The Difficult Task of Peace: Crisis,

Fragility and Conflict in an Uncertain

World 1st ed. 2020 Edition Francisco
Rojas Aravena
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-difficult-task-of-peace-crisis-fragility-and-conflict-i
n-an-uncertain-world-1st-ed-2020-edition-francisco-rojas-aravena/
The Difficult Task
of Peace
Crisis, Fragility and Conflict
in an Uncertain World
Edited by Francisco Rojas Aravena
The Difficult Task of Peace
 Francisco Rojas Aravena
Editor

The Difficult Task of

Peace
Crisis, Fragility and Conflict in an Uncertain World
Editor
Francisco Rojas Aravena
University for Peace
San Jose, Costa Rica

ISBN 978-3-030-21973-4    ISBN 978-3-030-21974-1 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21974-1

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.

Cover illustration: Igor Stevanovic / Alamy Stock Photo

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Preface

Working for peace is difficult and full of complexities. At present, it is a

difficult task in which more obstacles than opportunities appear, despite
the fact that the majority of humanity yearns for stability, progress, free-
dom, sustainable development and the respect for human rights—in short,
a sustainable peace.
Dealing with peace is more complicated and challenging than working
for war. War has resources, a larger budget and a greater critical mass than
the one made up of those of us working for peace. Despite this, efforts
such as the ones put forth by the University for Peace (UPEACE)—estab-
lished pursuant to UN General Assembly Resolution 35/55 of December
1980—in conjunction with the efforts made by diplomats and political
leaders within the framework of the only global multilateral institution,
the United Nations—continue to generate opportunities for peacebuild-
ing. They open spaces for saving lives, for the promotion of human dignity
and for the effective exercise of human rights by all and also undertakes
the important task of finding options for avoiding global catastrophe.
At the present time, as we near the end of the second decade of the
twenty-first century, the fact is that we live in a more turbulent world, with
greater uncertainties in all areas and with the emergence of global crises
that can only be taken on by an increasingly scarce instrument: interna-
tional cooperation. Coming together to defend global public goods such
as peace demonstrates significant setbacks on a daily basis. Likewise, set-
backs are evident in the most diverse areas, which increases the difficulties
for agreement and increases the lack of political will to develop effective
international cooperation actions. The setbacks are manifested in global

v
vi PREFACE

and regional multilateralism, in nuclear disarmament, in the limitation and

disarmament of conventional weapons, in advances with regard to threats
used and in the use of force. Although it can be stated that there are less
wars overall at the present moment, violence has increased, with a number
of casualties that can easily surpass those of traditional wars. There are cur-
rently less wars but more violent crises. With regard to the main global
threats, climate change and the loss of biodiversity, the necessary measures
are not being undertaken. On the contrary, both phenomena advance and
endanger the lives of billions of human beings. In the domestic political
sphere, democracy has also regressed all over the world, primarily in the
West. Ungovernability grows, and with it, the processes of democratic
degradation are consolidated.
The global programme established by the Member States that make up
the United Nations for the protection of humanity and the planet, the
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, seems to be progressing very
slowly and unevenly. Meanwhile, global threats advance exponentially.
Restoring the full rule of international law is fundamental. Strengthening
respect for resolutions emanating from the United Nations is an essential
condition for the protection of humanity and the planet, as well as to
achieve progress on the basis of sustainable development, all of which will
allow for the establishment of a sustainable peace.
This book, The Difficult Task of Peace: Crises, Fragility and Conflict in
an Uncertain World, published by Palgrave Macmillan, collects the contri-
butions, visions, studies and analyses of the faculty members of the
University for Peace. In 2020, UPEACE will celebrate four decades of
existence; of continuous work educating leaders for peace; of preparing
agents of change for conflict transformation; and of educating promoters
of non-violence, a respect for international law and the Rule of Law, and a
strong determination to defend the planet.
In the task of training and educating professionals for peace, our mul-
tidisciplinary academic team must develop a series of curricula and evalu-
ation policies that include proposals on current global events, using both
national and international case studies, in order to achieve the mission of
the University for Peace, that of training new generations for conflict
resolution and transformation, while simultaneously developing preven-
tive actions that favour opportunities for negotiation and mediation.
The chapters that make up this book include the experiences of our fac-
ulty members, both resident and visiting. In 2018 and 2019, I decided
to put together a global perspective based on the contributions of
 PREFACE vii

UPEACE professors, an important challenge requiring an integrated

team effort. The Dean of the University for Peace, Dr Juan Carlos Sainz-
Borgo, and former UPEACE faculty member, Dr Manish Tapa, worked
on the initial structure of the book, which was enriched by the contribu-
tions, suggestions and comments from a set of authors from different
regions, nationalities and professional backgrounds. Participants hail
from Africa, Asia, North America, Latin America and Europe, with vari-
ous perspectives in addressing the myriad aspects that influence crises
and impact the fragility of the processes of reconciliation and peace, all
within a context of high global uncertainties.

Book Structure
This book is organized into four parts. Part I is dedicated to a global per-
spective; the second, to regional views; the third is related to institutional
frameworks; and the fourth is dedicated to the shared challenges, actions
and interventions necessary for a sustainable peace.
Part I, which is on global perspectives, begins with my introduction,
“Hazardous and Erratic Times—Greater and Deeper Conflicts”, in which
I emphasize the fact that the international system has changed in a dizzy-
ing way over the last three decades, since the end of the Cold War. Geo-­
strategic relations and global geopolitics have been reconfigured. At this
time, as we near the end of the second decade of the twenty-first century,
strategic global restructuring is characterized by uncertainties, and a new
balance in power relations between the main actors has not been achieved.
One of the consequences of these profound changes is the significant crisis
of multilateral systems, both on a global and regional scale. Multilateralism
has been degraded. The number of state actors and international organiza-
tions has multiplied, as well as the configuration of large networks (national
and global) of people through social networks. Global threats have
increased. The risks to humanity are greater, due to the absence of effec-
tive actions to face traditional threats, the resurgence of nuclear tensions
and the emergence of new dangers. Global power relations are taking on
a new shape, and a new balance of power has not been defined. Globalization
produces a set of new demands on the State, particularly with regard to
the link between the State, markets and society. Politics have not been able
to respond to this complex relationship. The 2030 Agenda is an action
plan to overcome the most serious problems facing humanity today, all on
viii PREFACE

the basis of a global alliance that places collaboration as a hinge pin. Where
there is no peace, there is no development; without development, it is
impossible to have growth and prosperity, which only generates more pov-
erty, more inequality, more tensions, and violence and conflicts are aggra-
vated. War and conflict prevail. It is imperative that we develop an
educational model that promotes skills, values and behaviours that con-
tribute to peace, justice, sustainable development and solidarity. A society
that does not have the value of peace in its mind and in its heart will be
condemned to repeat cycles of conflict, violence and war. The University
for Peace promotes an agenda for peace. This book points us in that direc-
tion. If we want peace, we must work for peace.
In his chapter, “The Complex Concept of Peace in an Uncertain
World”, Fernando Blasco reviews the prevalent ideas about peace and vio-
lence developed by Johan Galtung, which are widely recognized and
accepted as a critical platform for consideration of peace studies. The
chapter focuses on the fourth distinction of violence: “whether or not
there is a subject (person) who acts”. It reviews the concepts of personal
or direct violence and structural or indirect violence, including the analysis
of the elite and political elite, and the manner in which these groups have
managed their elite power over centuries. As technologies change and cul-
tural paradigms are imposed and accepted, the oscillation between one
form of control and the other happens again and again. The author con-
cludes that true peace can only be achieved by the disappearance of struc-
tural violence and suggests that it is the task ahead.
In Part II, the regional view demonstrates the fragility of peace within
a global context of low certainties, an absence of deep trust and erratic
actions and omissions that produce greater misunderstandings in the deci-
sion-making processes of the varied and different actors. In their analysis
on the African context, “Peace, Governance and Security in Africa: Getting
It Right”, authors Samuel Kale Ewusi and Kingsley Lyonga Ngange use
qualitative data generated from interviews, as well as secondary data from
existing peace and security indexes, to explore how Africa can systemati-
cally confront its governance challenges in order to achieve sustainable
peace and security in a globalized world. In 2017, Africa recorded a total
number of 17,537 violent or conflict-related events consisting of large-­
scale wars, quasi-war situations, violent conflicts, riots and demonstrations
of a socio-political nature. While intra-state and inter-state conflicts have
been in a steady decline, there has been a noticeable increase in low-­
intensity conflicts. Most African governments have responded to the latter
 PREFACE ix

with repression, arbitrary arrests and detention as well as communication

shutdown. The intensity of the conflicts and the cumulative effects of
development stagnation and mass migration have transformed the conti-
nent into a basket case within the context of peace and security. Literature
on the state of Africa’s peace and security challenges generally attribute
this macabre situation to the inability of African leaders to address issues
of governance.
In their chapter on the Middle East, “Prospects of Peace and Conflict
in the Middle East in the Twenty-First Century”, Amr Abdalla, Lilya Akay
and Zeynya Shikur examine the numerous catalysts for conflict within the
Middle East and the North Africa region (MENA). The authors look at
the conflict-inducing factors from a two-fold perspective. First, those fac-
tors which have been present through so many generations that they can
be considered as “constant dynamics”, which continually influence con-
flict and instability in the region, such as the identity crisis of Islam in the
modern political and social world, gender injustices and a tremendous
growth of the youth population in the MENA region as whole, among
others. Second, conflict-inducing factors which are more transient in
nature, referred to as “shifting dynamics”, such as climate change, water
shortage and rising terrorist groups. Finally, the chapter examines the
prospects for peace within the MENA region, stating that there must be a
grassroots approach that considers the needs of civil society within each
country itself and the MENA region. This approach must be accompanied
by investing in various forms of modern technology to positively affect
shifting dynamics.
The chapter “Latin America and the International Court of Justice”,
authored by Juan Carlos Sainz-Borgo, presents an overview of the par-
ticipation of Latin America, as a region, within the procedures of the
International Court of Justice. The study compares the twentieth cen-
tury, as an era of relative inter-state peace with few limited conflicts among
States in relation to their borders, with the twenty-first century thus far,
in which Latin America has become one of the most popular customers
of the judicial organ of the United Nations. The chapter proposes a quan-
titative approach and focuses on the Latin American region, excluding
the Caribbean. Given the border history within the Latin American
region, there are certain historical and legal patterns shared by these
countries as former Spanish colonies, including the principle of uti possi-
detis iuris as the cornerstone of border settlement in the region. In the
case of the Caribbean, as former British or other European colonies, the
x PREFACE

decolonization and establishment of borders and frontiers followed dif-

ferent patterns.
In their chapter, Alma Maria O. Salvador and Daisy C. See write about
Securitizing South China Sea: ASEAN’s Response to Traditional and
Non-Traditional Maritime Security Conflicts. The central themes that this
chapter seeks to put forward revolve around what may be counter-narra-
tives that recast the Association of South East Asian Nations’ (ASEAN)
response to the concerns of the South China Sea (SCS). The first of these
focuses on the argument that the relatively less sensitive and alternatively
functional maritime security issues underline the sovereignty issue of the
SCS dispute. The core of this frame is centred on the process of evolving
the ASEAN maritime security community, particularly how it is linked to
the decoupling of traditional and non-traditional maritime security threats,
such as maritime safety, security and marine environmental protection.
Against this backdrop, the chapter seeks to answer the following ques-
tions: How did ASEAN pursue the securitization of maritime security in
the SCS? What norms and practices have ASEAN actors generated as part
of securitization? How has ASEAN responded to the current threats of
Islamic radicalization and China’s militarization of fishing?
In Part III, which focuses on the impact of the global situation on insti-
tutions and actions regarding international cooperation and trade, we
have included four chapters. In the chapter “Role of International
Adjudication in Conflict Resolution and Transformation”, Mihir Kanade
explores the positive role that international adjudication can play in “con-
flict resolution” (and transformation) between parties by distinguishing
from the traditional role played by adjudication in “dispute settlement”.
Through an exploration of transdisciplinary literature, legal instruments
and jurisprudence, it distinguishes between “conflict” and “dispute”,
“resolution” and “settlement” and “conflict resolution” and “dispute set-
tlement”, and suggests that despite pervasive employment of these terms
interchangeably by scholars, such teleological distinctions not only have
firm theoretical grounding but are essential for structured analysis of adju-
dication, so as to devise appropriate processes for conflict resolution and
transformation. Building on this, the chapter provides indicative illustra-
tions of how dispute settlement through adjudication may play a positive
role in conflict resolution and transformation. It challenges the common
assumption that adversarial litigation is counter-productive or inimical to
conflict resolution and transformation under all circumstances, and dem-
onstrates that a positive role is not only possible but is more firmly
 PREFACE xi

