace theory using a "civilizing hexagon", which demonstrates a good and working internal state order and the ability
for peace-orientated foreign affairs. (...)
It is only possible to overcome a system of organized lack of peace
by means of a civilizing project. The most important aspects associated with the peace
civilizing project are revealed by taking a look at the conditions which make internal peace possible in modern Western
industrialized societies. Senghass wanted to develop a wide peace concept without getting bogged down in the involved concepts associated with the terms
"negative peace" (= absence of war) and "positive peace" (= absence of structural
aggression) and it was for this reason that he developed the civilizing
hexagon. According to this point of view, peace is given when a constellation of conditions is present that provide mutual support for each other (...).
|
|
A
civilizing hexagon of this kind has six cornerstones which can be described as
follows:
1) The de-privatization of aggression and the establishment of a legitimate state monopoly of
aggression is essential for the civilizing project. There can be no lasting peace without "the
disarmament of the citizens" (...).
2) On the other hand, however,
control of the state monopoly on aggression and the establishment of a constitutional state are needed to make sure that state monopoly of aggression is not abused in a despotic way.
3) Increasing control over emotional states thorough
mutual interaction is established by growing interdependency and by the
de-privatization of aggression; this is referred to by Norbert Elias impressively as the
"process of civilization". The consequences of this might also lead to the establishment of
"emotional spheres", which transcend local boundaries and lead to a
"national identity".
4) This also serves in laying the foundations for democratic participation in the public decision-making
process.
5) Another aspect is social justice. The physical fortification of the rule of law is a constitutive condition for the ability of constitutional state orders to be sustained and, as a
consequence, inner peace to exist.
6) And, finally, a constructive conflict culture provides the foundations for disagreements to be resolved in a constructive way and
for compromise-orientated conflict skills, and makes up the last cornerstone in the
hexagon.
To this end, then, peace as a civilizing project becomes the desire for a legitimate and just state order. This also means that effective
civilizing and peace are in a sense "identical". When peace is understood in this way, it becomes clear that it's not a natural
state. "Peace has to be created." Or to put it another way: "If the aim is to
achieve peace in the sense of civilizing politics (...), the ground for peace has to be
prepared: Si vis pacem, para pacem.“"
[taken from: Michael Zürn: Vom Nationalstaat lernen, Das zivilisatorische Hexagon in der Weltinnenpolitik, in: Ulrich Menzel (Hrsg.): Vom Ewigen Frieden und vom Wohlstand der Nationen, Frankfurt am Main 2000, p. 21-25]
[Back to top of page]
|
