صلح مثبت در چشم انداز نظری (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
درخصوص چگونگی برقراری صلح، به عنوان یکی از مطالبات همیشگی جوامع بشری، نظریات گوناگونی مطرح شده است که ازنظر خاستگاه تاریخی، آن ها را می توان در دو قالب کلاسیک و مدرن دسته بندی کرد. ازطرفی، صلح پژوهان معاصر، با نقد انتزاعی و فردی بودن تأکید رویکرد کلاسیک بر آرامش درون و نیز انفعالی و ناکافی بودن تأکید رویکرد مدرن بر صِرف نبود جنگ، تلاش فعالانه برای تحقق صلح را مورد توجه قرار داده اند. دراین بین، یوهان گالتونگ، صلح پژوه پرآوازه نروژی، کوشیده است ضمن اشاره به موانع ساختاری، وجه ایجابی تحقق صلح در جوامع انسانی را با مطرح کردن ایده صلح مثبت پررنگ سازد. از این ایده برای تقویت مبانی نظری حوزه امنیت و صلح می توان استفاده کرد؛ ازاین رو، در مقاله حاضر، نخست، آثار گالتونگ را- با محوریت مفهوم صلح مثبت- به روش اسنادی واکاوی کرده و سپس کوشیده ایم با روش قیاسی، داده های به دست آمده را تجزیه وتحلیل و مؤلفه های مفهومی و کلیدی تحقق صلح مثبت را استخراج کنیم. در پایان نیز مدلی مفهومی پیشنهاد می شود که آن را می توان برای بررسی وجود زمینه های فکری تحقق صلح مثبت در اندیشه اندیشمندان گوناگون به کار گرفت. بر اساس یافته های پژوهش، چنانچه نفیِ تضادهای ساختاری ای چون استثمار، استعمار، تبعیض و فقر (در وجه سلبی) با همکاری، برابری سیاسی و عدالت اقتصادی (در وجه ایجابی) همراه شود و سمت وسوی این وضعیت در راستای ایجاد هماهنگی مثبت و احساس همدلی در جامعه باشد، آن گاه صلح مثبت محقق خواهد شد.Positive Peace in Theoretical Perspective
Introduction The quest for establishing and preserving peace has been a constant in human societies, giving rise to a multitude of theories and viewpoints. Among these, Norwegian peace researcher Johan Galtung introduced a novel perspective on the concept of peace in 1969, challenging the modern definitions. He argued that peace extends beyond the mere absence of war. Instead, it requires the eradication of all forms of violence and the establishment of enduring peace through the creation of new societal and political institutions, attitudes, and structures.Galtung distinguished between two types of peace: negative and positive. Negative peace, he explained, is focused on preserving peace through diplomatic means. On the other hand, positive peace is about building non-exploitative social structures, irrespective of the likelihood of war. Thus, while negative peace is about upholding the status quo, positive peace aims toward the formation of new structures, which are the outcome of peaceful interactions among individuals and the management of their differences with due regard to the legitimate needs and interests of everyone involved in important matters.Given the extensive body of Galtung’s work and the wide range of his views, this paper attempts to answer the question, “What are the key elements of achieving positive peace in Galtung’s thought?” Furthermore, we seek to develop a conceptual model that explores the potential intellectual foundations for achieving positive peace as perceived by other scholars.Methodology This study, devoid of any preconceived hypothesis, aims to uncover and elucidate a pattern of relationships among the conceptual elements that constitute positive peace in Galtung’s thought. The research is qualitative, exploratory, and employs a descriptive-analytical approach. Initially, Galtung’s works are examined in the context of positive peace using a document analysis method, which is part of a targeted descriptive study. Subsequently, an effort is made to pinpoint the crucial conceptual elements for achieving this kind of peace using an analogy method grounded in logical reasoning. Finally, a conceptual model is suggested by forming a logical linkage among these elements.Result and Discussion The research findings show that Galtung, through his unique approach to peace, posits that the objective of peace is not merely to halt war, but also to unify human society by eradicating the roots of structural violence. In fact, he advocates for the development of harmonious and peaceful relationships that integrate the economy, identity, and various groups within society.Within the context of Galtung’s positive peace theory, social harmony cannot be achieved unless a country’s domestic policies address the growing human needs. Without this, the international environment could also become more tense. Thus, by drawing parallels between peacemaking/peace stabilization and the health approaches in disease prevention and treatment, he divides the concept of peace into two types: positive and negative.Galtung proposes at least two therapeutic interventions in the realm of peace: firstly, the remedial measures of negative peace aimed at eradicating violence, and secondly, the preventive measures of positive peace intended to avert the onset of violence. In this context, negative peace underscores the importance of diplomatic peacekeeping initiatives, while positive peace (even in the face of unlikely warfare) concentrates on fostering peace and creating non-exploitative societal structures.Thus, the causes of war should not be solely attributed to the actions of individual or group decision-makers. Instead, the objectives of peace influence a multitude of issues that hinge on fulfilling basic human needs and enhancing the quality of life. In this regard, Galtung advances two topics in parallel. Firstly, he identifies four types of societal relationships - positive harmony, negative harmony, disharmony, and neutrality - and assesses the achievement of positive peace based on the outcomes of these relationships. Secondly, he examines the dynamics of violence and underscores the need to replace the “good” with the “evil”.In summary, this paper strives to draw logical connections among various themes in Galtung’s pacifist thoughts. The concluding remarks suggest that the resolution of structural contradictions, such as exploitation, colonialism/imperialism, discrimination, and poverty, should go hand in hand with corrective efforts to transform violent structures. This transformation requires the collective participation of all society members to shape their own future and to institute political equality and economic justice. Ultimately, if these efforts lead to the establishment of positive harmony and foster a sense of unity within society, then the goal of achieving positive peace will be realized.
تبلیغات