e­ mbedded in social (not just legal) order than what the negative fixation
on adjudication as an adversarial model might suggest. The chapter aims
to serve as a basis for further transdisciplinary research by scholars.
The view on the European Union (EU) is authored by former President
of the European Parliament, Enrique Barón Crespo, and current European
Union Ambassador to Costa Rica, Pelayo Castro, and is titled “European
Union: A Sound Superpower in a Multipolar World”. “Crisis appears to
have become the norm in many parts of the world” reads the invitation for
contributors to this book. However, the real problem is not conflict but
uncertainty regarding the very underpinnings of the international order.
The quantity of conflict and the “state of confusion as to where the power
stands” (Mogherini 2017) is thus not the cause but the consequence of a
deeper qualitative problem. However, crisis is not only disarray, it is also
the moment to take decisions and shape reality in new ways. Is ours—and
Europe’s—the end or the beginning of a new era? Or, is it rather a mid-life
crisis that will reshape but not destroy the fairly young liberal world order?
These questions stand at the very heart of debates about the future of the
European Union itself. Is there a role for the European Union in the brave
new world where conventional wisdom foresees the “rise of the rest”
(Zakaria 2011), an international security vacuum (Shapiro and
Hackenbroich 2017) and the return of a Hobbesian realist balance-of-
power competition (Haass 2017)? In this chapter, the authors examine the
role of the EU from an evolutionary perspective, emphasizing the power-
ful forces behind its own incremental configuration and complex but resil-
ient governance. Since the economic crisis erupted in 2008, and particularly
in the period of 2014–2017, the EU was predicted, almost condemned, to
unravel, overcome by both internal (rise of populism, Brexit, demise of the
Eurozone) and external (an arch of instability: Russia, Middle East, North
Africa) pressure. Yet, the EU has consistently defied pessimists and this
chapter argues that it will continue to do so. In a world of strategic atro-
phy and unpredictability, the EU will remain a sound and predictable
superpower able to evolve and adapt while helping to preserve and reshape
a liberal multipolar international order.
In his chapter, “The Belt and Road: Building a Community of Shared
Interests Together”, Zhang Xiaoyu examines China’s cooperation with
various regions of the world. Over 2000 years ago, industrious and brave
people living in Eurasia opened various trade and people-to-people com-
munication routes connecting Asia, Europe and Africa, which was collec-
tively called the Silk Road later on. The Silk Road spirit—peaceful
xii PREFACE

cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learning and win-win

results—was passed down from generation to generation to promote the
progress of human civilization and advance prosperity and development of
countries along the Silk Road, symbolizing exchanges and cooperation
between Eastern and Western countries and becoming a common histori-
cal and cultural heritage for countries around the world. In the twenty-­
first century, in a new era themed “peace, development, cooperation and
win-win”, facing a weak recovery of world economy and complex global
and regional situations, it is more important and precious to inherit and
carry forward the Silk Road spirit. On September 7, 2013, Chinese
President Xi Jinping proposed the idea of building the Silk Road Economic
Belt when delivering a speech at the Nazarbayev University in Kazakhstan,
and the twenty-first century Maritime Silk Road when addressing the
Indonesian parliament on October 3, 2013, which is jointly known as the
Belt and Road Initiative. Since then, the initiative has become a major
national strategy and won worldwide attention.
Relying on literature evidence of some major conflicts in Africa such as
the Libyan uprising and the genocide in Rwanda, this chapter, “The African
Union in the Present Context”—written by Chinedu Thomas Ekwealor—
presents the twin phenomena of the African Union in the present context
through the lenses of Realist Theory. The Berlin conference of 1884 in
Germany systemically parcelled Africa to Europe. Since then, she was
lorded over by her European conquerors. As a means of wriggling itself out
of colonial order, Africa waged a war of independence with European colo-
nial emperors. Around the late 1950s and early 1960s, most African states
became independent nations. The euphoria of sovereignty which followed,
fittingly informed the decision to form the Organization of African Unity
(OAU)—the predecessor of the African Union (AU). At its inception in
1963, while the main objectives of the OAU were, inter alia, to rid the
continent of the remaining vestiges of colonization and to promote unity
among African states and citizens, it calculatedly rejected interferences in
African affairs in all its forms. Ensuing from the OAU’s tradition, upon
establishment in 2001, the AU expanded on its existing scope and, as a
major shift, included the doctrine of legitimate intervention in Member
States with a view to overcome the inadequacies of non-­interference, which
suffocated dialogue and allowed genocide in Rwanda. Scholars of Africa’s
history and authors of OAU/AU unanimously agree that Africa was not
spared the adverse repercussions of colonialism. Singularly, historians argue
that the emergence of an artificially c­ onstructed African state by Europeans,
 PREFACE xiii

coupled with internal and yet sophisticated contradictions, truncated the

hope for a successful Africa since birth. Despite the plausibility of this
thought, authors of OAU/AU have contending views. They argue that
bad-policy-oriented OAU and especially fearful AU have produced weak-
ened Africa without a voice at global dais.
In Part IV, dedicated to common and shared challenges, we highlight
the research being conducted on terrorism and religious extremism.
Likewise, we emphasize the importance of interventions in essential areas,
such as food security and actions towards developing a culture of peace. In
his chapter “Religious Fundamentalism and Violent Extremism”, authors
Zahid Shahab Ahmed and Galib Bashirov point out that all religions have
worldviews and their followers become defensive when threatened. In
recent history, we can find examples of numerous religious fundamentalist
movements, such as Islamic, Hindu, Jewish and Christian, since the end of
the Cold War. The September 11 terrorist attacks on the US brought
attention to Islamic fundamentalism and extremism, and how that has
been propagated through madrassas and other institutions in Muslim-
majority states. This led to an investment in educational reforms and pro-
grammes on peace education; however, a more specialized term of
“countering violent extremism (CVE)” was coined and/or promoted
during the White House Summit on CVE in 2015. Since then, the US has
taken the lead with its partners, such as the European Union, Australia,
Canada, and the UK, on CVE programmes globally. The manifestation of
religious fundamentalism varies from one faith to another; however, there
are similarities in terms of the linkages of fundamentalism with radicaliza-
tion, extremism, violent extremism and terrorism. The chapter aims to
understand how fundamentalism and violent extremism are defined in
relation to the prominent religions, such as Christianity, Islam, Hinduism
and Buddhism. The analysis will focus on differential treatment of the fol-
lowers of the selected faiths in the literature on violent extremism and
terrorism and programmes on CVE.
In her chapter “Terrorist Fighters, Mass Surveillance and International
Law”, Mariateresa Garrido V. highlights that in traditional armed conflicts,
parties can be easily identifiable. Combatants know who the enemies are,
where are they located and even which weapons they are using. In the so-­
called war on terror, things are different. It is not clear who the combat-
ants are nor what their modus operandi is. Yet the United Nations Security
Council (UNSC) Resolution 2178(2014) specifies that foreign terrorist
fighters are posing serious threats to international peace and security.
xiv PREFACE

These fighters are using communications technologies to plan and orga-

nize their operations, and for that reason, in the same resolution, the
UNSC, acting under chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
urged all states to “intensify and accelerate the exchange of operational
information” regarding the actions or movements of these fighters. Digital
technologies facilitate the implementation of a surveillance system that
allows states to achieve that goal. However, from the international law
perspective, their use is highly controversial. Mass surveillance programmes
have several consequences for the protection of human rights. This chapter
conducts a legal analysis of UNSC Resolutions to demonstrate that they
contradict basic regulations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and
International Human Rights Law, by discussing the identification of ter-
rorist fighters in the light of IHL and illustrating how states have imple-
mented surveillance and information-sharing systems to fight terrorism,
concluding by considering its impacts on the promotion and protection of
human rights.
Achieving sustainable agriculture and food security for all is one of the
major challenges of the twenty-first century. The United Nations 2018
State of the World’s Food Security Report speaks to this challenge.
Specifically, this report describes that recently, the number of undernour-
ished people in the world has been on the rise, after a prolonged global
decline. This increase is related to inequality, climate change and conflict.
In her chapter, “Achieving Food Security in the Face of Inequality, Climate
Change, and Conflict”, author Olivia Sylvester will examine the latter and
additionally review described approaches to food security interventions
that address some of these challenges.
Part IV is completed by Heather Kertyzia’s chapter “Using Participatory
Action Research to Define Cultures of Peace”. In the United Nations
Security Council Resolution on Peacebuilding (2016) two seemingly sep-
arate but related approaches to peacebuilding are reflected: one is the
political focus on national governance and the work of the Security
Council and the General Assembly, while the other is focused on the work
of women, youth and civil society in building sustainable peace. This chap-
ter will explore the second aspect, particularly how Participatory Action
Research can be an effective intervention tool for defining cultures of peace.

San Jose, Costa Rica Francisco Rojas Aravena

 Preface  xv

References
Haass, Richard. 2017. America and the Great Abdication. The Atlantic,
December 28, 2017.
Mogherini Calls EU A Peace “Superpower”, in Wake of Trump Win. 2017.
EurActiv, November 11, 2016. Accessed February 16, 2017. http://www.
euractiv.com/section/security/news/mogherini-calls-eu-a-peace-superpower-in-
wake-of-trump-win/
Shapiro, J., and J. Hackenbroich. 2017. Opportunities amid Disorder: Europe and
the World in 2018. Edited by Jeremy Shapiro and Jonathan Hackenbroich. ECFR.
Zakaria, Fareed. 2011. The Post-American World: And the Rise of the Rest. Penguin
Books Limited.
 Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the colleagues who have contributed their ideas,
research and analysis to this important volume, The Difficult Task of Peace:
Crisis, Fragility and Conflict in an Uncertain World. Each one of them
contributes a global, pluralistic and multinational perspective, which sets
this book apart. Likewise, I would like to extend my gratitude for the sug-
gestions I received from both academics and practitioners during the cre-
ation of this book, whose ideas and support gave us the push we needed
to obtain this result. Similarly, I would like to thank all of our readers for
helping us guarantee the quality of these chapters.
I would like to highlight the participation, in these pages, of the Acting
President of the UPEACE Council and the Chancellor of the University
for Peace and a distinguished member of our Council, who worked along-
side our faculty members to achieve an important vision and analysis of the
current international system.
I would also like to extend a special thank you to the editorial team, led
by Laura Arroyo Cubillo, and the constant collaboration, work and dedi-
cation provided by the Rector’s team, led by Ariela Fernandez.
We are immensely pleased with this partnership with Palgrave
Macmillan, which will enable this book to reach a broad and significant
number of political actors, academicians, members of civil society organi-
zations and NGOs, journalists, peace workers, humanitarian activists, stu-
dents and anyone else interested in the business of peace.
The Difficult Task of Peace: Crisis, Fragility and Conflict in an Uncertain
World provides a holistic look that will prove useful in different courses on
the topics of Peace and Conflict, Peace Education, International Relations

xvii
xviii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

and Regional Studies during the end of the second decade of the twenty-­
first century.
If we want Peace, we must work for Peace.

San Jose, Costa Rica Francisco Rojas Aravena

 Contents

Part I Introduction   1

Introduction: Hazardous and Erratic Times—Greater and

Deeper Conflicts  3
Francisco Rojas Aravena

The Complex Concept of Peace in an Uncertain World 15

Fernando Blasco

Part II Regional Outlook  35

Peace, Governance and Security in Africa: Getting It Right 37

Samuel Kale Ewusi and Kingsley Lyonga Ngange

Prospects of Peace and Conflict in the Middle East in the

Twenty-First Century 59
Amr Abdalla, Lilya Akay, and Zeynya Shikur

Latin America and the International Court of Justice 87

Juan Carlos Sainz-Borgo

xix
xx Contents

Securitizing the South China Sea: ASEAN’s Response to

Traditional and Nontraditional Maritime Security Conflicts109
Alma Maria O. Salvador and Daisy C. See

Part III Institutional Outlook 129

Role of International Adjudication in Conflict Resolution and

Transformation131
Mihir Kanade

The European Union: A Sound Superpower in a Multipolar

World171
Enrique Barón Crespo and Pelayo Castro Zuzuárregui

The Belt and Road: Building a Community of Shared Interests

Together203
Zhang Xiaoyu

The African Union in the Present Context225

Chinedu Thomas Ekwealor

Part IV Common Challenges and Interventions 243

Religious Fundamentalism and Violent Extremism245

Zahid Shahab Ahmed and Galib Bashirov

Terrorist Fighters, Mass Surveillance, and International Law261

Mariateresa Garrido V.
 Contents  xxi

Achieving Food Security in the Face of Inequity, Climate

Change, and Conflict277
Olivia Sylvester

Using Participatory Action Research to Define Cultures of

Peace297
Heather Kertyzia
 Notes on Contributors

Amr Abdalla is a visiting professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at the

University for Peace and the Wesley Theological Seminary. He serves as
the Senior Advisor on Conflict Resolution at the Washington-based orga-
nization KARAMAH: Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights in the
Washington, DC, area. From 2014 to 2017, he was the Senior Advisor on
Policy Analysis and Research at the Institute for Peace and Security Studies
of Addis Ababa University. In 2013–2014, he was Vice President of
SALAM Institute for Peace and Justice in Washington, DC. From 2004 to
2013, he was professor, Dean and Vice Rector at the University for Peace
(UPEACE) in Costa Rica. Prior to that, he was a senior fellow with the
Peace Operations Policy Program, School of Public Policy, at George
Mason University, Virginia. He was also Professor of Conflict Analysis and
Resolution at the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences in
Leesburg, Virginia. Both his academic and professional careers are multi-
disciplinary. He obtained a law degree in Egypt in 1977 where he prac-
ticed law as a prosecuting attorney from 1978 to 1986. From 1981 to
1986, he was a member of the public prosecutor team investigating the
case of the assassination of President Sadat and numerous other terrorism
cases. He then migrated to the US where he obtained a master’s degree in
Sociology and a PhD in Conflict Analysis and Resolution from George
Mason University. He has been teaching Conflict Analysis and Resolution
to graduate classes, and has conducted training, research and evaluation of
conflict resolution and peacebuilding programmes in several countries in
Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Europe and the Americas.

