Jus Post Bellum and Just Peace

Abstract

Theories of just peace have remained understudied in international law and peace studies. This chapter introduces major themes of the book and traces the role of peace and justice in just peace discourse. It identifies different approaches towards just peace in three fields: just war theory, peacebuilding practice, and transitional justice approaches. It argues that just peace is more than ‘just a peace’, namely a stable peace with justice, but at the same time highly dependent on relational and discursive dimensions. It requires negotiation, recognition, and implementation and involves concession or compromise from parties. It is not only related to form and process, but connected to different dimensions of justice (retributive, procedural, restorative, and distributive justice) which need to be adjusted to the context of transitions from conflict to peace. Peace must be perceived to be fair and just.

How Ukraine’s Just War Challenges Just Peace Theory

“…In the case of Ukraine, this skepticism was justified. Strictly from the perspective of just peace, Ukraine should have appealed to the UN to provide protection for its citizens through a peacekeeping operation, and negotiations with Russia should have taken place (Stahn 2020). However, it has become clear that the UN, and especially the UN's Security Council, is internally divided.…”

Living through war: An oral history of civilians in Sudan

“…Our analysis of just peace is rooted in both strategic peacebuilding approaches (Lederach & Appleby, 2010; Philpott, 2010; Schirch, 2004; Wählisch, 2019) and the intersubjective approaches (Aggestam & Björkdahl, 2013; Allan & Keller, 2006, 2008; Persson, 2014; Stahn & Iverson, 2020). Strategic peacebuilding approaches presuppose engagement among a wide array of actors from many sectors of society.…”