ICAR News Network - Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution

ICAR News Network

The 'Surge' Will Not Rebuild Iraq
Dennis Sandole, ICAR Professor
Posted: 01/10/08

[Published, Financial Times, January 10, 2008] Sir, General David Petraeus’ “surge” in Iraq, measured in terms of number of attacks and of US and Iraqi fatalities, has been a success, more so than many of its supporters had thought possible. But it is also true that the window of opportunity provided by this success in increasing “negative peace” (eg, reductions in hostilities) has not been maximised by Iraqi leaders’ promised efforts to achieve reconciliation among the Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions (“Iraq surge brings a lull in violence but no reconciliation”, January 7).

Clearly, the nation-state architects of the international system are much better at destroying than they are at rebuilding post-conflict physical and psychological and emotional infrastructure. Is this because national security tends to put a priority on “hard power” at the expense of “soft power”? Just look at the massive differential in US investments in those two sectors in Pakistan.

It may also be because of the limited availability of appropriate theory, but more importantly, of appropriate strategies for applying theory to reconciliation and efforts to build peace on the ground. Just look at Bosnia-Herzegovina 13 years after the imposition of “negative peace” by Nato, where the Bosnian Croats, Muslims and Serbs are still “fighting”, but by political means, prevented from returning to full-scale warfare only by a fragile European Union “negative peace” force.

The limited but growing body of theory suggests that the overall process of putting together a war-torn state can take more than 20 years and involve multiple actors who try, often woefully, to maximise co-ordination to avoid duplication as they intervene.

While success for Iraq requires the “negative peace” that the surge has provided, it also requires much more to approach and maintain “positive peace” (eg, dealing with the underlying conditions of violent conflict), with few examples worldwide to provide models.

Exploring the implications of this sorry state of affairs for the first post-Bush US president should be among the priorities of all candidates currently exhausting themselves in the primaries.

Dennis J.D. Sandole,
Professor of Conflict Resolution and International Relations,
Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution,
Arlington, VA 2220, US

News Network Homepage / Armenia / 2008 Elections / Afghanistan / Diplomacy/ Egypt / Environment / Global Peace Index / Health / Immigration / Iraq / Iran / Islam / Kosovo / Nuclear Proliferation / Pakistan / Palestine-Israel / Russia / Somalia / South America / Turkey /




ICAR News Network The 'Surge' Will Not Rebuild Iraq Dennis Sandole, ICAR Professor Posted: 01/10/08 [Published, Financial Times, January 10, 2008] Sir, General David Petraeus’ “surge” in Iraq, measured in terms of number of attacks and of US and Iraqi fatalities, has been a success, more so than many of its supporters had thought possible. But it is also true that the window of opportunity provided by this success in increasing “negative peace” (eg, reductions in hostilities) has not been maximised by Iraqi leaders’ promised efforts to achieve reconciliation among the Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions (“Iraq surge brings a lull in violence but no reconciliation”, January 7). Clearly, the nation-state architects of the international system are much better at destroying than they are at rebuilding post-conflict physical and psychological and emotional infrastructure. Is this because national security tends to put a priority on “hard power” at the expense of “soft power”? Just look at the massive differential in US investments in those two sectors in Pakistan. It may also be because of the limited availability of appropriate theory, but more importantly, of appropriate strategies for applying theory to reconciliation and efforts to build peace on the ground. Just look at Bosnia-Herzegovina 13 years after the imposition of “negative peace” by Nato, where the Bosnian Croats, Muslims and Serbs are still “fighting”, but by political means, prevented from returning to full-scale warfare only by a fragile European Union “negative peace” force. The limited but growing body of theory suggests that the overall process of putting together a war-torn state can take more than 20 years and involve multiple actors who try, often woefully, to maximise co-ordination to avoid duplication as they intervene. While success for Iraq requires the “negative peace” that the surge has provided, it also requires much more to approach and maintain “positive peace” (eg, dealing with the underlying conditions of violent conflict), with few examples worldwide to provide models. Exploring the implications of this sorry state of affairs for the first post-Bush US president should be among the priorities of all candidates currently exhausting themselves in the primaries. Dennis J.D. Sandole, Professor of Conflict Resolution and International Relations, Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, Arlington, VA 2220, US News Network Homepage / Armenia / 2008 Elections / Afghanistan / Diplomacy/ Egypt / Environment / Global Peace Index / Health / Immigration / Iraq / Iran / Islam / Kosovo / Nuclear Proliferation / Pakistan / Palestine-Israel / Russia / Somalia / South America / Turkey /		About ICAR Student Information Prospective Students Faculty and Staff Alumni Career Services Academic Programs Library ICAR In The News Events Technology Resources ICAR Publications Point Of View Center Center for World Religions, Diplomacy & Conflict Resolution