xxiii
xxiv NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Zahid Shahab Ahmed holds a PhD from the University of New England,
Australia. He is currently a Research Fellow at the Alfred Deakin Institute
for Citizenship and Globalization, Deakin University, Australia. Prior to
joining Deakin University, he was Assistant Professor of Peace and Conflict
Studies at the National University of Sciences and Technology, Pakistan.
His teaching and research interests include diplomacy, foreign policy and
international organizations, with a special focus on South Asia. Ahmed’s
research is published in a range of journals including Asian Studies Review,
Global Policy, Democratization, South Asia Research, and International
Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society. Prior to joining academia, Ahmed
held research, training and consultancy roles in international development
and peacebuilding, including with Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Peace
Direct and Prince Claus Fund. He is still actively engaged in peacebuilding
work with local and international NGOs. During 2015—2016, he con-
ducted a research on ‘Peace Education in Pakistan’ which was funded by the
United States Institute of Peace. His research on the lawyer’s movement in
Pakistan was funded by the International Centre for Nonviolent Conflict.
Lilya Akay is based in Berlin. She has a bachelor’s degree in International
Business and Management from Inholland University, Amsterdam (2014)
and a master’s degree in Peace and Conflict Studies at the Hacettepe
University in Ankara, Turkey (2016). She is committed to countering
Islamophobia and violent extremism, as well as working for women’s
rights. Her master’s thesis assesses the public discourse in Germany, dis-
cussing the relationship between public discourse and discrimination
against hijab-wearing women in Germany. Akay worked as a research and
training associate and is co-author of C.R. SIPPABIO—A Model for
Conflict Analysis, and …Say Peace—A Conflict Resolution Manual for
Muslim Communities. Furthermore, she was a teaching assistant for online
courses on Negotiations and Mediation at the University for Peace. She
does project work to support the unemployed to re-join the workforce by
providing them with trainings and administrative assistance.
Enrique Barón Crespo is a lawyer and an economist with a PhD in Law
and Economics (Universidad Complutense, ICADE—Madrid). He served
as President of the European Parliament from 1989–1992. He is a mem-
ber of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party and sits with the Party of
European Socialists group in the European Parliament. As a practicing
lawyer, he specialized in labor law. Crespo is a member of the Board of
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xxv

Advisors of the Global Panel Foundation and the Advisory Board of think
tank Gold Mercury International, London, UK. He is an active player in
Gold Mercury’s Brand EU initiative to improve the management and pro-
motion of the European Union brand and monitor its progress. He is
currently the Chancellor of the University for Peace, President of the
“International Yehudi Menuhin Foundation”, Vice President of the
Istituto Internazionale per l’Opera e la Poesia di Verona-UNESCO, mem-
ber of the Fundacion Dali and of the Board of Trustees of Friends of
Europe and the Conseil de Notre Europe. He speaks seven European
languages and has authored several books.
Galib Bashirov holds a PhD from Florida International University,
US. He is currently a PhD student and research assistant in political sci-
ence at Deakin University. He does research on state-society relations in
Azerbaijan and Turkey, US foreign policy in the Caspian Sea region, and
Muslim immigrant mobilization in the West. His previous work has
appeared in various journals including Democratization, Third World
Quarterly and Central Asian Survey.
Fernando Blasco is the former Director of the Executive Office of the
Secretary-General of the United Nations and is currently the Vice President
of the UPEACE Council. Mr. Blasco has 25 years of experience in the
private sector, working with international corporations in both corporate
executive and private executive consultant positions. His specialization in
management and best practices spans the fields of human resources,
administration, finance and supply-chain management. Having been based
in Argentina, the US and Spain, he developed an international experience
of implementing organizational change and improvement. In 2005, he
shifted his focus to the not-for-profit sector, undertaking consultancies for
the World Food Programme (WFP) in its headquarters in Rome, Italy,
where he focused on advising WFP’s Chief Operations Officer on the
implementation of change management initiatives. In 2008, he was
selected to lead the development and implementation of the Global Field
Support Strategy for the then newly created United Nations Department
of Field Support, a strategic project designed to optimize the deployment
and maintenance of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and Political
Missions globally. In his capacity as Director in the Executive Office of the
Secretary-General, he was responsible for supporting the integrated imple-
mentation of the Secretary-General’s strategic management initiatives. He
is a graduate of Pace University.
xxvi NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Pelayo Castro Zuzuárregui is a diplomat with the European External

Action Service (EEAS). Between 2015 and 2019, he served as Ambassador
and Head of Delegation of the European Union to Costa Rica. As an offi-
cial of the European Union, he has held different positions in the European
Parliament and EEAS, including as member of the Cabinet of the High
Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy—
Catherine Ashton—and as Head of the Division responsible for relations
with the European Parliament and National Parliaments of the
EEAS. Previously, he worked as an advisor in the Presidency of the
Government of Spain. Zuzuárregui earned a degree in Political Science,
specializing in international relations, from the Autonomous University of
Barcelona and a master’s degree in European Studies from the College of
Europe in Bruges as a “Patronat Català Pro Europa” scholar. He is also a
recipient of the “la Caixa” scholarship and a postgraduate from Georgetown
University’s Master of Science in Foreign Service, where he was awarded
the “Karl F. Landegger” Honors Certificate in International Business
Diplomacy and the Dean’s Award for Academic Excellence.
Chinedu Thomas Ekwealor, PhD, is a Doctor of Conflict and Peace.
He is the Academic Development Officer and a post-doctoral research fel-
low in the School of Social Sciences, College of Humanities, Cluster of
International and Public Affairs, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South
Africa. His interests are located within the broader strata of the United
Nations and the African Union. Drawing from these interests, his research
activities straddled the linked and mutually reinforcing areas of global and
regional security governance. Specifically, his writings focus on issue areas
that have particular resonance for Security Council reform, and state and
human (in)securities in Africa and globally.
Samuel Kale Ewusi is Professor of Peace Studies and International
Relations and the Director of the Africa Regional Programme of the
United Nations-University for Peace (UPEACE). He previously served as
Assistant Professor Great Lakes programme and later Research Coordinator
at the same University. He has taught courses on political economy and
Peace Research at the main Campus in Costa Rica, Central America and
has also lectured at the following universities: North-West University,
South Africa; National University of Rwanda, Rwanda Senior Defense
Staff College; Catholic University of Eastern Africa, Nairobi Kenya,
Uganda Martyrs University, Addis Ababa University, Gulu University,
Uganda, University of Burundi and the Universite Libre des Pays des
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xxvii

Grand Lacs in Goma, DR Congo. Ewusi’s research is in the area of the

role of political and economic governance and their implications for secu-
rity in the developing world. He has authored, co-authored and edited six
books. He holds a Doctor of Philosophy in Peace Studies and International
Relations (South Africa), a Master of Science in International Relations
(Nigeria) and a Bachelor of Law (Yaounde II, Cameroon).
Mariateresa Garrido V. is an Assistant Professor in the Department of
International Law at UPEACE and the Coordinator of the UPEACE
Doctoral Committee. She is an international lawyer and holds a Doctorate
from UPEACE. Her main research area is related to the exercise of the
right to freedom of expression and the protection of journalists in Latin
America; but she is also researching on the interaction between human
rights and Information and Communication Technologies. She uses mixed
methodologies and legal research to explore linkages between the law,
journalism and new technologies. She is a Venezuelan lawyer who holds
two master’s degrees—one from UPEACE in International Law and the
Settlement of the Disputes and the other from the Central University of
Venezuela in Public International Law.
Mihir Kanade is the Academic Coordinator of UPEACE and the Head
of its Department of International Law, as well as the Director of the
UPEACE Human Rights Centre. He holds an LLB from Nagpur
University (India) and a master’s degree and doctorate from UPEACE. He
is also an adjunct faculty at Universidad Alfonso X El Sabio (Spain),
Cheikh Anta Diop University (Senegal), and Long Island University (US).
His principal area of academic research and study is international law,
human rights and globalization, covering several themes within that inter-
face including trade and investment, sustainable development, forced
migration, indigenous peoples’ rights and public health, amongst others.
He has extensive experience in training staff of inter-governmental, gov-
ernmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as professionals,
in the field of human rights. He acts as an advisor to several human rights
organizations and corporations on issues related to international law and
human rights. He serves on the International Advisory Board of the
International Bar Association on the topic of Business and Human Rights.
He also leads a project of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for
Human Rights on promoting the Right to Development. Prior to his pur-
suit in academia, Kanade practiced for several years as a lawyer at the
Bombay High Court and at the Supreme Court of India.
xxviii NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Heather Kertyzia is the Head of the Department of Peace and Conflict

Studies at the University for Peace in Costa Rica. Her teaching focus lies
within the peace education and gender and peacebuilding programmes.
Kertyzia’s research uses participatory methods to better understand and
improve practices of peace education, primarily at the secondary and uni-
versity levels. She has engaged in these processes in several countries,
working in partnership with faculty and teachers to collectively develop
more peaceful educational cultures. Kertyzia writes from an intersectional
feminist perspective and draws on post-development theories. As a former
secondary school teacher, she understands the importance of the local
community in building more socially, economically and environmentally
just educational spaces. As an interdisciplinary scholar, Kertyzia has worked
with communities throughout the Americas, with a recent focus on part-
nering with local grassroots organizations in Los Angeles, Nicaragua and
Costa Rica. She has taught at universities in New Zealand, Colombia, the
US and Costa Rica in peace studies, conflict resolution, peacebuilding,
teacher education, human rights and international law programmes.
Kingsley Lyonga Ngange is a senior lecturer in Journalism and Mass
Communication and Head of the Department of Journalism and Mass
Communication at University of Buea, Cameroon. He is also a visiting
professor at UPEACE Africa Regional Centre’s masters and doctoral
degree programs. Graduating from the University of Buea in Cameroon
with a bachelor’s degree in journalism and communication, he worked for
the university as their public affairs officer for three years before traveling
to Sweden to study for his master’s degree at the University of Linköping.
After Sweden, Ngange returned to Cameroon as a television/radio jour-
nalist for the state broadcasters. In 2012, he graduated with a PhD in
communications, officially making him the first Cameroonian to graduate
with a PhD from a Cameroonian university.
Francisco Rojas Aravena was elected as the eighth Rector of the
University for Peace (UPEACE) in 2013. He was elected for a second
term in 2018. Aravena has a PhD in Political Science from the University
of Utrecht (Netherlands) and an MS in Political Science from the Latin
American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO). He specializes in interna-
tional relations, human security, integration, Latin American political sys-
tems, negotiations—theory and practice—and international security and
defense, and has served as the Secretary-General of FLACSO (2004–
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xxix

2012) and Director of FLACSO Chile (1996–2004). He was also profes-

sor at the School of International Relations of the National University
(UNA) of Costa Rica (1980–1990); a Fulbright Professor at the Latin
American and Caribbean Centre (LACC) at Florida International
University (Miami, FL). He is currently a board member of the Spanish
edition of Foreign Affairs Magazine (Mexico); an Advisory Member of
Pensamiento Iberoamericano Magazine (Spain); and is also a member of
the Editorial Committee of Political Science Magazine (National University
of Colombia). Aravena has also conducted advisory and consulting work
for various international agencies and governments in the region. He is a
prolific author and editor and has written a large number of books, as well
as contributed book chapters, both within and outside of Latin America,
many of which have been translated into other languages.
Juan Carlos Sainz-Borgo is Professor and Dean at UPEACE. He has
also been Associate Professor of International Law at the Universidad
Central de Venezuela in Caracas since 1998. He served as Fulbright
Visiting Professor at the Washington College of Law at American
University in Washington, DC (2008–2009) and as Professor of
Humanitarian International Law at the Universidad Sergio Arboleda
(2009–2014), the Universidad Javeriana and Universidad del Rosario, all
in Colombia. He has also been professor at the Universidad Alfonso X El
Sabio in Madrid since 2009. He was Jurist to the Regional Delegation of
Venezuela and the Caribbean of the International Committee of the Red
Cross. He served as member of the Venezuelan Foreign Service in charge
of border affairs as Adviser and Coordinator of the Cooperation Border
Programs between 1991 and 1999, and Deputy Director of the Diplomatic
Academy. Sainz-Borgo has a law degree, a master’s degree in International
Law and a doctorate degree (Cum Laude) from the Universidad Central
de Venezuela in Caracas and a master’s degree from Oxford University
(UK). He has written four books on international law and international
relations and numerous articles in different publications in the field.
Alma Maria O. Salvador, PhD, is Assistant Professor of political science.
She was also the former chair of the Ateneo Department of Political
Science and a former academic coordinator for the Dual Degree Program
in political science and international peacebuilding of the Ateneo de
Manila University (ADMU) and the University for Peace. Her research
interest includes maritime security and disaster resilience. Her most recent
xxx NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

co-authored work, “Of stories that matter: The social construction of risk
in planning for coastal areas in Antique, Philippines” was most recently
published in 2018 in the Disaster Prevention and Management: An
International Journal. Earlier, she co-authored “Nationalism in Local
Media During International Conflict: Text Mining Domestic News
Reports of the China–Philippines Maritime Dispute”, which was pub-
lished in the Journal of Language and Social Psychology in 2014.
Daisy C. See is Assistant Professor of Chinese Studies and former direc-
tor of the Chinese Studies Program at Ateneo de Manila University
(Philippines). Earlier, she co-authored “Nationalism in Local Media
During International Conflict: Text Mining Domestic News Reports of
the China–Philippines Maritime Dispute” which was published in the
Journal of Language and Social Psychology in 2014.
Zeynya Shikur has a law degree (LLB) and a master’s degree in Peace
and Security from Addis Ababa University. She is a master’s student in
Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia.
Prior to that, she has worked as a Programme Research Officer at the
African Peace and Security Programme of the Institute for Peace and
Security Studies, Addis Ababa University.
Olivia Sylvester, PhD, is an assistant professor and Head of the
Department of Environment, Development and Peace at the University
for Peace. She is also an adjunct professor for Long Island University and
teaches in their Global Studies programme. In the last decade, Sylvester’s
research programme has focused on food security, sustainable agriculture,
climate change and gender; she works with Indigenous people, women,
smallholder farmers and youth on these topics. She is also a member of the
International Union for Conservation of Nature and the International
Society of Ethnobiology. Being active within these networks allows her to
work at the interface of policy and practice.
Zhang Xiaoyu is the Executive Vice President of China International
Council for the Promotion of Multinational Corporations, a non-govern-
mental organization approved by the State Council, registered with the
Ministry of Civil Affairs and directly supervised by the Ministry of
Commerce of the People’s Republic of China, and is specially engaged in
the work of multinational corporations in China. It is well-known all over
the world for successfully organizing the World Economic Development
Declaration Conference and issuing the globally unique World Economic
 Notes on Contributors  xxxi

