CHAPTER SEVEN
The Peace Barometer
WE ARE A WORLD OBSESSED WITH MEASUREMENTS. ENTIRE industries are dedicated to tracking vast varieties of economic data, from the Nasdaq to unemployment, inflation to interest rates. Although quantifying economic growth and decline is valuable, such figures tell us little about the true state of society. To assess that, there are organizations that measure literacy or infant mortality rates—there’s even a push for indexing Gross National Happiness1—but when was the last time these figures were displayed prominently on the local news?
It is time to move social and psychological measurements to the forefront of our evaluations of the state of society, particularly when it comes to peace. When a society moves from war to peace, economic data tells only half the story; other measurements are necessary to evaluate the psychological state of society. As I discussed in chapter 4 on peace ecology, economic indicators make no difference if a population’s mind-set is stuck within a culture of war.
Sustainable peace relies on the attitudes and cooperation of the people who have lived with conflict. To effect a genuine change in conflict and post-conflict societies, people must choose peaceful settlement and cooperation, advocate compromise for potential gain, support regional integration, and embrace the international community and multiculturalism without abandoning local traditions—all by free will, not by force. Peace must be accepted and valued by societies, in action as well as in word.
But the definition of the word peace is not absolute; people perceive peace differently according to their own definitions and 86 cultural perceptions. Differing definitions of peace can lead to dissatisfaction, frustration, conflict, and violence within societies and across borders. It is impossible to form an objective picture of a population’s views of peace because leaders usually speak on behalf of the public and the media echoes those sentiments. Elections, which do not take place very frequently in democratic societies, let alone in nondemocratic ones, give only a vague idea of voters’ opinions.
Therefore, before any other part of the peacemaking process begins, research must be undertaken to measure the conflict societies’ attitudes toward peace—how they define peace, what they want out of a peace agreement, and how they view current approaches to local and regional conflict resolution. Such data can help decision makers acquire as objective a view as possible of the range of opinion and can steer peacemaking toward a course that fulfills the needs of the silent majority.
Measuring Peace
Similar to the way the Nasdaq measures stocks, a “peace barometer” can be used to measure public opinion in countries that want to liberate themselves from a state of conflict. A peace barometer can identify the social impetus toward peace and the primary opposition to it; these measurements can be used by governments, NGOs, and civil organizations to better direct policy and approaches to the peacemaking process.
The peace barometer allows us to study the role of psychological processes and attitudes in violence and peacebuilding—for example, the differentiation between “us” and “them.” We can study the effects of victimization and the ways in which it inhibits empathy for the Other and makes the world seem dangerous. Relations between groups are greatly affected by culture, societal institutions, and political processes; the peace barometer helps us identify these intersections and understand how they can be influenced toward peaceful values. 87
In late 2005 the Peres Center for Peace worked with Gallup International to survey Israeli and Palestinian attitudes toward peace. This project (the partial results of which are included in part 4 in the context of the Pax Mediterraneo) helped us identify the core values and beliefs on each side, which influenced our organizational approach to peacebuilding. Polling in this region continues on an ongoing basis, capturing perpetually changing attitudes.
Peace barometers elsewhere can be modeled on the structure initiated by the Peres Center for Peace, which employs both qualitative and quantitative methods to measure populations’ perceptions and beliefs. Instead of blanket surveys that focus on a few broad questions, the peace barometer uses face-to-face interviews to explore people’s attitudes in depth. These interviews, lasting approximately an hour each, are conducted with random samples of citizens to gain an overall range of public opinions.
The questions in the Middle Eastern peace barometer are divided into six categories: war and peace, vision and identity, creative diplomacy, economic cooperation, the role of the international community, and peace ecology. These categories and the specific questions can be tailored for individual conflicts, depending on the regional situation and the stage of the peace process. All peace barometer surveys can be designed to measure the public’s attitude toward the culture of peace; the benefits of peace; the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, or another international peace-brokering presence; Western culture; and possible social mobilization—for example, the willingness of people to participate in peace projects, and the value of peace education.
The data collected from these surveys make it possible to evaluate the impact of peacebuilding initiatives at both a micro level (domestic politics) and a macro level (regional politics), thereby promoting systematic research and thinking about issues connected with peacemaking and conflict resolution.
Within any society that moves from conflict to peace there remain forces that would rather continue the conflict. These groups are often driven by religious figures who exploit a fertile ground of 88 poverty to recruit weak and disgruntled populations to extreme, militant, nationalistic, and often obtuse viewpoints. It’s easy for conflict populations to fall in love with the conflict culture because it is convenient to abdicate responsibility for one’s own misery and instead to blame the enemy. It’s also easy for the media to focus only on these negative groups and thus to perpetuate the belief that each side is still trapped in a culture of conflict.
The peace barometer can identify the negative elements in a society, but it also can bring to light the silent majority that favors peace processes and coexistence. Governments, NGOs, and civil societies can emphasize these positive groups and help transform this passive majority to an active majority within the framework of the modern participatory peace.