Geography’s ties with war‐making, territorial and imperial conquest are well known. Geography has also made contributions to the study of peace. In recent years, geographers have been engaged in a rich debate over the relations between studies of war and peace and the conceptual and methodological frameworks for approaching studies of violence. This paper reviews the vibrant recent literature on geographies of peace, which features two striking points of consensus. First, peace must be understood as a process. Second, defining peace is a question of defining violence. These points of consensus, in turn, raise questions about research sites and methods. To flesh out some of these issues, this paper turns to Galtung’s theorizing on peace and structural violence. The concept of structural violence has been very influential, but remains undertheorized. The third section, in turn, details feminist theories and methods of researching violence that challenge undifferentiated landscapes of war, peace and structural violence. The fourth section illustrates the ideas of peace as a process and epistemologies of violence by way of example. I sketch the context and terms through which “antiviolence” organizing emerged in the United States over the past 30 years. Antiviolence, as developed most centrally by antiracist, feminist activists and theorists, offers not only a powerful analytic for understanding connections among forms of violence and uneven spaces of harm and well‐being, but also a practical way of bridging spheres of organizing that might otherwise remain discrete. I conclude by offering implications drawn from antiviolence praxis for geographic studies of war and peace.

This article analyzes how the spatial metaphor of 53206, a zip code within the city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, connects with crises in the legitimacy of policing and politicians’ claims to care about Black lives. It examines how, in the context of deepening racialized poverty, ongoing mobilizations against police violence, and increasing rates of violent crime, liberal and conservative rhetoric about 53206 largely obscures the roles that decades of deindustrialization and labor assaults, metropolitan racial and wealth segregation, and public school and welfare restructuring play in producing racial and class inequality to instead emphasize racializing tropes about ‘Black-on-Black crime,’ broken homes, and uncaring Black communities. Situating the examination within critical analysis of urban poverty, geographic scholarship on the racialization of space, and critical criminology, the authors consider the salience of the term territorial stigmatization as a means to understand how historical and contemporary processes of racialized capitalism shape Milwaukee’s urban and social divides. They argue that discursive constructions of 53206 and the rhetorical posture of saving Black lives deployed by elected officials have had the effect of entrenching policing power while further rendering neighborhoods like Milwaukee’s Northside as already dead and dying.

No abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

In this paper we map out what we are calling a "geopolitics of trauma" by examining the role of trauma in transnational refugee regimes and the individualisation of geopolitical relations through mental health diagnosis and service provision.Focusing on one site of entry into the international regime of refugee administration, we present findings from fieldwork that we conducted in August, 2015 in Turkey with NGOs and IGOs involved in the protection, mental health and psychosocial service provision, and resettlement of refugees. The findings that we present demonstrate the challenges of refugee care and management on the front lines in Turkey and the significance of mental health diagnosis, treatment and documentation in the early stages of refugee administration. We suggest that practices of refugee screening and resettlement are imbued with traumatic stressors and trace how trauma intersects with the administration of refugees in different sites and at different times. We argue that the protracted situation of refugees in Turkey (many of whom will wait eight years for their Refugee Status Determination interview) and the multiple interviews and demands for documentation through which a displaced person applies for refugee status and third-country resettlement become sites of ongoing traumatisation for the refugee subject. Further, in the practices of screening and documentation, we can trace the medicalisation of the refugee subject as not only a question of care but also a practice of legibility on which the state and international organisations base their decisions about inclusion and exclusion. The geopolitics of trauma thus emerges not only in cartographies of war, displacement and resettlement, but also in the minute details and performative demands of the refugee determination and resettlement process. K E Y W O R D S mental health, Middle East, migration management, political geography, post-traumatic stress disorder, refugees 1 | INTRODUCTIONWar and peace tend to be thought of as discrete spaces and temporalities, yet the displacement and resettlement of refugees challenges this geopolitical imagination. In this paper, we examine how procedures for registering, assessing, protecting and managing refugees rework the trauma of war and violence to create new geopolitical connectivities. Rather than conceptualising trauma as an individualised experience that happened elsewhere and in the past, we argue that the screening ---