Development Declaration. In July 2006, it was granted the Special

Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United
Nations. Previous to that, he was Executive Chairman and Chief Director
of the International Roundtable of Multinational Corporations’ Leaders,
as well as President of GIW Co. Ltd. He holds a master’s degree in Global
Economics and Law and has vast experience in local governments, State
Council, NGOs and private companies. He has been Editor-in-Chief of
several publications, including The Road to Reform and Development of
Large and Medium Enterprises in China; Guidelines to Market Economy,
and author of works such as the Manual on the Management of International
Corporations and On Peaceful Development. He is currently a member of
the Council of the University for Peace.
 List of Figures

Using Participatory Action Research to Define

Cultures of Peace
Fig. 1 A culture of peace in SSINN (WA, April 8, 2013) 302
Fig. 2 A culture of peace in SSINN (WA, April 9, 2013) 303
Fig. 3 Depiction of the existing culture in the SSINN 308

xxxiii
 PART I

Introduction
 Introduction: Hazardous and Erratic
Times—Greater and Deeper Conflicts

Francisco Rojas Aravena

The international system has changed in a dizzying way over the last three
decades, since the end of the Cold War. Geo-strategic relations and global
geopolitics have been reconfigured. Currently, as we near the end of the
second decade of the twenty-first century, strategic global restructuring is
characterized by uncertainties, and a new balance in power relations
between the main actors has yet to be achieved. Since the end of the Cold
War, different events have changed the course of these relationships. The
first of these were the acts of global terrorism that characterized 2001,
with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11.
Subsequently, there was the failure of the wars waged in Iraq and
Afghanistan. The departure of the majority of US troops did not leave
most of these territories with adequate governance; on the contrary, con-
flicts are maintained, and in some cases, they have become more acute in
recent years. The third significant process was the global financial crisis,
detonated by the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008. Added to this
is a fourth element, the sustained increase in military spending by the
major global powers, coupled with the development of new weapons
linked to Artificial Intelligence and robotics. Simultaneously, there was the
rupture of bilateral agreements on missiles between the US and Russia and

F. Rojas Aravena (*)

University for Peace, San Jose, Costa Rica
e-mail: frojas@upeace.org

© The Author(s) 2020 3

F. Rojas Aravena (ed.), The Difficult Task of Peace,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21974-1_1
4 F. ROJAS ARAVENA

the former’s departure from the Multilateral Agreement on Nuclear

Weapons with Iran. In the fifth place, we can highlight the growing role
of global communications, particularly that of social networks, with a
direct impact on the way global and national events are perceived. These
perceptions are limiting the spaces for decision-making by leaders and
political authorities at all levels. In addition, they affect and violate the
conditions of the electoral process in different parts of the planet. In the
sixth place, the emergence of substantive changes in political leadership in
all regions of the world merits special mention; the advancement of differ-
ent forms of populism in the West is destabilizing democratic political
systems. Finally, in seventh place, are the debates around the basic defini-
tions of global public goods, the role of multilateralism and the impor-
tance of cooperation, at the political, economic, social and cultural levels,
which have become politicized and polarized.
One of the consequences of these profound changes is the significant
crisis of multilateral systems, both on a global and regional scale.
Multilateralism has been degraded and particularisms and sovereignty
have increased. Visions with strong nationalist weight are defined as “pop-
ulist.” One of the main characteristics of these “populist visions” is eco-
nomic protectionism, with increasingly acute expressions in commercial
disputes, which generate conflict situations way beyond the commercial,
with an impact on finance and global political relations.
In the 30 years since the end of the Cold War, the number of State
actors and international organizations has multiplied, as has the configura-
tion of large networks of people (both on a domestic and global scale)
through social networks. At present, some States occupy important places
in the economic, financial, political and military spheres, which were nei-
ther recognized nor achieved during the Cold War period. However, from
the standpoint of the formality of international institutions, little or noth-
ing has changed. The proposed reforms within the United Nations
Security Council, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund
have not advanced. The only real change was the creation of the Group of
Twenty (G20), but with little impact on the framework of global relations.
Global threats have increased. The risks to humanity are greater, due to
the absence of effective actions to face traditional threats, the re-­emergence
of nuclear tensions, the emergence of new menaces such as climate change
and transnational crime and the emergence of a new global economic-­
financial crisis. Faced with these situations, we assert that no State or inter-
national actor possesses the capacities or conditions to confront the new
 INTRODUCTION: HAZARDOUS AND ERRATIC TIMES—GREATER… 5

global challenges on its own. No State, through any unilateral action, can
halt the advancement of climate change; no State has the conditions,
resources or operational deployment capacity to confront transnational
crime. International organizations can champion and work towards ensur-
ing a better exercise of basic human rights and the protection of people,
but only if basic consensus is reached in order to coordinate the policies
generated by the main actors. Only cooperation will make it possible to
face the challenges and risks that emerge from globalization and interde-
pendence, in addition to the tendencies emanating from these global pro-
cesses. Hence, international partnerships and cooperation are essential for
delaying the serious impact of climate change, the emergence of sanitary
catastrophes and to stop the advancement of transnational crime and the
emergence of serious tensions between actors with a global impact.

The International System in the Midst of a Global

Strategic Restructuring
Global power relations are taking on a new shape; they are heading towards
a reconfiguration of geo-strategic character that has yet to define the new
balance of power. A deep crisis in the multilateral system and its institu-
tions is taking place, produced by the breakage of large multilateral agree-
ments as well as by growing nationalist and “populist” visions.
These changes are evident not only in the political-military spheres, but
also in the economic field. Protectionism is growing in various parts of the
world, and with it, it becomes possible to perceive that we are on the verge
of a new great global economic crisis and commercial war. It is necessary
to reinforce preventive measures and to develop minimal trust in order to
prevent grave consequences for all States and their citizens. However, the
US unilateral politics have led to a rupture in basic trust between impor-
tant international actors like the European Union and Russia, as well as
several Asian and Latin American countries. European leaders have
expressed their lack of confidence in strategic agreements with the
US. These agreements have a profound impact on atomic threats, particu-
larly those reached by the nuclear powers and the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) with Iran.
China is consolidating its political and military presence in the “Sea of
China” and has expressed its openness to free trade and global interdepen-
dency in the economic arena. In order to achieve these goals, China has
6 F. ROJAS ARAVENA

developed the One Belt, One Road initiative (also known as the Belt and
Road Initiative) as a strategy of global interdependence. On the other
hand, its foreign policy has sought renewed forms of cooperation with
countries from different continents. The opening and promotion of
renewed ties with Japan represents a significant new global trend. We can
also point to its new relations with countries of the Central American
Isthmus and the deepening of cooperative relations within the African
continent. Many of these actions generate fear in different sectors.
Russia has stabilized its system under Putin’s rule and has demonstrated
its military capacity, not just in local and regional wars, but also in the
Middle East. The launching of last-generation missiles has evidenced its
military capabilities. Its participation in the Syrian Civil War has been deci-
sive in the change in the correlation of forces. All future negotiations on
the future of Syria should take Russia into account.
Once again, this war—which continues seven years later—has demon-
strated that military power is insufficient to change power relations and
that essential political consensuses are required. In this sense, the main
actors in Europe—including Russia and China—in recognition of the
grave humanitarian crisis of our time, have agreed that the solution will
only be reached through political negotiations. It is here that the role of
the United Nations will be critical in deciding whether this is successful, as
it represents the only instance that enables fundamental legitimacy and
transparency, while also allowing for the design of the actions necessary to
reach a post-conflict stage, one that will be inevitably complex. A situation
that has yet to escalate to a military confrontation but that requires a fun-
damental role on behalf of the United Nations is the one marked by ten-
sion and crisis in Venezuela.
India has achieved important economic growth in the last few years and
is looking to position itself as an actor capable of influencing the direction
of global events, placing a strong emphasis on commerce, technological
exchange, and most importantly, on South-South Cooperation.
In this context, Africa is still divided by wars and domestic polarization,
which have led to important migratory movements towards Europe and
Latin America. In the case of Latin American migrants, they hope to reach
the United States and Canada.
Organized crime and the violence it entails are manifested in practically
every region of the planet. Organized crime has a direct impact on many
civil conflicts, as well as in post-conflict processes. International coopera-
tion is, in this case, fundamental. Without it, it will be impossible to halt
 INTRODUCTION: HAZARDOUS AND ERRATIC TIMES—GREATER… 7

and reduce the erosion that organized crime has produced on democratic
governance, the Rule of Law and democracy.
Even though Latin America is considered an area of relative interstate
peace, it is the region with the highest rates of inequality and violence in
the world. Homicide rates throughout the region reach figures equivalent
to those reported in many international wars and cases of deep civil con-
flicts. Of the 52 cities with the highest levels of violence in the world, 42
are located in Latin America and the Caribbean, with more than 21 of
them in Brazil and a similarly high number in Mexico. Even in countries
with long democratic traditions and standards, such as Costa Rica, orga-
nized crime has become a substantial threat, and has increased the homi-
cide rate to double digits. Organized crime is undoubtedly the main threat
to democracy and stability in the Latin American region.
The multilateral intra-regional dialogue in Latin America is experienc-
ing its deepest crisis, as is highlighted by the paralysis plaguing the Union
of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Community of Latin
American and Caribbean States (CELAC).
In this time of crisis, Latin American cooperation and coordination
organizations are not alone; other important institutions are also in crisis.
The BRIC (grouping that refers to Brazil, Russia, India and China) is in a
similar situation and the G20 has not managed to find the right path
towards changing current global actions. Multilateralism at the global
level has not created options or offered solutions capable of resolving the
lack of organization, uncertainty and difficulties created by a lack of basic
coordination within the international system.
Globalization produces a new set of demands with regard to the State,
especially with regard to the link between the State, markets and society.
The political crisis—fuelled by populism and nationalism—has been
unable to provide answers to this complex relationship. This directly
affects our vision of multilateralism, democracy, peacebuilding and people
themselves. There is no holistic global project that allows for the defence
of global public goods. This is evidenced by the United States pulling out
of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, their rupture of the Atomic
Agreement with Iran, their lack of participation in the Trans-Pacific and
the long debates and negotiations around commerce, trade and their insti-
tutions. The growing discrepancies between the different States involved
in the Middle East crisis, particularly Syria, Yemen and others, as well as
growing tensions on the Palestine-Israeli border further aggravate the
situation. The African context reflects a similar situation.
8 F. ROJAS ARAVENA

