Agonistic peace and confronting the past: An analysis of a failed peace process and the role of narratives

Abstract

This study analyzes how peace processes in socio-political environments that do not support ‘confronting the past’ (CTP) initiatives are affected by the exclusion and delegitimization of alternative narratives different from dominant ones concerning the nature and history of ethnic conflicts, focusing on Turkey’s failed peace process as a case study. It pays specific attention to the resistance against acknowledging alternatives to dominant narratives by considering the role played by bystanders and antagonistic citizens, who are not directly part of the conflict but nonetheless support it by remaining passive or directly/indirectly supporting dominant narratives. Driven by agonistic peace theory, the article shows how failing to turn these groups into agonistic citizens through some form of agonistic CTP initiative and allowing a space for alternative narratives can result in the fragility of efforts towards a transition to peace.

Keywords

agonistic peace confronting the past ethnic conflict Kurdish issue in Turkey narratives peace processes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aggestam

Cristiano

Strombom

(2015) Toward agonistic peacebuilding? Exploring the antagonism-agonism nexus in the Middle East peace process. Third World Quarterly 36(9): 1736–1753.

Bar-Tal

(2000) From intractable conflict through conflict resolution to reconciliation: Psychological analysis. Political Psychology 21(2): 351–365.

Bar-Tal

(2003) Collective memory of physical violence: Its contribution to the culture of violence. In: Cairns

Roe

(eds) The Role of Memory in Ethnic Conflict. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77–93.

Bar-Tal

(forthcoming) Conflict supporting narratives and the struggle over them. In: Srour

Mana

(eds) Collective Narratives in Intractable Conflict: The Case of the Israeli and Palestinian Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 1–35.

Başer

Çelik

(2014) Imagining peace in a conflict environment: Kurdish youths’ framing of the Kurdish issue in Turkey. Patterns of Prejudice 48(3): 265–285.

Bashir

(2009) Accommodating historically oppressed social groups: Deliberative democracy and the politics of reconciliation. In: Kymlicka

Bashir

(eds) The Politics of Reconciliation in Multicultural Societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 48–69.

Bashir

(2016) Neutralizing history and memory in divided societies: The case of making peace in Palestine/Israel. In: Jumana

Storihle

(eds) The Goodness Regime, pp. 20–27. Available at: http://www.nasjonalmuseet.no/filestore/Utstillinger_og_aktiviteter/Aktiviteter/Arrangementer/2016/Mellomstasjonen/Kunstsnakk_1_13_sept/TheGoodnessRegime.pdf

Berkan

(2013) ‘Türk Sorunu’ Aşılmadan ‘Kürt Sorunu’ Aşılabilir mi? Available at: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/22467410.asp (accessed 20 May 2019).

Bilali

Çelik

(2014) Psychological asymmetry in minority-majority relations at different stages of ethnic conflict. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 43(B): 253–264.

10.

BİLGESAM (2009) Güneydoğu Sorununun Sosyolojik Analizi: Teknik Rapor. Ankara: BİLGESAM Yayınları.

11.

BİLGESAM (2013) Çözüm Sürecine Toplumsal Bakış. Ankara: BİLGESAM Yayınları.

12.

Call

(2012) Why Peace Fails: The Causes and Prevention of Civil War Recurrence. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

13.

Çelik

(2015) The Kurdish issue and levels of ontological security. In: Rumelili

(ed.) Conflict Resolution and Ontological Security: Peace Anxieties. New York: Routledge, pp. 52–70.

14.

Daly

Sarkin

(2007) Reconciliation in Divided Societies: Finding Common Ground. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

15.

Ekopolitik (2009) Workshop notes of the Turkey’s big roof project. Available at: https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Ekopolitik_MezkurMe%C3%A7hulMesele_2009-1.pdf (accessed 25 February 2019).

16.

Ergil

(2012) Türkiye’nin Türk Kimliği Sorunu. Perspectives 3(13): 4–7.

17.

Gürses

Çelik

Balta

(2020) Civil war and democratization: A micro-level analysis. Social Sciences Quarterly 101: 776–791.