Under these conditions, achieving the Sustainable Development Goals

(SDGs) laid out in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development seems
like a distant possibility, particularly due to the impact that uncertainty and
disrespect have on International Law, as well as the actions and growing
tensions at the expense of international cooperation.
States cooperate as a result of the opportunities and circumstances in
which they interact. At the same time, these contexts are determined by
global, regional and national plots. Similarly, random events generate
unforeseen frameworks that can either open or eliminate opportunities.
Authorities evaluate these crossroads and their respective spheres of action
in order to determine whether they generate enough opportunities and
advantages to make cooperation advantageous, or, on the contrary,
whether it is preferable, based on their perceptions, to confront the posi-
tion of the other actors involved. Self-interest, by its very definition, often
tends to win out, to hold a greater weight, to become the main priority.
These dynamics happen where global interests meet a more general frame-
work of action, one where global and regional public goods should be pri-
oritized simultaneously, although this is not necessarily the case.
Establishing an adequate balance demands an important political vision
and an essential will both locally and within the multilateral system.
Depending on the decisions and courses of action taken, a concatena-
tion of forces and situations will be established, one where cooperative
relations, values and the principles shared by the different actors are either
strengthened or weakened. The coincidence of basic interests enables and
allows for the confirmation of spaces and instruments for establishing and
coordinating policies. On the contrary, differences in perceptions, or the
non-acceptance of the way the interests of “others” are expressed, make it
difficult and sometimes impossible for the convergence of these processes.
In short, they inhibit the establishment of spaces for cooperation.
Within multilateral spheres, the resource most often used to avoid the
convergence of interests and foster the development of resolutions—bind-
ing or not—is by means of the “veto” resource by a decision-maker, as a
“zero-sum game.” It is therefore necessary to reflect on whether coopera-
tion assists or complicates synergy. In what contexts does one have prece-
dence over the actions of others? In which areas has cooperation been
shown to be more likely to succeed? The road ahead in the face of global
threats must promote greater and more effective multilateralism, one
based on the fulfilment of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
which constitutes a global initiative towards achieving peace and security,
 INTRODUCTION: HAZARDOUS AND ERRATIC TIMES—GREATER… 9

sustainable development and the protection of human rights, all while car-
ing for the planet as a whole.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was approved by Heads of
State in 2015. It is a plan of action for overcoming the grave problems
faced by humanity, on the basis of a global alliance that places collabora-
tion as the axis for articulation. As previously stated, cooperation is the
only option for facing climate change, pandemics, global financial crises or
global-reach terrorism. This is why this universal plan of action proposes
goals in 17 areas, expressed in each one of the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs), to be achieved by 2030.
In order to reach the proposed goals, people are placed at the center; in
this way, human beings can develop their capacities within contexts of
dignity and equality, all while advocating for a healthy environment. The
latter means protecting the environment while fostering prosperity. As
such, societies can be free from fear and violence in an inclusive and just
manner. Without peace, sustainable development is not possible. Without
sustainable development, stability and peace cannot be achieved.
Development, peace, governability and democracy demand effective par-
ticipation and inclusion. Development and the 2030 Agenda demand
more multilateralism through a world alliance based on solidarity and
cooperation.
As the United Nations has pointed out several times, there is no peace
without development, and without development, there will be no peace or
respect for human rights. Sustainable Development Goal number 16 is at
the heart of this global objective, as it promotes peace on the basis of
respect for justice and the construction of solid institutions, which are
fundamental for a civilized, peaceful coexistence that promotes prosperity.
Risks are also expressed in increasingly more evident ways for the entire
planet around the global crisis, making it even more difficult to generate
effective preventive measures. We lack the mitigation capacities to resolve
the pressing global issues. Climate change, financial crises, the impact of
the information and communication revolutions are all increasingly com-
plex matters that affect global stability and create more uncertainty at
all levels.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution is expanding rapidly within the
framework of globalization and interdependency. Robotics, b ­ iotechnology
10 F. ROJAS ARAVENA

and Artificial Intelligence are radically changing production. Their effect

on the global economy is evident not only within the current superpow-
ers, but also within small countries. Job loss, as a result of robotics, is
growing. In turn, the technological revolution is changing the way we
produce, and with that, the job market itself. Many adults and senior citi-
zens lack the skills to adapt to these vertiginous changes. In many places,
younger generations have difficulty accessing the type of education neces-
sary to fully incorporate themselves into this information and technologi-
cal revolution, spurred by the development of Artificial Intelligence.
Technological illiteracy results in the marginalization of an important sec-
tor of the world’s population. On the other hand, this revolution is facili-
tating communication through social networks, which constitute new
virtual communities that frame and influence perceptions about global
and local political events and situations in an increasingly determining way.
The emergence of “fake news” impacts the way we think and reason. One
of the results of these emerging processes is a fissure in the support or
undermining of the decisions made by political, religious, social and cul-
tural leaders around the world.
The impact of natural disasters, extreme meteorological events and
other environmental threats, caused by climate change, contribute and
reinforce these phenomena affecting a growing number of the world’s
population.
Conflicts emerge with great force. They reduce the weight of preven-
tion and the generation of capacities for conflict resolution.
Notwithstanding, societies are building and developing resilience mecha-
nisms. Preventive and anticipatory policies, as well as the construction of
spaces for dialogue, discussion and mediation, enable the reduction of
risks and threats and become a key for the defence of democratic gover-
nance, civic coexistence and peacebuilding. Resilience increases the possi-
bilities of success.
As I pointed out before the UN General Assembly in April of 2018,
within the complex and interdependent international system, old and new
threats interrelate in the dynamics of global conflict. These have growing
costs and the resources allocated to peacekeeping activities simultaneously
decrease. Conflicts and crises are increasingly complex. This demands bet-
ter analysis, the construction of shared visions and anticipatory actions
that can foster better opportunities for prevention, as highlighted by UN
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
 INTRODUCTION: HAZARDOUS AND ERRATIC TIMES—GREATER… 11

Within the current context of global interdependency, we need to visu-

alize and create operative frameworks and platforms to guarantee that the
link between peace and security, development and human rights—which
strengthen each other—may be transformed into specific actions that con-
tribute to the de-escalation of domestic, regional and international tensions.
Interstate conflicts have decreased. However, intra-national domestic
conflicts cause a greater number of deaths and suffering. The destruction
of infrastructure affects the security of civilians, especially those belonging
to the most vulnerable sectors. In order to face these conflicts, multilater-
alism and education are fundamental tools.

Education is Essential for Conflict Resolution

In a society at war, what kind of education is necessary? Students need to
understand the reasons for this violence, the reasons why men and women
in their communities die, why they are afraid, why international actors are
involved in their country’s conflict.
In a society that is divided and trapped by conflict, education for peace
is an essential requirement, a first priority. This means education for non-
violence, education for inclusion, education for social cohesion, education
for Rule of Law, education for legality and ethics—in summary, education
for sustainable peace and the development of cooperative multilateralism.
It is imperative that we develop an educational model that promotes
skills, values and behaviours that contribute to peace, justice, sustainable
development and solidarity. A society that does not have the value of peace
in their minds and hearts is condemned to repeat cycles of conflict, vio-
lence and war.
Without peace, rights cannot be exercised. Without peace, there is no
right to education. Without peace, human rights are deeply and increasingly
violated. Where there is no peace, there is no development; without devel-
opment, it is impossible to have growth and prosperity, which only creates
more poverty, more inequality, more tensions and violence, and conflicts are
aggravated. All this becomes a permanent way of life where human loss does
not matter, nor does the loss of infrastructure or the loss of a country’s cul-
ture and collective memory. Building a sustainable peace is fundamental.
To reach a sustainable peace, the development of educational policies,
which include the different aspects involved in complex conflicts and cri-
ses, is necessary as part of preventive policies. It is also necessary to take
aim at the root and cause of conflict and violence. We foresee that complex
12 F. ROJAS ARAVENA

crises will only increase and will constitute the main factor for conflict in
the future.
The previous President of the General Assembly, Miroslav Lajčák
(2017–2018) noted, “The United Nations needs a new approach to
Peace.” The main concept that he proposed is that of a sustainable peace,
a solid peace, one that carries on for generations to come. The University
for Peace (UPEACE) participated in this debate, where it pointed out that
“training and educating for the achievement of a sustainable peace is to
foster multilateralism, shared co-responsibilities, mutual understanding,
gender equality and inclusion. Preventive actions must be based on better
knowledge and the recognition of the roots of conflict in order to open up
spaces for negotiation.” It is necessary to build a sustainable peace.
Multilateral cooperation, pluralistic education and holistic visions are key,
as are the development of new knowledge and the political will that allows
us to set new paths moving forward.
Education is the best investment. It always provides returns way beyond
the initial investment, but the most significant benefits are expressed over
the long term, with a view towards the future. Education for conflict
transformation, for the construction of a culture of peace and nonvio-
lence, is an essential investment to reach substantial goals in the fields of
security, development and human rights, as well as to lay the groundwork
for achieving a sustainable peace.

The UPEACE Mission

Within this context, it is necessary to visualize the fulfilment of UPEACE’s
mission, that of “providing humanity with an international institution of
higher education for peace and with the aim of promoting, among all
human beings, the spirit of understanding, tolerance and peaceful coexis-
tence, to stimulate cooperation among peoples and to help lessen obsta-
cles and threats to world peace and progress, in keeping with the noble
aspirations proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations.”
The 2030 Agenda expresses, within a program of action, UPEACE’s
global mission. Our actions are carried out through (a) political-diplo-
matic links, (b) significant academic and research programs, (c) the orga-
nization of international fora and seminars, (d) a humanitarian program
and (e) the publications that emerge as a result of these tasks.
The University for Peace promotes an Agenda for Peace. This book
demonstrates the difficulties in advancing towards a sustainable peace in
 INTRODUCTION: HAZARDOUS AND ERRATIC TIMES—GREATER… 13

different regions of the world. The weight of uncertainty within a context

of post-truths and “fake news” produce even greater complications in
advancing towards a shared understanding of the deep causes of current
conflicts, which combine old prejudices, disillusions on unmet goals, as
well as the emergence of new risks and great threats to all of humankind.
Global public goods have weakened as global threats increase. The
complications for global governance are evident. Interdependence is
unavoidable. Notwithstanding, the context of 2018 is increasingly paro-
chial and with a greater emphasis on authoritarianism, to the detriment of
global democracy. In his message at the end of 2017, UN Secretary-­
General Antonio Guterres pointed out that conflicts had increased, that
atomic danger was greater than in previous periods, that inequality was on
the rise, along with discrimination, that climate change is accelerating and
that the necessary measures were not being undertaken to prevent impend-
ing doom for a significant part of humanity. In other words, threats are
greater than ever before.
This book reinforces our commitment to the work carried out by the
University for Peace towards a sustainable peace and to our activities
devoted to conflict resolution and transformation based on local actions.
These include mediation, as expressed within neighbourhoods and com-
munities to promote an effective democratic coexistence. These actions
will generate good practices that can be projected in different regions as
well as the global scenario. We also promote debates on the essential con-
cepts related to a sustainable peace and educate new generations of agents
for change.
In that sense, the thousands of small actions based on prevention, on
construction of trust and education for peace and nonviolence, serve as
fruitful seeds that will allow us to face the growing vulnerabilities of our
societies. All of these actions promote the empowerment of our students
to develop a renewed leadership capable of overcoming the shortcomings
of the Cold War generations. The result will be a greater promotion of the
respect for human rights, advances in sustainable development and prog-
ress in human security; in short, an advancement for knowledge and the
promotion and consolidation of a sustainable peace.
In these hazardous and erratic times of greater and deeper conflicts, we
reaffirm the statement made by Rodrigo Carazo, founder of the University
for Peace—established by the General Assembly of the United Nations
pursuant to its Resolution 35/55 of 1980—“Peace is not found, Peace is
built. (…) If we want Peace, we must prepare Peace.”
 The Complex Concept of Peace
in an Uncertain World

Fernando Blasco

Of the many attempts at peace by so many world actors—governments,

diplomats, politicians, national and international peacekeepers, NGOs,
activists, religions, and so on—one common thing can be established: they
all fail. There is hardly a need to justify this assertion. There is hardly a
need to expose again the number and condition of refugees and displaced
persons, the daily casualties of open and hidden wars, the statistics of hun-
ger or the deterioration of the environment. It is enough to walk a couple
of blocks in any of the major cities of the world and the justification appears
with all its force.
So, it might be worthwhile to review again the prevalent ideas about
peace and violence that circulate among those who, in one way or another,
spend most of their time speculating about the possibility of peace, the
eradication of violence and its root causes. While we cannot expect ideas
to immediately condition the actions of world actors who make the deci-
sions that ultimately frame either peace or violence, we know that ideas—
derided, resisted or opposed as they may be—inevitably permeate people,
and people do condition world actors. The obvious examples would be
evolution or heliocentricity but, less popular, the case of the Nakaz is per-
haps more emblematic of this reality.

F. Blasco (*)
UPEACE Council, San Jose, Costa Rica

© The Author(s) 2020 15

F. Rojas Aravena (ed.), The Difficult Task of Peace,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21974-1_2
16 F. BLASCO

Early in 1767, Catherine the Great finished the composition of the

Nakaz (the Instructions) that she immediately presented to Russia’s
Legislative Commission that she had assembled. The 428 members of the
Commission included representatives of the military and civil services, the
nobility, townsmen, peasants living on state lands and various non-Russian
ethnic groups. The Instructions, almost all of it copied from Montesquieu
and the Marquis de Beccaria (Catherine wrote “only the arrangement of
the material, and a line here and a word there, belong to me”), was to
guide the Commission in composing a new code of law to reshape Russian
society (Lincoln 1987: 220).
The Instructions was a compendium of the most advanced ideas of the
time. Many of its articles sound revolutionary even today in some coun-
tries: “the usage of torture is contrary to all the dictates of nature and
reason”, “proofs from fact demonstrate to us that the frequent use of capi-
tal punishment never mended the morals of a people”, “the most sure but,
at the same time, the most difficult expedient to mend the morals of the
people, is a perfect system of education.” Voltaire commended the
Instructions as “the most beautiful monument of the century” (Lincoln
1987: 222). The Commission, however, mired in battles of sectorial inter-
ests, never issued the new code of law outlined in the Instructions.
Catherine failed in her attempt to change Russian society—in whatever
way one might think she had in mind—through the Instructions. Different
views can be sustained on what she really attempted to achieve, as serious
contradictions are evident in the Instructions. While it purports to advo-
cate for a society based on the rule of law, it nonetheless declares that “the
Sovereign is absolute; for there is no other authority but that which cen-
tres in his single Person.” In any case, whereas it is clear that the “constitu-
ents” of the members of the Commission were not ready to entertain the
advanced concepts of the Instructions (Lincoln 1987: 221), the document
had important repercussions with many European thinkers. Denis Diderot
was one of them. On his return from Russia in 1774, he began writing a
long essay to analyse the Instructions (Diderot 1992: 78).
Diderot started his essay by observing that “There is no true sovereign
except the nation; there can be no true legislator except the people. It is
rare that people submit sincerely to laws which have been imposed on
them.” And some lines below: “The first line of a well-made Code should
bind the sovereign. It should begin thus: ‘We the people and we the sov-
ereign swear conjointly to obey these laws’ (Diderot 1992: 81). Diderot
was aiming at a law that would bring ‘happiness and security’” to the
 THE COMPLEX CONCEPT OF PEACE IN AN UNCERTAIN WORLD 17

people. It would be a law for peace, on the condition that the law be “leg-
islated” by the people.
If, as Diderot asserted, “the people” determine what is possible for the
governing body, at least in the longer term, how would it be possible to
attain their involvement? What “people” did Diderot and all those who
followed this track have in mind? Of course, “We the people” became
famous by its use in the Preamble to the United States Constitution. Later,
the Preamble of the United Nations Charter adopted a perhaps even more
ambitious embodiment by stating “we the peoples of the United Nations.”
Other drafters of preambles seem to have recognized the difficulty of
directly assuming for oneself the voice of the people. For example, the
preamble to the Federal Constitution of Brazil begins with “We, the rep-
resentatives of the Brazilian People,” and the Preamble to the Argentine
Constitution begins with “We, the representatives of the People of the
Argentine Nation.”
Thus, almost in every document that has been drafted as the basis for
the functioning of any modern state, two features can be recognized: this
basic law aims at guaranteeing some form of peace, and, it is sanctioned in
the name of the people(s). As we know, the success achieved by this means
and its related machinery has been very poor. Violence abounds. Consider
as an example the richest and most powerful country in the world, the
United States of America, where, according to the official information
released by the United States Census Bureau on September 12, 2018, the
number of people living in poverty in the country is 39.7 million, or 12.3%
of the population.

Violence
The theories of peace and violence developed by Johan Galtung, in par-
ticular in his 1969 article Violence, Peace, and Peace Research (Galtung
1969), are widely recognized and accepted as a critical platform for con-
sideration of peace studies. Almost 50 years after its publication, it retains
a major influence. We will therefore select it as the starting point for our
discussion aimed at offering a new presentation and arrangement of ideas
that, even though mostly already analysed and considered, could elicit
innovative views from thinkers of peace.
In his essay, Galtung presented two key points that we shall retain: that
“peace is absence of violence” (Galtung 1969: 167); and, that “violence is
present when human beings are being influenced so that their actual
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
XV.

On kulunut aikaa useita vuosia, toisille pitkiä, toisille lyhyitä.

Laajoina lainehtivat Ison-Kankaan pellot juhannuksen aikana ja

hiukkasen myöhemminkin, jolloin ruis tuulessa aaltoilee kuin meren
pinta.

Pitkinä pistävät metsään päin pitkät, satasyliset ketosarat työntäen

heiniä maan täydeltä helteiseen kesä-ilmaan. Kauvas apilan tuoksu
leviää tuulen kantamana.

Korkeana ja maalattuna kohoaa talon suuri asuinrakennus kuin

linna, ja pitkä, suuri kivinavetta antaa asunnon yli puolelle sadalle
lehmälle.

Entiset rakennukset on hävitetty ja uudet sijaan kohonneet.

Rikas ja ylpeä on Ison-Kankaan talo.

Kenelle hän laittanee? Kenelle hän koonnee? ihmettelivät ihmiset.

Ei kukaan tiedä isännän tuumia ennenkuin taasen näkevät jonkun

uuden laitoksen hänen tahdostaan kohoavan.
 Rikas on Ison-Kankaan isäntä. Rikkautta työntävät hänelle
voimakas maa ja hyötyisä karja ja vankka metsä.

Hän se osaa maasta ottaa, ihmettelevät päätään puistaen vanhat

miehet. Kuinka kauvan tuolla riittänee, köyhtyy maa vähemmälläkin
kiskomisella, puhuvat he.

Mutta multa on syvää Ison-Kankaan pelloissa.

Yksinäinen on isäntä. Ei kukaan saata häntä ystäväkseen sanoa.

Moni tyttö häntä mielien katsoisi, kun uskaltaisi, mutta hän on niin
yksinäinen ja ylpeä, ettei kukaan uskalla häntä lähestyä.

Ja hänkö heistä välittäisi.

Elämä hänen ympärillään kiehuu ja kuohuu, Mutta hän elää kuin

elämästä erillään.

Onko tuo sen iloisen ja leikkisän Kankaan Matin poika?

ihmettelivät
Pakojokelaiset. Tuo ylpeä ja yksinäinen.

Pikku-Kankaan Antti on isäntänä hänen naapurissaan ja

emäntänä Anna.

Mitä miettii Ison-Kankaan mahtava isäntä? arvelee monasti

itsekseen Anna. Anna on tyytyväinen, mutta sittenkin löytyy tuolla
sydämen pohjassa arka paikka, joka koskaan ei aivan
tuntumattomaksi katoa.

Pikku-Kankaan Antista on kehittynyt edistysmielinen mies. Hän

toimii monessa yhteisessä yrityksessä. Paljon, paljon on muuttunut
sitten muutaman vuoden.

Niin nuorisoseurako?

Siellä toimii toinen polvi ja seuran kirjuri tutkii entisiä pöytäkirjoja ja

näkee siellä tuon erakon nimen, tuon nimen, jonka omistaja elää
yksinään suuressa talossaan ja joka mielessään katkerasti ivailee
kaikkia yhteisiä toimia, joista sattumalta kuulee puhuttavan.
Toimikoot! Ei heistä kuitenkaan mitään tule, ei heistä eikä heidän
toimistaan.

Mutta joutuu hänkin sanansa sanomaan elämän hyörinässä.

Tuolla suuressa kylässä, kirkonkylässä, on kansakoulu tullut liian

pieneksi. Pikku-Kankaan Antti ja muut hänen kanssaan rupesivat
tahtomaan uutta koulua Pakojoen kylään, sinne Ison-Kankaan luo.
Eihän ollut kirkolle, jossa koulu oli, pitkä matka, mutta oli niin paljon
asukkaita täälläkin, että koulu oli täälläkin tarpeen.

Tuossa joen törmällä, Ison-Kankaan maalla on kuin Luojan luoma

paikka sitä varten.

Asia saatiin ajetuksi niin pitkälle, että koulu päätettiin rakentaa.

Käytiin tiedustamassa maan hintaa Ison-Kankaan haltijalta.

Ei rahalla eikä millään, tuli jäykkä vastaus.

— Vielä te tässä kouluja! Kuin niillä te paremmaksi muuttuisitte,

mietti ylpeä isäntä. Hän muisteli sitä aikaa, jolloin hän itse oli ollut
kansakoulussa, tuolla kirkonkylän vanhassa koulussa. Nauramaan,
tyhmästi nauramaan he kykenivät — sen ajan hän niin elävästi
muisti — mutta muuhun korkeampaan, jonkun aatteen, vaikka
helponkin käsittämiseen, siihen heistä ei monikaan kyennyt. Ja sitten
koulun jälkeen! Kun ei ollut enään pakkoa kirjaa käteensä ottaa, niin
silloin kaikki muu paitsi syöminen ja koirankujeet unohtuivat. Mitä
hyötyä heille koulusta, noille tomppeleille, jotka kirjaa kuin ruttoa
pelkäävät? Samallaisia ovat nykyisetkin mukulat. Vielä heille kouluja.
Joka kykenee kohoamaan tuosta raskasliikkeisestä, typerästä
joukosta, niin hän kykenee sen tekemään kouluittakin, mietti hän.

Jonkun ajan perästä näki hän sanomalehdessä kuvauksen

itsestään. Hän sen mukaan oli valistuksen vastustaja, synkän
taantumuksen mies.

— Niin olenkin ja siinä pysyn. Tuon joukon vastustaja olen ikäni,

sillä tuo suuri joukko ei jaksa koskaan herätä tuosta tyhmyyden
unesta, jota se nukkuu, mietti hän.

Niin, sehän oli eräänä pyhäpäivänä kesällä, kun aurinko paahtoi,

kärpäset surisivat ja hän makasi rakennuksen varjossa ruohikolla.
Mäntylän ukko mennä köpitti partaisine poskineen pölyistä tietä
pitkin.
Kalle huomasi hänet ja häntä rupesi itsekseen naurattamaan.

— Yksissä ollaan, Mäntyläinen, sanoi hän, kun ukko hänen

kohdalleen kerkesi.

— Mitä?

— Niin, yksissä ollaan.

— Niinpä tässä ollaan.

— Niin, mutta siinä, että kirjat teille, noille poikavekaroille, jotka

tuolla aidalla kiekkuvat ja noille tytöille, jotka tuolla tiellä tulevat, ovat
tarpeetonta tavaraa.

— Niin, veikkonen, ovatkin. Me elämme kirjoittakin.

— Niin te elättekin, ja Kallea nauratti.

— Mutta mistä tämä nyt, tällainen juttu? kysyi ihmeissään

Mäntyläinen.

— No kun olen tullut samaan tulokseen noista kirjoista kun tekin,

etteivät ne sovi tavallisen talonpojan käteen.

— Älä.

— Se on tosi.

— Vai niin, sanoi Mäntyläinen ja katsoi epäillen nauravaa Kallea.

Vai niin, sanoi hän vielä ja lähti tietä pitkin menemään.

— Hittoako minä löpisin! Mitä minä nyt tuon kanssa rupesin

puhumaan. Ei se uskonut kuitenkaan; katsoi niin epäillen kuin olisin
häntä pilkannut.

Mutta itsekseen häntä nauratti. Ollaan Mäntyläisen kanssa

samassa, mutta ei kuitenkaan samassa, mietti hän.

— Mitähän kujeita tuo nyt oli? mietti Mäntyläinen kävellessään.

Mutta koulu perustettiin Pakojoelle. Se toimi alussa

vuokrahuoneissa.
XVI.

Oli syyskesä, jolloin tuli kiertomatkallaan seuran työtä innostamaan

keskusseuran sihteeri, nuori ylioppilas, Lauri Saha.

Hän huomasi, että urheilu-innostus oli kerennyt saapua jo tänne

syrjäiseen seutuunkin. Ollen itse innokas urheilija, koetti hän ohjata
myös tätäkin puolta seuran toiminnassa.

Mutta puuttui urheilukenttä, sillä seuran talo oli peltojen keskellä.

— Tuossahan, pojat, on maata. Tahtokaa lahjaksi tai jos ette saa,

niin ostakaa, sanoi hän, kun tästä asiasta oli puhe seuran talolla.

— On siinä peltoa, mutta siitä ei lohkene meidän käytettäväksi

rahallakaan, sanoi seuran esimies.

— Kenen se on?

— Ison-Kankaan, tuli vastaus.

— Kyllä se isäntä antaa, kun vaan kauniisti pyydätte.

— Ei anna, vaikka mitä tekisimme, vastasivat pojat.

 — Sehän kumma! Minä lähden teidän puolestanne kauppaa
tekemään, koska minulla on vielä aikaa. Kyllä saatte maata sen
verran kuin tarvitsette, sanoi ylioppilas innoissaan.

Hän kyseli tuosta maanomistajasta. Pojat selittivät ja hänen

mielenkiintonsa ja uteliaisuutensa heräsi. Hän halusi nähdä tuon
karhun, joka yksinään, muista erillään elää.

Illalla lähti hän yksin Isolle-Kankaalle.

Taloa lähestyessään näki hän mahtavan navetan, jonne juuri

lehmiä ajettiin.

Hän tuli pihalle. Hiukan ihmeisiinsä joutui hän nähdessään sen

hyvän järjestyksen, mikä kaikkialla vallitsi.

Porrasten edessä tuli palvelustyttö häntä vastaan ja uteliaana

töllisti tuota nuorta, valkolakkista miestä.

— Onko isäntä kotona? kysyi Lauri Saha.

— On. Tuolla se on kamarissaan, vastasi tyttö. Tuolta toisia

portaita sinne pääsee, lisäsi hän, kun kysyjä näytti epäröivän, mistä
sen kamarin löytäisi.

— Hän on joku tuollainen herännäinen, joka vihaa

nuorisoseuraliikettä, päätteli Lauri Saha, mennessään osoitettuun
suuntaan. Hän oli kuvitellut isäntää joksikin mistään
välittämättömäksi olijaksi; sillä eihän poikain selityksestä selvää
kuvaa ollut saanut. Mutta tuo järjestys ja talon mahtavuus pani hänet
hiukan ymmälle.
 Hän nousi portaita ja tuli eteiseen. Ohhoh! Mitäs täällä tuleekaan,
mietti hän. Sillä eteinen vaatenaulakkoineen oli niin komea, ettei hän
ollut silmiään uskoa.

Hiukan epäröiden koputti hän ovelle.