18.

Hill

Jr (2010) The moral responsibilities of bystanders. Journal of Social Philosophy 41(1): 28–39.

19.

Hürriyet (2005) Kürt Sorunu Benim Sorunum. Available at: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/kurt-sorunu-benim-sorunum-341847 (accessed 25 February 2019).

20.

Khoury

(2016) National narratives and the Oslo peace process: How peacebuilding paradigms address conflicts over history. Nations and Nationalism 22(3): 465–483.

21.

Little

(2012) Disjunctured narratives: Rethinking reconciliation and conflict transformation. International Political Science Review 33(1): 82–98.

22.

Lucic

(2013) Bystanders in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the conflict in the 1990s. Croatian Political Science Review 50(5): 29–53.

23.

Maddison

(2014) Relational formation and agonistic dialogue in divided societies. Political Studies 63(5): 1014–1030.

24.

Maddison

Diprose

(2018) Conflict dynamics and agonistic dialogue on historical violence: A case from Indonesia. Third World Quarterly 39(8): 1622–1639.

25.

Mouffe

(2000) The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso Books.

26.

Mynet (2011) Erdoğan’ı Zora Sokacak Konuşma. Available at: http://www.mynet.com/haber/guncel/erdogani-zora-sokacak-konusma-591874-1 (accessed 22 May 2019).

27.

(2011) Are we becoming more distant? Exploring the nature of social polarization along ethnic lines in the city of Izmir. Unpublished MA Thesis, Sabancı University, Istanbul.

28.

Oran

(2014) Kürt Barışında Batı Cephesi: Ben Ege’de Akilken. Istanbul: Iletişim.

29.

Ramsbotham

(2010) Transforming Violent Conflict: Radical Disagreement, Dialogue and Survival. Abingdon: Routledge.

30.

Rouhana

(2004) Group identity and power asymmetry in reconciliation processes: The Israeli–Palestinian case. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 10(1): 33–52.

31.

Rumelili

Çelik

(2017) Ontological insecurity in asymmetric conflicts: Reflections on agonistic peace in Turkey’s Kurdish issue. Security Dialogue 48(4): 279–296.

32.

Sabah (2013) Akil İnsanlara Saldırı Girişimi. Available at: https://www.sabah.com.tr/gundem/2013/04/27/kil-insanlara-saldiri-girisimi (accessed 29 July 2019).

33.

Schaap

(2005) Political Reconciliation. London: Routledge.

34.

Schaap

(2006) Agonism in divided societies. Philosophy & Social Criticism 32(2): 255–277.

35.

Shinko

(2008) Agonistic peace: A postmodern reading. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 36(3): 473–491.

36.

Staub

(1993) The psychology of bystanders, perpetrators, and heroic helpers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 17: 315–341.

37.

Staub

(2003) Notes on cultures of violence, cultures of caring and peace, and the fulfilment of basic human needs. Political Psychology 24(1): 1–21.

38.

Staub

(2006) Reconciliation after genocide, mass killing, or intractable conflict: Understanding the roots of violence, psychological recovery, and steps toward a general theory. Political Psychology 27(6): 867–894.

39.

Strömbom

(2019) Exploring analytical avenues for agonistic peace. Journal of International Relations and Development. Epub ahead of print 24 June. DOI: 10.1057/s41268-019-00176-6.

40.

Tekdemir

(2016) Conflict and reconciliation between Turks and Kurds: The HDP as an agonistic actor. Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 16(4): 651–669.

41.

UKAM (2014) Akil İnsanlar Heyet Raporları. İstanbul: UKAM Yayınları.

42.

Uluğ

ÖM

Cohrs

(2017) “If we become friends, maybe I can change my perspective”: Intergroup contact, endorsement of conflict narratives, and peace related attitudes in Turkey. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 23(3): 278–287.

43.

Westendorf

(2015) Why Peace Processes Fail: Negotiating Insecurity after Civil War. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

44.

Wolff

(2009) Complex power-sharing and the centrality of territorial self-governance in contemporary conflict settlements. Ethnopolitics 8(1): 27–45.