— Sisään! kuului syvä ääni.

Hän aukaisi oven. Mutta hän ei tahtonut uskoa todeksi, mitä näki.
Kirjoja pitkät hyllyt yhdellä seinällä ihan täynnä ja niin hyvässä
järjestyksessä. Tämähän on harvinaista, mietti Lauri Saha. Mihin
olen tullutkaan.

Sitten loi hän katseensa isäntään. Pitkä, harteikas, enemmän

lukumiehen kuin maanviljelijän näköinen oli tuo nuorellainen,
syväsilmäinen mies. Ei puvusta, mutta kasvoista päättäen.

Hän epäröi. Tällaista ei hän ollut osannut kuvitellakaan.

— Iltaa! Anteeksi jos häiritsen, tuli Lauri Sahalta ihan

huomaamattaan. Hänen maalla kulkiessaan ei ollut tarvinnut
kohteliaisuussanoja käyttää. Mutta nyt tuli tuo ihan itsestään, kun ei
tiennyt varmasti kuin olla, miten eleä.

— Istukaa! Olkaa hyvä! kehoitti tuo toinen, nousten pöytänsä

vieressä seisomaan.

Oli jotain kankeaa heidän kummankin käytöksessä, sillä toinen oli

tullut sellaiseen paikkaan ja sellaisen henkilön luo, jota paikkaa ja
henkilöä ei osannut tuollaiseksi kuvitellakaan.

— Niin, käyn asiaan heti käsiksi. Olen tämän nuorisoseurapiirin

keskusseuran sihteeri ja matkoilla jouduin myös tänne. Tuli tuolla
seuran talolla puheeksi urheilukentän laittaminen, koska urheilu
näkyy täälläkin saaneen kannattajia. Mutta heillä ei ole maata siinä
talon likellä. Kuuluu olevan siinä teidän maata. Lähdin heidän
puolestaan pyytämään teitä hyväntahtoisesti luovuttamaan sopivan
maapalan seuran käytettäväksi.

Toinen kuunteli tuota puhetta katsoen ulos. Hieno hymynkierre

väikkyi hänen huulillaan.

— Helkkari, kun puhun juhlallisesti kuin asianajaja, mietti Lauri

Saha.

— Niin, mitä te siitä arvelette? kysyi hän kun ei tullut heti

vastausta.

— En minä voi siitä luovuttaa maata, vastasi Kalle.

— Olikin tarkoitus, että jos olisi liian suuri vaatimus teidän

mielestänne maata ilmaiseksi luovuttaa, niin kyllä seura sen korvaisi,
ostaisi, toisin sanoen.

— En minä rahasta välitä. Jos minä maan antaisin, niin antaisin

ilmaiseksi, mutta minä en tahdo, en halua antaa mitenkään.

— Saanko luvan kysyä, miksi ette anna? kysyi Lauri Saha, sillä
hän päätteli mielessään: sittenkin ahdasmielinen, ehkä
uskonnollisten seikkain tähden vastustaa nuorisoseuraliikettä. Hän
varustautui odotettuun taisteluun.

— Siksi, kun se olisi periaatteitani vastaan, kuului vastaus.

— Anteeksi, jos olen utelias! Mutta onhan hauska keskustella.

Minkä vuoksi maan luovuttaminen tähän tarkoitukseen on teidän
periaatteitanne vastaan?

— Sen vuoksi, koska koko seura ja liike, kaikkine toimineen, on

minun mielestäni tarpeeton järkeville ihmisille.

— Mutta olettehan te ennen ottaneet osaa seuran toimintaan.

— Senpä vuoksi tiedänkin sen toiminnan turhaksi.

— Pidättekö te turhana kansan valistamisen? Sehän

nuorisoseuratyön tarkoitus on. Minkälainen valistustoiminta teidän
mielestänne vastaisi paremmin tarkoitustaan? kysyi Lauri Saha,
odottaen nyt noiden olettamiensa uskonnollisten mielipiteiden esille
tulemista.

Mutta hän ei ollut uskoa korviaan, kun Kalle vastasi:

— En kannata minkäänlaista valistamistyötä.

— Kuinka?

Kalle sanoi vielä saman uudelleen.

— Mutta miten te tuohon — anteeksi, jos sanon — noin synkkään

tulokseen olette tulleet? kysyi ihmeissään Lauri Saha.

— Siksi olen siihen tulokseen tullut, koska sen omasta kohdastani

olen huomannut todeksi.

— Selittäkäähän toki tarkemmin mielipiteenne! huudahti Lauri

Saha. Hänestä tuntui hiukan hullunkuriselta tuollainen väite. Häntä
suututti tuon miehen musta taantumuskanta, kuten hän mielessään
nimitti sitä.
 — Silti niin ajattelin, koska mielipiteeni mukaan ihminen,
kehityskykyinen ihminen, voipi kohota valistuneeksi ilman seuroja ja
kouluja. Ja sellaisista ihmisistä, jotka eivät voi itse kehittyä, ei tule
valistuneita tai sivistyneitä — sanoipa noita nyt miten hyvänsä —
seurojen eikä muitten laitosten muokkaamallakaan. He pysyvät siinä
tilassa missä ovat, teki heille mitä tahansa.

— No, no, eihän — — —

— Odottakaahan! Silti nuorisoseuran toimintakin on minun

mielestäni turhaa. Se tekee tuollaisia idiootteja, jotka luulevat
olevansa jotakin, mutta jotka kuitenkaan eivät ole kuin suunsoittajia.
Suoraan sanoen enimmillä ihmisillä ei ole kehittymiskykyä. Heitä ei
saa tuosta tuohon, vaikka henkensä antaisi heitä kehittääkseen.

— Mutta heitä ei ole koetettukaan kehittää. Esimerkiksi

nuorisoseuraliike on vielä niin nuori, ettei sen vaikutuksia vielä tiedä
odottaakaan. Pimeydessä on meidän kansa, varsinainen saloilla
elävä kansa saanut tähän asti elää.

— Mutta pimeydessähän ovat kaikki alkuaan eläneet, sellaisetkin,

jotka nyt valkeudessa vaeltavat.

— Mitä tarkoitatte? kysyi Lauri Saha, jota keskustelu alkoi

viehättää.

— Tarkoitan, että — suokaa nyt mennä kauvaksi taaksepäin —

että pimeydessähän ovat eläneet muinaisuudessa kaikki ihmiset.
Vähä kerrallaanhan ovat kaikki kehittyneet: taiteet, tieteet, yleensä
ihmishengen saavutukset. Mutta kuka noita on kehittänyt? Ihmiset.
Mutta mitkä ihmiset? Nuo, joilla on ollut kehitys- ja kehittymiskyky.
 — Tarkoitatte ihmiskunnan neroja. Mutta eiväthän kaikki ihmiset
ole neroja, sehän on mahdoton olettamuskin, sanoi Lauri Saha.

— Eivät olekaan. En sitä tarkoitakaan. Eivät kaikki ole neroja,

mutta on sellaisia, jotka neroja ymmärtävät, jotka esimerkiksi taiteen
saavutuksista osaavat nauttia. Mutta niitäkin on vähän, verrattuna
tuohon suureen joukkoon, joka ei kykene muuhun kuin syömiseen ja
tyydyttämään alhaisimpia viettejään. Tuo suuri joukkohan on aina
ollut noitten kehityskykyisten johdettavana, kuin raskas ainejoukkio
on se vierähtänyt aina sinne, mihin sitä on vieritetty. Sitä on aina
hallinnut tuo sen yläpuolella oleva, siitä kyllä noussut ihmisryhmä; ja
niin tulee aina olemaan. Tuo joukko ei jaksa kohota, ei koskaan, on
turha vaiva sitä yrittääkkään.

— Mutta tehän olette, vaikka olette talonpoika, hirveän

ylimysmielinen, sanoi Lauri Saha.

— Sanokaapa miksi haluatte, niin ajattelen.

— Mutta onhan tuo joukko, niinkuin sitä nimitätte, paljon

muuttunut. Ovathan tavat sievistyneet entisajan tapoihin verrattuna.
Onhan kansa esimerkiksi oppinut lukemaan ja paljon voisi luetella
esimerkkejä, jotka osoittavat sen kehityskykyä. Siis valistustyö ei ole
turhaa, koska se jotain aikaan saapi, vaikkakin hitaasti.

— On se oppinut lukemaan ja on se oppinut jotain muutakin, Mutta

miten? Pakosta. Tiedättehän, jos esimerkiksi ajattelemme meidän
kansamme kehitystä, miten tuo lukutaito on saavutettu. Jotkut
valistuneet, Gezelius-piispathan etupäässä, sen aikaan saivat. Mutta
miten? Pakolla. Vedoten tunteisiin ja viettoihin: ei saanut naimisiin
mennä eikä uskonnollisiin menoihin osaa ottaa, jos ei osannut lukea.
Tämä pakko juuri saikin tuon koneellisen lukutaidon aikaan. Sillä
sehän oli koneellista lukemista, eihän ymmärtämisestä ollut
puhettakaan. Mutta oli vastahakoista tuosta joukosta lukeminen,
niinkuin se vieläkin on. Jos ei olisi pakkoa, niin suuri osa siitä ei
kirjaa käteensä ottaisi.

— Te liioittelette. Lukemaanhan kansa on hyvin halukasta ja

samaten oppimaan. Senhän todistaa sanomalehtien runsas
leveneminen ja kirjallisuuden leveneminen, puhui Lauri Saha.

— Ihmiset ovat lisääntyneet, joten suhteellisesti tuo valveilla oleva

ryhmäkin on lisääntynyt. Mutta suuri joukko nukkuu ikuista unta, se
ei välitä sanomalehdistä eikä kirjallisuudesta. Kyllä se huutaa
sorrosta ja sortamisesta, mutta kun leipää kurkkuunsa saa, niin on
hiljaa.

— Te olette katkera, sanoi Lauri Saha.

— Jos se olisi saanut olla rauhassa, niin se olisi samallaisessa

asemassa kuin kreikkalaisilla orjat. Mutta muutamat
pehmeäsydämiset ihmiset ovat kuvitelleet voivansa tuon joukon
herättää ikuisesta unestaan. Tuon joukon, jota kreikkalaiset
osajoukoksi sanoivat ja jota nyt ei enään orjina kohdella, jolla olisi
vapaa valta kohota, jos se kykenisi. Mutta se ei kykene. Huutaa se
kyllä osaa — osaahan sonnikin, — kun sen päähän on ajettu jotain
aatteita, kun kellokkaat edellä huutavat, niin osaa joukkokin perässä.
Heiltä puuttuu ehkä toisinaan leipää, mutta kun he sitä saavat, niin
silloin, silloin huuto loppuu ja joukko on tyytyväinen, muuta se ei
kaipaa.

— Mutta teillähän on hirveät mielipiteet, huudahti Lauri Saha.

 — Niin ehkä on, mutta todet kuitenkin. — Niin, miksi tuota joukkoa
sitten vaivata! Antaisi sille leipää ja teettäisi sillä työtä ja muuten
hyvin kohtelisi. Kehityskykyiset ihmiset tekisivät henkistä työtä tai
mikä miellyttäisi mitäkin. Lisäisivät tuota ihmishengen tuottamaa
henkistä perintöä. Miksi he koko joukkoa koittavat perässään vetää
ja siihen turhaan työhön aikaansa kuluttaa. Miksi he tuota joukkoa
kiskovat, tuota, joka ennen oli orjajoukko, jota ei enään sinä pidetä,
mutta jona se on ollut ennen ja tulee vastakin olemaan, aina se tulee
olemaan joukkona, niin tänään, niin huomenna ja niin ijankaiken.
Siihen suuntaan kehitytään, että nykyisen rahaylimystön sijaan tulee
hengen ylimystö. Sukuylimystö on kadottanut merkityksensä, nyt tai
oikeammin tulevaisuudessa kadottaa raha- ja raa'an voiman ylimystö
valtansa ja hengen ylimystö pääsee oikeuksiinsa. Mutta joukko
pysyy aina joukkona, sen olot paranevat ja silloinhan se on
tyytyväinen, sille hengen ylimystö suo leipää ja silloin kaikki, koko
maailma on onnellinen.

— Minua ihan pyörryttää tuo teidän mielikuvituksenne lento. Te

olette katkera, jostain katkeroitunut ja silti olette mielestäni väärässä.
Minun mielestäni ovat kaikki terveet ihmiset kehityskykyisiä, joilla on
kyky kehittää henkeään ja omistaa ihmiskunnan henkinen perintö ja
kyky siitä nauttia. Kehitysmahdollisuuden siihen tarjoaa myös
nuorisoseuraliike. Maalaisväestömme on hidasta ja kankeaa, koska
se tähän asti on pimeydessä ollut. Mutta odotetaan ja tehdään työtä
sen hyväksi, niin kyllä vielä kerran päivä vaikenee, sanoi Lauri Saha.

— Niinhän te sanotte. Te, jotka saatte olla todella sivistyneitten

parissa ja jotka saatte sivistyksen hedelmistä, taiteesta ja muista
ihmishengen saavutuksista monipuolisesti nauttia. Te silloin tällöin
kuin huviksenne tulette tänne maalle ja saarnaatte innoissanne
valistuksesta ja valistamisesta tuntematta ollenkaan valistettavianne.
Mutta hyvähän on toivossa elää, puhui Kalle. Hän oli noussut
kävelemään ja käveli kiihtyneenä lattialla.

— Mutta nuorisoseuraliikehän on juuri kansasta alkunsa saanut.

Siellähän sen alkujuuret ovat, sanoi Lauri Saha.

— Niinhän sanotaan. Mutta kun tarkemmin tuon liikkeen

alkuvaikutteita tutkittaisiin, niin mistähän mahdettaisiinkaan löytää
sen juuret? puhui Kalle. Ja vaikka se olisikin alkuisin n.s.
oppimattomista, niin mitä se todistaa? Voihan niistä ja niistähän juuri
kohoaakin oppineita, ei koulumaisessa merkityksessä,
ymmärrättehän mitä tarkoitan. Nehän ne tuon joukon jättävät, tuosta
joukosta kohoavat. Mutta nämähän kohoaisivat ilman seuroja. Siis
sen toiminta, nuorisoseuraliikkeen toiminta, on turhaa. Minä
esimerkiksi olen siksi tullut, mikä olen, yksin. En sano tätä, että
itseäni tahtoisin kohottaa teidän silmissänne, sillä olenhan mikä olen
enkä välitä mitä minusta ajattelette ja mitä minusta muut ajattelevat.
Halveksin tuota joukkoa, jota te valistatte.

— Mutta ajatelkaahan, sanoi Lauri Saha. Teidän yläpuolellanne

voipi olla toisia, jotka teitä halveksivat ja muita teidän laisianne. Ja
voipi olla enemmän kehittyneitä ja täydellisempiä kuin te, jotka
kuitenkin uskovat ihmiskunnan, koko ihmiskunnan kehitykseen; ja
jos enemmän kehittyneet kuin te olette, siihen uskovat, niin silloinhan
myöntänette heidän olevan oikeassa ja tunnustatte olevanne
väärässä.

— Oletuksia, pelkkiä oletuksia, sanoi Kalle.

— Sekinkö, ettei ole korkeammalle kehittyneitä ihmisiä kuin te?

— En sitä tarkoittanut. On tietenkin.

 — Anteeksi, jos puhun suoraan teille! Ettehän loukkaannu?

— En, puhukaa!

— Minusta tuntuu, että teiltä innostus ja rakkaus on loppunut. Noin

katkeraksi en minä ainakaan toivoisi tulevani. Kyllä luulen
ymmärtäväni teitä. Te olette toimineet nuorisoseurassa ja te olette
innostuneet, mutta ette ole saaneet heti unelmianne toteutetuksi ja te
olette kyllääntynyt ja tullut katkeraksi ja ehkä toisetkin syyt ovat
vaikuttaneet teihin, syyt, joita en ole oikeutettu kyselemään. Mutta
huomatkaa, että ihmiset kehittyäkseen tarvitsevat aikaa. Ihminen ei
henkisesti hienostu ennenkuin sukupolvien kuluttua. Jos ihminen on
alhaisella sivistysasteella ja hänen poikansa koettaa kohota isäänsä
korkeammalle, niin hän sen kyllä voipi saavuttaa, mutta ei hänkään
vielä ole hienostunut henkisesti, hänessäkin on jotain karkeaa, joka
johtuu hänen isänsä vaikutuksesta, jonka hän on, tuo pyrkijä, saanut
perinnöksi lapsuuden kodista j.n.e. Hänen poikansa useimmassa
tapauksessa kohoaa yhä korkeammalle, hänen henkensä on yhä
hienostuneempi, mutta vielä hänessäkin, vaikka vähemmässä
määrässä huomataan karkeutta, jonka hän on isältään perinyt, tämä
taas isältään j.n.e. Ja ehkä monenkin polven perästä huomataan
tuota perintöä. Mutta se haihtuu polvi polvelta, kunnes se kokonaan
katoaa ja tulee esille sielukas ihminen, niin täydellinen ja ylevä kuin
ihminen voipi olla. Tällä tavalla voipi joissakin tapauksissa kehittyä
ihminen, hitaasti kyllä, mutta varmasti.

— Eikö mitä! sanoi Kalle. Monen jalon ihmisen lapsesta tulee

toisinaan — eläimellinen.

— Totta, mutta useimmassa tapauksessa kehittyneempi. Ja

ajatelkaa! Kun kaikki ihmiset saataisiin kehittymään, kehityksen
alkuun, niin silloin, niin silloin ihmiset muuttuisivat. Tähän toivoon
perustuu myös osaltaan meidän työmme. Me tässä polvessa
panemme valistustyön alkuun, laajennamme sitä, sen piiriä. Tämän
jälkeen tulee hiukkasen kehittyneempi polvi j.n.e. Emme täydellistä
tulosta työstämme näe; meidän työmme on tulevaisuuden työtä.
Mutta siltipä se innostaa!

— Mutta kykeneekö koskaan tuo joukko kokonaisuudessa

kehittymään. Mistä se voima, joka panee sen hitaat aivot toimimaan
ja sen tylsät silmät järjen, tunteen ja innostuksen valoa loistamaan?
— Mutta mehän joudumme liian kauvaksi. — Olen epäröivä — en
tiedä varmaan mitä varmana pitää. Olisikohan totta, että olisin
erehtynyt? — En tiedä. Pitää miettiä. — Mutta en voi periaatteistani
luopua ennenkuin varmasti näen, että olen väärässä. Täällä on
kuitenkin niin yksinään. Ei ole ollut kenen kanssa olisi keskustellut.
— Kirjat kyllä, mutta sekin on niin yksipuolista. — Niin, mutta en
tunnusta vielä tulleeni voitetuksi.

— Te olette edellä noista toisista. Te olette päätänne pitempi

tavallista kansaa, kuten sanotaan, sanoi Lauri Saha innoissaan.
Häntä ihmetytti tuon yksinäisen miehen mielipiteet ja hänen
harrastuksensa. Mitä hänestä olisi tullutkaan, jos hän olisi saanut
käyttää hyödykseen niitä apuja, joita tuhannet pölkkypäät kouluissa
saavat? mietti hän.

Kalle oli hetken äänetönnä. Hänen mieltään hiveli niin suloisesti

tuo toisen tunnustus, jonka hän tunsi ansainneensa. Mutta se
suututtikin. Hän tahtoi olla yksin tai ainakin näyttää, ettei hän siitä
välitä.

— En pidä imarteluista, sanoi hän jäykästi.

 — En tarkoittanut imarrella. Sanoin mitä ajattelin. Mutta uskokaa,
että ihmiskunta voipi kokonaisuudessaan kehittyä. Sen todistaa
ainakin työ, mitä nykyaikana tehdään sen hyväksi. Työ kouluissa, työ
kirkoissa, työ yhdistyksissä, seuroissa ja kaikkialla.

— Mitenkähän se sitä todistaa? kysyi epäillen Kalle ja jatkoi: kaikki

näyttää ainakin turhaa olevan.

— Odottakaa, kun koetan selittää! sanoi Lauri Saha. Nyt kiehuu ja

kuohuu. Nyt riidellään ja taistellaan. Nyt esimerkiksi sosialismi
levenee kautta maailman, tuoden levetessään paljon pahaakin,
vihaa, katkeruutta ja pyhän ja korkean halveksumista. Mutta mikä
panee maailman tuollaiseen myllerrykseen? Mikä on se voima, joka
raottaa tuon suuren joukon silmät, tuon joukon, jota te halveksitte?

— Halveksin, koska se on niin tyhmää. En halveksi minä, vaan

moni muukin sanoi Kalle.

— Niin, te halveksitte kyllä sillä tavoin, että teidän

halveksimistanne voipi ymmärtää ja — kunnioittaakin. Mutta on
paljon sellaisia, jotka esimerkiksi halveksivat tuota joukkoa
vähemmästä syystä kuin te, ja noita tuollaisia halveksijoita löytyy n.s.
oppineiden joukossa, virkamiesten, pappien ja sellaisten, jotka ovat
olleet tilaisuudessa nauttimaan ihmishengen aarteista enemmän
kuin esimerkiksi te. He ovat tuollaisia itsekylläisiä, surkuteltavia
olentoja, jotka kansasta, johon he itse kuuluvat, ovat saaneet väärän
käsityksen toista tietä kuin te. Tai heillä ei ole siitä mitään käsitystä,
he pelkäävät tuota joukkoa, joksi te nimitätte ihmisiä, he pelkäävät
sitä kuin ruttoa. Saarnaavat sen tietämättömyydestä ja raakuudesta,
eivät uskalla sitä lähestyä, peljäten muka vaipuvansa takaisin
raakalaisuuteen. Erillään he pysyttelevät yksinomaan mukavuuden
syistä; onhan niin mukava olla sivistynyt ja nauttia sivistyksen
hedelmistä ja elätyttää itseänsä tuolla joukolla, joka tekee
raskaammat ja likaisimmat työt.

— No mutta tehän olette sosialisti, sanoi hymyillen Kalle.

— Kyllä tavallaan. Niin, ja jos sitten tuo joukko nyt vihdoinkin jotain
vaatii, vaikkapa vain saada osansa sivistyksestä nuorisoseuratyön
muodossa, niin tuota liikettä tuomitaan sen vuoksi, koska se vielä
maistuu raa'alle, koska siinä on vielä seassa todellakin raakuutta ja
tietämättömyyttä, sen vuoksi, koska se liike on tietämättömien liike,
jotka juuri silmänsä ovat auki saaneet ja vaativat ihmishengen
tuloksista osansa. Lauri Saha pysähtyi hiukan ja näytti miettivän.

— Ja sitten? kysyi malttamattomana Kalle.

— Tuota liikettä tuomitsevat kouluutetut, koska tuon liikkeen joukot

eivät osaa niin toimia, niin elää kuin nuo tuomitsijat, koska heillä ei
vielä mitään ole, kun he vasta ovat alkuaskeleita ottamassa — jotain
omistaakseen, sitä saamaan mitä heiltä puuttuu. He eivät osaa
nauttia taiteesta eikä muusta korkeammasta niinkuin ne, joita
kasvatetaan siitä ja kaikesta jalosta nauttimaan.

— Mutta minä luulen osaavani nauttia ja samaa joukkoahan

minäkin olen samoissa oloissa kasvanut ja heidän kanssaan ollut
ikäni. Minun laisiani — onhan tämä kuin omaa kehumista — on
paljonkin ehkä. Eikö tämä todista, että noilta toisilta puuttuu kyky
kohota korkeammalle? sanoi Kalle innokkaasti.

— Te ja teidän laisenne olette poikkeuksia. Kyllä ympäristö ja

kasvatus, tavat ja sivistys on perinnäistä, senhän myönnätte kuin
ajattelette. Hitaastihan kaikki on kehittynyt, vuosituhansien kuluessa.
Mutta nyt kun suuri joukko tahtoo saada sivistystä, kun se herää, niin
monet sivistyneet, sanon esimerkiksi papit, pitävät tuon joukon
pyrkimyksiä — syntisinä. He saarnaavat heidän menonsa,
alkuaskeleensa synniksi, koska paljon kompastuksia sattuu. Tieto ja
sivistys, minkä joukko itsellensä hankkii, pyörryttää sitä ja silti antaa
monesti se aihetta papin saarnassaan sanomaan — sen pyrkimyksiä
— synniksi, joka on perkeleestä ja siis tuo pyrkimyskin samasta
lähteestä. Mutta nuo tuollaiset herrat eivät huomaa syvemmälle,
eivät huomaa mikä on se voima, joka esimerkiksi
nuorisoseuraliikkeen pohjaltaan on alkuun pannut ja joka on
raottanut joukon silmät? Se voima, joka kärsii nähdessään
tietämättömyyttä ja kurjuutta, joka koettaa poistaa sitä, saaden
toisinaan aikaan sellaista, mikä hetkeksi näyttää lisäävän taistelua ja
tuskaa, se voima on piilossa, noiden katse ei ylety sitä näkemään.
Sanoin: hetkeksi näyttää lisäävän taistelua ja tuskaa ja raakuuttakin,
sillä ihmiskunnan hetket ovat pitkiä. Niin, mikä on tuo voima, joka
panee kehityksen alkuun, joukkojenkin kehityksen, jonka
päämääränä on onni? Sitä voimaa, niin, tiedättekö miksi sitä
nimitetään? — Sitä nimitetään rakkaudeksi. Sen Luoja on
ihmisrintaan pannut kaiken sen pahuuden kanssa kamppailemaan,
mikä siellä myöskin on. Mutta kerran tuo voima pahuuden voittaa,
voittaa raakuuden, kun ihmishengen aarteet ovat kaikkien
nautittavana. Tässä uskossahan niin monet ihmiskunnan
suurimmista ovat työnsä tehneet. Miksi he eivät ole etsineet ja etsi
omia etujaan ja petä tuota sokeata joukkoa, johon kuuluu rikkaita,
jotka yhä tahtovat rikastua ja hekumoitsijoita, joille nautinto,
likainenkin on muuta kalliimpi ja köyhiä, jotka kurjuudessaan
hammasta kiristelevät? Miksi nuo ihmiskunnan jaloimmat eivät tahdo
nauttia yksin hengen voimiensa tuottamasta edusta? Heillähän olisi
— toisinaan, voimaa ja kykyä sortaa ja pettää. Miksi he totuutta
julistavat ja elämänsä muitten onneksi käyttävät? Siihen pakoittaa